The Evolution of Irreducible Complexity

	Duration: 06:05 minutes Upload Time: 2007-03-17 11:39:57 User: cdk007 :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day
Description: If we are to have a proper debate we all need to use the same definition of Irreducible Complexity. Michael Behe defines it as: "By irreducibly complex I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning" The problem is ID / creationist supporters take this to mean that an IC system could not have evolved. Their mistake is that IC is a statement about a systems present state, not its past history. Many systems are by definition IC. But for every IC system studied data exists supporting a biologically plausible scenario for their evolution. So in short, are their IC systems. Yes. Does being IC mean it could not have evolved. NO. To download this video go to: http://files-upload.com/files/502437/The%20Evolution%20of%20Irreducible%20Complexity.wmv or http://www.veoh.com/videos/v1173003GTbXPrDf
Comments
Twicebakedtaters ::: Favorites The cornerstone of ID should be the simple reason that nature exhibits both design and intelligence. If it does not then we likewise have neither design nor intelligence as we are the forces of nature at work. We are not the definition of intelligence. Determining what intelligence is...is a matter of degree governed solely by opinion which is not scientific in the least. 07-10-23 10:42:14 __________________________________________________
egoeimi3 ::: Favorites And Mo, know whom I'm challenging. My statement was clearly directed at EX, and the context was evidence for a designer that Ex was challenging. You jump right into a discussion about evidence for God and mis-imply what I'm asking concerning evolution, which that isn't what I'm even talking about. The context is does designed features point to evidence for God. And my premise is, yes, because chance (or uncaused) is what is left. 07-10-22 09:09:27 __________________________________________________
egoeimi3 ::: Favorites Mo, and in the context of Irreducible complexity, we are talking about complex things, that can't be reduced or have parts taken away and function normally, or not at all. So did complex DNA come about by chance (nothing caused it) or by a Designer (because design is seen in it). So don't insult my intelligence, you know very well what I'm asking concerning this context. 07-10-22 09:04:56 __________________________________________________
egoeimi3 ::: Favorites Mo, I would say that about you spreading your faith in goo to you theology. 2nd, then what is evolution (more specifically macro), if it isn't by chance (which simple means nothing started the process) then how did the process start, where or how did the wheels start turning (in other words, where or how was energy applied to start evolutinary process). Is that specific enough? 07-10-22 09:00:55 __________________________________________________
Mozza314 ::: Favorites Just one more note. Clearly this person is NOT sincerely interested in truth. They are sincerely interested in spreading their blind faith. 07-10-22 08:00:50 __________________________________________________
Mozza314 ::: Favorites (I'm not doing this for you, I'm doing it for the benefit of others) Another thing you would have to do is ask the question in the right way. You need to ask for an explanation, say "I don't know how evolution could have produced this", rather than performing a speculation, and disguise it as irrefutable logic that there must be a god. 07-10-22 07:58:34 __________________________________________________
Mozza314 ::: Favorites "How does chance our absences of a Designer explain birds" "How does chance explain it?" Evolution is not chance. Natural selection is not chance. NO ONE who is intelligent and informed about evolution would suggest that these things happened by chance. They happened by evolution. If you want to be taken seriously, don't call evolution chance, and that's only one thing you have to do. 07-10-22 07:54:43 __________________________________________________
egoeimi3 ::: Favorites To give you an example. How does chance our absences of a Designer explain birds, having the ability to navigate. Pacific plovers' young can fly from Alaska to hawaii without being taught it. How does chance explain it? It can't. Man programs GPS, that is a designer's quality. Pacific plovers come equipped with that already, that is evidence of a Designer. If you deny that logic, then you are saying it just happened unguided, and how does that make since EX? 07-10-21 07:12:51 __________________________________________________
egoeimi3 ::: Favorites Ex, what evidence have anyone show that there isn't a God? Evidence for God is based on design or chance. If the world came about by chance and unguided then prove it. But the world around us shows that there is a designer if you logically look at set factors for our existence. Chance doesn't do any designing it just says time. Not. Design says someone fasioned this world, that is evidence bar none logically. 07-10-21 07:10:26 __________________________________________________
damianpoirier ::: Favorites "each little mutation" does NOT have to be benificial. Does everyone understand this now? 07-10-20 20:10:56 __________________________________________________