Changes

'''Irreducible Complexity''' an argument used to support intelligent design that claims that all parts of a system are required for it to work properly, and the removal of any part would disable the whole system. The idea of irreducible complexity is that some systems are so complex that the removal or alteration of any part would prevent the system from functioning. Proponents of [[intelligent design]] claim that irreducible complexity is evidence that the system probably was designed by an intelligent agent of some sort.

'''Irreducible Complexity''' an argument used to support intelligent design that claims that all parts of a system are required for it to work properly, and the removal of any part would disable the whole system. The idea of irreducible complexity is that some systems are so complex that the removal or alteration of any part would prevent the system from functioning. Proponents of [[intelligent design]] claim that irreducible complexity is evidence that the system probably was designed by an intelligent agent of some sort.

For example, a car will not go without an engine. Indeed, the engine will not run without fuel and a starter motor. The designer must ensure that all parts work together to produce the intended function.

For example, a car will not go without an engine. Indeed, the engine will not run without fuel and a starter motor. The designer must ensure that all parts work together to produce the intended function. A car could not just evolve.

[[Image:Wm Dembski.jpg|right|150px|thumb|[[William Dembski]]]]

[[Image:Wm Dembski.jpg|right|150px|thumb|[[William Dembski]]]]

[[William Dembski]] in his book ''No Free Lunch'', states the the following:  

[[William Dembski]] in his book ''No Free Lunch'', states the the following:  

[[Intelligent design]] theorists agree with Charles Darwin that a biological system could not make a gradual transition via small successive steps, unless each step provided an advantage to the species.  

[[Intelligent design]] theorists agree with Charles Darwin that a biological system could not make a gradual transition via small successive steps, unless each step provided an advantage to the species.  

Behe presents several examples of organs and cells which he argues could not have evolved through natural forces alone due to their irreducible complexity.  

Behe presents several examples of organs and cells which he says could not have evolved through natural forces alone due to their irreducible complexity.  

Behe introduced and defined this term on page 9 of his  work, "Darwin's Black Box":   

Behe introduced and defined this term on page 9 of his  work, "Darwin's Black Box":   

It is therefore a state of interacting components that could not function without all its parts. In particular, the term is used by proponents of [[intelligent design]] to argue that irreducibly complex biological systems cannot evolve.  

It is therefore a state of interacting components that could not function without all its parts. In particular, the term is used by proponents of [[intelligent design]] to argue that irreducibly complex biological systems cannot evolve.  

The most commonly used examples of irreducibly complex biological systems are the human compound eye, the [[blood clotting cascade]], and the bacterial [[flagellum]]. However, not all parts of the blood clotting cascade are necessary, as one Behe lists is missing in whales, and different animals have different numbers of clotting steps. The evolution of the compound eye is now well understood, and it has been found that the basal body of the flagellum  

The most commonly used examples of irreducibly complex biological systems are the human compound eye, the [[blood clotting cascade]], and the bacterial [[flagellum]]. However, not all parts of the blood clotting cascade are necessary, as one Behe is missing in whales, and different animals have different numbers of clotting steps. The evolution of the compound eye is now well understood, and it has been found that the basal body of the flagellum is similar to a needle-like structure some bacteria use to inject toxins into eukaryotic cells.

is similar to a needle-like structure some bacteria use to inject toxins into eukaryotic cells.

Kenneth R. Miller describes hypothetical precursors to the flagellum's being used as ionic channels within [[bacteria]], known as the ''Type III Secretory System''.<ref>[http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design2/article.html The Flagellum Unspun]</ref>  However, Professor Behe counters that Miller's criticism of his work is flawed. <ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_trueacidtest.htm</ref>  Critics, including biology professor John McDonald, have countered Behe's toy model, the mouse trap, used to illustrate the concept. McDonald produced examples of how he considered the mousetrap to be "easy to reduce", eventually to a single part.<ref name=trap>[http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mousetrap.html A reducibly complex mousetrap] (graphics-intensive, requires [[JavaScript]])</ref> <!--Critics consider that most, or all, of the examples were based on misunderstandings of the workings of the biological systems in question, and consider the low quality of these examples excellent evidence for the argument from ignorance.-->However, Professor Behe disputes the criticism of John McDonald. <ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_mousetrapdefended.htm</ref>

Kenneth R. Miller describes hypothetical precursors to the flagellum's being used as ionic channels within [[bacteria]], known as the ''Type III Secretory System''.<ref>[http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design2/article.html The Flagellum Unspun]</ref>  However, Professor Behe counters that Miller's criticism of his work is flawed. <ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_trueacidtest.htm</ref>  Critics, including biology professor John McDonald, have countered Behe's toy model, the mouse trap, used to illustrate the concept. McDonald produced examples of how he considered the mousetrap to be "easy to reduce", eventually to a single part.<ref name=trap>[http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mousetrap.html A reducibly complex mousetrap] (graphics-intensive, requires [[JavaScript]])</ref> <!--Critics consider that most, or all, of the examples were based on misunderstandings of the workings of the biological systems in question, and consider the low quality of these examples excellent evidence for the argument from ignorance.-->However, Professor Behe disputes the criticism of John McDonald. <ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_mousetrapdefended.htm</ref>