 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
INTELLIGENT DESIGN EVIDENCE
Methods of Design Detection
Methods of Design Detection
|
Michael Behe, Professor of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University, argues that the
most convincing evidence for design is not to be found in the stars or the fossils, but
in biochemical systems. Author of Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to
Evolution, and The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism, Behe
has posed a scientific response to Charles Darwin's challenge in Origin of Species:
evolution, through a concept he calls irreducible complexity. As explained by the
Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center (IDEA), "In simple terms, this idea
applies to any system of interacting parts in which the removal of any one part
destroys the function of the entire system. An irreducibly complex system, then,
requires each and every component to be in place before it will function."
The IDEA Center continues:
Evolution simply cannot produce complex structures in a single generation as would
be required for the formation of irreducibly complex systems. To imagine that a
chance set of mutations would produce all 200 proteins required for cilia function in a
single generation stretches the imagination beyond the breaking point. And yet,
producing one or a few of these proteins at a time, in standard Darwinian fashion,
would convey no survival advantage because those few proteins would have no
function-indeed, they would constitute a waste of energy for the cell to even produce.
Darwin recognized this as a potent threat to his theory of evolution-the issue that
could completely disprove his idea. So the question must be raised: Has Darwin's
theory of evolution "absolutely broken down?" According to Michael Behe, the answer
is a resounding "yes."
For a good description of irreducible complexity, including examples, see the entire
article at the IDEA Center website
most convincing evidence for design is not to be found in the stars or the fossils, but
in biochemical systems. Author of Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to
Evolution, and The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism, Behe
has posed a scientific response to Charles Darwin's challenge in Origin of Species:
- If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not
possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications,
my theory would absolutely break down.
evolution, through a concept he calls irreducible complexity. As explained by the
Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center (IDEA), "In simple terms, this idea
applies to any system of interacting parts in which the removal of any one part
destroys the function of the entire system. An irreducibly complex system, then,
requires each and every component to be in place before it will function."
The IDEA Center continues:
- Since the publication of Darwin’s Black Box, Behe has refined the definition of
irreducible complexity. In 1996 he wrote that “any precursor to an irreducibly
complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional.” By
defining irreducible complexity in terms of “nonfunctionality,” Behe casts light
on the fundamental problem with evolutionary theory: evolution cannot produce
something where there would be a non-functional intermediate. Natural
selection only preserves or “selects” those structures which are functional. If it
is not functional, it cannot be naturally selected. Thus, Behe’s latest definition
of irreducible complexity is as follows:
- “An irreducibly complex evolutionary pathway is one that contains one or more
unselected steps (that is, one or more necessary-but-unselected mutations).
The degree of irreducible complexity is the number of unselected steps in the
pathway.” (A Response to Critics of Darwin’s Black Box, by Michael Behe,
PCID, Volume 1.1, January February March, 2002; iscid.org/)
Evolution simply cannot produce complex structures in a single generation as would
be required for the formation of irreducibly complex systems. To imagine that a
chance set of mutations would produce all 200 proteins required for cilia function in a
single generation stretches the imagination beyond the breaking point. And yet,
producing one or a few of these proteins at a time, in standard Darwinian fashion,
would convey no survival advantage because those few proteins would have no
function-indeed, they would constitute a waste of energy for the cell to even produce.
Darwin recognized this as a potent threat to his theory of evolution-the issue that
could completely disprove his idea. So the question must be raised: Has Darwin's
theory of evolution "absolutely broken down?" According to Michael Behe, the answer
is a resounding "yes."
For a good description of irreducible complexity, including examples, see the entire
article at the IDEA Center website