You have probably heard of irreducible complexity before. It’s a fancy phrase conjured up by the Discovery Institute. Wikipedia says it’s:
… the argument that certain biological systems cannot have evolved by successive small modifications to pre-existing functional systems through natural selection, because no less complex system would function. Irreducible complexity has become central to the creationist concept of intelligent design, but the scientific community, which regards intelligent design as pseudoscience, rejects the concept of irreducible complexity.
After a while there was nothing left to say — but creationists never abandon any of their arguments because there are always new droolers who haven’t heard them before. So it is with Jason Lisle — the creationist astrophysicist. After previously working for the Institute for Creation Research, and then ol’ Hambo’s Answers in Genesis, he’s now running his own show — the Biblical Science Institute.
Jason just posted Irreducible Complexity. Would ya believe it, there’s a picture of a mousetrap above Jason’s article. Ironically, it’s the same picture appearing in the Wikipedia article, at the section titled The mousetrap example.
Jason’s article is long, but it’s old stuff so we’ll skip a lot of it. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
One of the many scientific lines of evidence against neo-Darwinian evolution involves the concept of irreducible complexity. [BWAHAHAHAHAHA!] … The different parts of a biological cell are interdependent. That is, each part of the cell depends on all the other parts of the cell in order to function properly. Remove any one essential part, and the cell dies. Hence, the cell is not just complex; it is irreducibly complex. That is, it cannot be reduced to a simpler functioning cell by removing any essential component. Yet, neo-Darwinian evolution requires that all life came about from simpler forms, with new components added over the course of time by mutations. Hence, neo-Darwinian evolution is incompatible with irreducible complexity
Jeepers, he’s right! Without your head — you’re dead. Why didn’t our teachers tell us about this? Jason says:
Irreducibly complexity is the mark of intelligent forethought. [Yes, it’s obvious!] Manmade machines almost always exhibit irreducible complexity. Consider an automobile. It has many interdependent parts that work together to accomplish a goal – in this case to provide transportation for people and property. If you remove any essential part (the engine, the wheels, the drivetrain, the transmission, the steering wheel, the fuel tank, etc.) then the vehicle will not be able to do what it was designed to do.
No doubt about it — Darwin was a fool! After that, Jason devotes several paragraphs to giving us all of Behe’s arguments. We’ll skip that stuff because Behe’s arguments were discussed at length in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case, and we quoted that part of the court’s opinion extensively — see Kitzmiller v. Dover: Michael Behe’s Testimony.
To avoid a bunch of ancient clunkers, we’ll skip most of Jason’s post and jump right to his final paragraph. Here it is:
A functional self-replicating cell requires all these systems to be in place simultaneously. Therefore, a cell cannot have evolved in a neo-Darwinian stepwise fashion. The complexity of living cells was unknown in Darwin’s day. And we didn’t know nearly as much about the complexity of biological organs and systems. So, Darwin’s ignorance of the many examples of irreducible complexity is somewhat understandable given the time in which he lived. But today there is no excuse. [No excuse!] We now understand much about how biological systems operate, and we have countless examples of irreducible complexity. [Hee hee!] Knowledge is the enemy of evolution. [Aaaargh!!] But all of this science only serves to confirm what Christians have known for millennia. Biblical creation is true.
Powerful stuff, isn’t it? Well, dear reader, whatcha gonna do — continue to be a hell-bound Darwinist, or fall to your knees and accept The Truth™?
Copyright © 2021. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.