A post at Uncommon Descent offers an innovative way of illustrating the concept of irreducible complexity — one that is likely to be more resistant to Darwinist misrepresentation than Michael Behe’s well-known mouse trap analogy.
The illustration is intended to address the common misconception that irreducible complexity entails that (a) the individual subcomponents cannot be used to serve other functions; and (b) no simpler system exists that can perform the same or a similar function. This caricature of irreducible complexity is seen, for example, in the writings of John McDonald, Kenneth Miller and Nick Matzke.
Facebook Comments