[Tribune7]

"Both the man-made world and the biological world are full of examples of "Irreducible Complexity." That is, systems or machines which were designed with a number of specific parts "wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning." Here is your definition. It was falsified before Behe published.

The flagellum is quite literally an outboard motor that some bacteria use to swim. It is a rotary device that, like a motorboat, turns a propeller to push against liquid, moving the bacterium forward in the process. It consists of a number of parts, including a long tail that acts as a propeller, the hook region, which attaches the propeller to the drive shaft, the motor, which uses a flow of acid from the outside of the bacterium to the inside to power the turning, a stator, which keeps the structure stationary in the plane of the membrane while the propeller turns, and bushing material to allow the drive shaft to poke up through the bacterial membrane. In the absence of the hook, or the motor, or the propeller, or the drive shaft, or most of the forty different types of proteins that genetic studies have shown to be necessary for the activity or construction of the flagellum, one does not get a flagellum that spins half as fast as it used to, or a quarter as fast. Either the flagellum does not work, or it does not even get constructed in the cell.

Now, which of those parts of the flagellum mentioned can be removed leaving it able to function?

[shubi]

The two bands mentioned in the article or whatever.

Parts such as pump and motor do not actually compose a flagellum. It is a metaphor, not a literal meaning in this case. As a creationist, I am sure you have trouble separating the two, but that is not my problem. Go back and read the article you refused to read in the first place.