Posted on 09/10/2009 8:45:31 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Molecular biologist Michael Behe described a system made of several interacting parts, whereby the removal of one part would disrupt the functioning of the whole, as being irreducibly complex. Both creation scientists and intelligent design proponents highlight examples of irreducible complexity in their studies, because they argue against evolutionary hypotheses. The very structure of these systems—with their interdependent parts working all together or not at all—demands a non-Darwinian, non-chance, non-piecemeal origin.
A team of evolutionary molecular biologists thinks it may have refuted this concept of irreducible complexity. In a recent study, the researchers focused on a specific cellular machine involved in protein transport and claimed that it was indeed reducible to its component parts. But did they use real science to demonstrate this, or just scientific-sounding phrases?...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
There is no such thing as a Creation scientist.....there is a such thing as a scientists that also believes in the Creation.
D’uh.
.....and when quoting me, at least have the freakin’ balls to ping me......or didn’t they issue you balls in Marine Corps boot camp?
All I see is ES committing multiple fallacies in support of evolution again.
In this case, he's using the fallacy of contextomy combined with the fallacy of composition.
At least he's broadened his use of fallacy as argument to include a couple of different ones. That, in itself, is a huge step up the learning curve for him.
Ref Post #98. Then how about when referring to me, at least have the balls to ping ME.... or didn't they issue YOU any balls in evo-land?
Hypocrite!
God is all powerful, why would he labor when he could wave his hands and create an arch?
You showed your true colors last night when you refused to show us how you can send evo’s crying after a debate. In turn I can ask of you are there only arguments that you and your fellow id/creationists/ cdesign proponentsists can only make on FR?
Actions speak louder than words, and your actions last night spoke volumes.
BTW are you familiar with the term unintended consequences? If you do ever go to that other site in a creation thread and pay close attention you might just see how your spam posting here a FR have just that effect. ;-)
This is what Behe said when questioned about astrology:
“Question..... But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?
Answer.... Yes, that’s correct. And let me explain under my definition of the word “theory,” it is — a sense of the word “theory” does not include the theory being true, it means a proposition based on physical evidence to explain some facts by logical inferences. There have been many theories throughout the history of science which looked good at the time which further progress has shown to be incorrect. Nonetheless, we can’t go back and say that because they were incorrect they were not theories. So many many things that we now realized to be incorrect, incorrect theories, are nonetheless theories.”.
You may have to explain it S L O W L Y to the Braying Bunch.
Yes did see where Behe said according to his definition Astrology was a scientific theory on the same accord as intelligent design.
I guess that means that neither are correct.
Sorry, that’s the second time I UNINTENTIONALLY did that today. Please accept my humble apology.
Now on to your question. The USMC has no need to issue balls as our recruits are required to have them before enlistment, otherwise they’ll never make it through bootcamp...and be forced to join the Army d;op
I wish I could understand what you’re saying, Ira....but when you fly into these impotent rages you make absolutely no sense. I guess that’s what happens when evos find themselves on the losing side of the origins debate.
It is fairly obvious the Universe is not static.
I just tried it the way you spelled it, and the Spell Check DID UNDERLINE IT IN RED, indicating it was wrong.
Perhaps you are mistaken.
I am saying that talk is cheap, and last night you proved that be refusing to send the evo’s away crying outside of your echo chamber here at FR.
You exposed yourself since you obviously lack the confidence in your arguments to present them outside of this controlled environment with all your cheerleaders to back your numerous fallacies.
Too afraid to run with the big dogs, so just stay here on the porch.
I think it important to note that you are being the 'better man' here.
You and I do not always agree on things, and have different opinions about this 'young Earth' theory.
However, that makes no difference to me. What makes a difference (from my experience on FR) is how a person conducts themselves.
You do well, considering the attacks you take.
If you really believe what you just said, then why do you even bother to log on to FR and post anything at all?
Surely you would be happier up on the porch with the 'big dogs'.
==Too afraid to run with the big dogs, so just stay here on the porch.
The big dogs over at your backwater website with all the snotnosed and pimply geeks who like to make crude remarks and daydream outloud about both homo and animal-erotic fantasies? No thanks. But I can see how you would fit right in.
PS Just out of curiosity, what arguments are you and your evo-atheist coreligionists being prevented from making on Free Republic?
Thanks. I’m not perfect by any stretch. But you have to remember that half the time I am totally kidding with these guys. I cracks me up that they take so much of what I say so seriously. Of course, the anti-Christians who pretend to be Christians in order to make Christianity look bad are a different story altogether.
All the best—GGG
About 90% attacking the messenger.
You totally obfuscated my original question. It was a simple question. Surely it cannot be lost on you. I must conclude that you are refusing to answer it based on some insecurity in your own position, whatever that is.
As you have no inclination to enter into this particular discussion with intellectual honesty, I’m done with you on this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.