Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Anti-Evolution argument of irreducible complexity debunked

 Anti-evolution proponents often use the argument of irreducible complexity, for example complex structures such as the human eye consist of intricately inter-dependent elements that could not have evolved independently. This informative video debunks those anti-evolutionist arguments and explains how complexity can arise through gradual evolution.

1 comment:

  1. The eye argument does not deal with the details of how a specific eye - take ours, the octupus, pick one - can get to its present form in a step-by-step manner. The fact that there are different types of eyes throughout the animal world does not prove anything.

    But I would like you to tell me where did the first cell come from? What natural process created that? Feel free to assume an RNA world as your starting point to make it easier, and I'll even give you a pool filled with Amino acids. Tell me how all they randomly segregate into all left-handed and then somehow form the first RNA molecule? Actually, better yet, let's follow the scientific method and try to reproduce it, after all, it’s a naturalistic process, we can certainly replicate it a lab. We can make synthetic diamonds and synthetic oil in the lab, why not a single-cell organism out of non-living thing?

    As we learned in engineering school, this amount of information - in RNA or DNA - is not going to randomly form from a stochastic process. I can tell you if the scientific community had known that DNA was the building block of life before Darwin theory, it would never have been accepted, DNA looks very, very designed - its more complex than any engineered system I can think of. There's a reason Crick accepted panspermia, he was intellectually honest enough to realize you can't get that first cell from nothing.

    And, Beat, you know Scientific history well enough to know that the solid scientific theories get more evidence as time goes on - take Einstein's theories as a good example - but the bad ones raise more questions and are constantly being "updated" to account for new discrepancies - take the geocentric view of the Universe.

    Which one does evolution smell like?