Science Stumbles on Design Part 1 of 2
Rice University 2002
Summary: Dr. Behe argues that the common mousetrap can point one to God. This invention, like many things that are found in biological systems, is "irreducibly complex"—that is, it only functions when all of its component parts are present. Using the example of the mousetrap, Dr. Behe explains in depth why many such irreducibly complex things such as the human eye present problems for Darwinian theory. The existence of biological systems that cannot evolve gradually, argues Dr. Behe, is a compelling argument that the patterns of nature did not arise by chance, but rather are the products of a Designer.
Topics: Evolution, Humanity, Engineering & Technology, Natural Sciences & Math, Science
Behe has an interesting article in the New York Times today that makes his case concisely for intelligent design. "The strong appearance of design allows a disarmingly simple argument: if it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, then, absent compelling evidence to the contrary, we have warrant to conclude it's a duck. Design should not be overlooked simply because it's so obvious."
Bob, Feb 7, 2005 | 9:39 amDarwin in his famous book "The Origin of Species," wrote "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." Yes there are such organs. They are the reproductive organs. Darwin assumed in his theory that these organs already existed in the first place. Reproductive organs are quite ‘complex organs’. Since most of you know how the human reproductive organs works, and if we were to follow Darwinian evolution path, let’s see how this might be explained by Darwinian evolution. 1. A mutation causes an ovary to grow inside a human, we now call woman. 2. Few generations later, a mutation causes the testicles to grow inside a human, we now call, man. 3. Few generations later, another mutation causes uterus to be in the woman. By now, the reader has to agree, that these is illogical since there is no “next generation�? without having all the organs listed here plus many other organs, in the first place. So by Darwin’s own words, his theory absolutely breaks down. Q.E.D.
paula.smith, Oct 21, 2007 | 11:19 pm