Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Irreducible Complexity Of Organs Refute Darwinism-Video
08-14-2008, 03:31 PM
Post: #1
The Irreducible Complexity Of Organs Refute Darwinism-Video
[Image: 294515619_17a6ea8072_m.jpg]

THE IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY OF ORGANS REFUTE DARWINISM

http://www.harunyahya.tv/detail.php?l=4&pid=4799&cid=76

The bodies of all living beings are made up of cells a hundredth of a millimeter in size. These tiny organisms are much more complex than any machine that we ever know. This irreducible complexity of the cell shatters the Darwinist myth and proves the fact of creation.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2009, 08:02 AM
Post: #2
RE: The Irreducible Complexity Of Organs Refute Darwinism-Video
(08-14-2008 03:31 PM)ahmetsecer Wrote:  [Image: 294515619_17a6ea8072_m.jpg]

THE IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY OF ORGANS REFUTE DARWINISM

http://www.harunyahya.tv/detail.php?l=4&pid=4799&cid=76

The bodies of all living beings are made up of cells a hundredth of a millimeter in size. These tiny organisms are much more complex than any machine that we ever know. This irreducible complexity of the cell shatters the Darwinist myth and proves the fact of creation.


Then why do people who are actually trained in biology fail to be convinced be that kind of argument? Do you think that scientists, even the theists amongst them, are being deliberately obtuse?

"As somebody who has watched our own D.N.A. sequence emerge, our own instruction book over the course of the last few years, all three billion letters of our code, and watched how it compares with that of other species, the evidence that comes out of that kind of analysis is overwhelmingly in favor of a single origin of life from which various forms were then derived by a process which seems entirely consistent with Darwin's view of natural selection. By saying that, some people listening to my words will immediately conclude that I must therefore be opposed to any role for god in the process that's not true. But I'm not an advocate of intelligent design, either. Intelligent design is a fairly recent arrival on the scene. Been around 15 years or so. It argues that there are certain constructs in biology, certain particular features that can't be explained by evolution because they have irreduceable complexity. Take the eye, for instance. How do you develop something as complicated as the eye by a process of natural selection. It doesn't seem like that would fit with the slow gradual process where small changes get selected for. You'd never get there. The problem with that argument is biology actually is identifying multiple intermediate steps from the simplest single light-sensitive cell to something as complicated as the eye which clearly could have evolution acting upon them and result in a complicated structure."

(Francis Collins)
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-28-2009, 01:04 PM (This post was last modified: 03-28-2009 02:39 PM by clarence clutterbuck.)
Post: #3
RE: The Irreducible Complexity Of Organs Refute Darwinism-Video
The usual re-heated and long refuted arguments from Yahya, with a generous dollop of further fallacy added for good measure. Such as in the presenter's opening statement where he laughably refers to Yahya as an "intellectual" and then goes on to say..

Quote:"The theory of evolution that describes how all living things are the products of coincidences.."

By the word "coincidences", I'm guessing he means the processes of genetic mutation and sexual recombination, genetic drift and horizontal gene transfer, which are then acted upon by the non-random process of natural selection.

Quote:"...and denies the existence of the creator is the most powerful ideology against religion today"

Evolution is a scientific theory that explains the development and diversification of life into its many different species. Evolution is about observable reality. It is not an ideology and does not deny the existence of an invisible and unprovable supernatural creative entity.

The presenter goes on to explain the concept of irreducible complexity, and how the withdrawal of one element of a structure like the eye would render it useless. This may be true of the human eye and many other biological structures, but what he fails to mention is that the ability of evolution to produce irreducibly complex structures was understood and explained by Nobel Prize winning geneticist H J Mueller as long ago as 1918.

Creationists describe the development of complexity as if it is a step by step, linear addition of parts where the whole cannot function until all parts are present, and they argue therefore that slow, gradual evolution cannot happen. What Mueller theorized, is that parts are added to a biological structure without initially being indispensable, but may later become so as evolution causes other parts to be removed. There's a nice article about the phenomenon, plus this neat pictorial analogy, on the Talk Origins website.

Example 1: The stone bridge

A clear example of the Mullerian two-step is given by a stone bridge. Consider a crude "precursor bridge" made of three stones. This bridge spans the area needed to be crossed and is thus functional. For step one of the Mullerian two-step, a part is added: a flat stone on top, covering all precursor stones. Whether this improves the functionality of the bridge is irrelevant — it may or may not, the bridge still functions. For step two of the Mullerian two-step, the middle stone is removed. Voilá, we have an irreducibly complex bridge, since the last step made the top-stone necessary for the function.

The precursor bridge: three stones.

The precursor bridge: three stones.

[Image: stone_bridge0.jpg]

Step #1, add a part: the top-stone.

[Image: stone_bridge1.jpg]

Step #2, make it necessary: remove the middle stone. As promised, we now have an irreducibly complex stone bridge. None of the three stones can be removed without destroying the bridge's function.

[Image: stone_bridge2.jpg]

I wonder if Talk Origins is available in Turkey?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
Cool Non-religious opposition to Darwinism Unknowable 96 13,678 02-19-2013 11:47 PM
Last Post: JohnnyRelentless
Exclamation 200th Anniversary of Darwinism's Collapse - Site ahmetsecer 2 972 02-18-2009 02:01 PM
Last Post: GTseng3
Exclamation Darwinism: The Worst So-Called Scientific Deception-2 ahmetsecer 2 1,070 12-16-2008 05:42 AM
Last Post: Anglican
Exclamation Darwinism: The Worst So-Called Scientific Deception-1 ahmetsecer 3 1,080 12-15-2008 02:22 PM
Last Post: Anglican
Exclamation Another Twisted Belief With The Same Logic As Darwinism Has Now Approved ahmetsecer 19 4,119 12-10-2008 11:35 PM
Last Post: David Grupultsnik
Exclamation Proteins Refute Darwinism-Video ahmetsecer 0 743 09-23-2008 04:24 PM
Last Post: ahmetsecer
  Fossils Refute Darwinism- Amazing Video ahmetsecer 0 684 08-14-2008 03:34 PM
Last Post: ahmetsecer



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)