<< FMA:
If you believe that IC is still a reliable detector of design, can you show
how it can exclude a natural pathway as a designer?
Nelson:
An irreducibly complex systems can only be built simultaneously. Thus
physical precursors are eliminated as the designer. It can not be built
gradually , step by step.
>>
FMA:
You are avoiding the question.
Nelson:
No I answered it directly.
FMA:
You presume that IC systems can only be built
simultaneously, something not supported by actual evidence and you presume
that IC systems cannot arise gradually, again not supported by evidence.
Nelson:
The actual system is the evidence. All it's parts must be present or none of
the parts are present. You can see this with chaperone machines:
"whenever hsp70 was present in a genome, hsp40 and grpE were also found if
enough sequencing was done; conversely, genome sequencing has demonstrated
that if the hsp70 gene is absent, hsp40 and grpE are also absent."
<< Nelson:
As I illustrated with the Dawkins discussion of the 91 membranes, it
succesfully eliminates natural selection.
>> >>
FMA:
Nope, it merely eliminates a particular pathway of natural selection.
Furthermore, do you propose to say that elimination of natural selection is
evidence of design? Are there no other natural pathways possible?
Nelson:
What natural pathways do you propose? Also I have said many times that
design itself is demonstrated in these systems, it is a specified
arrangement of parts.
<<
FMA:
Not really. All you are attacking is the strawman that natural selection can
only take direct routes.
Nelson:
Indirect routes are indistinguishable from direct ones and invoke pure
random chance. They are non-Darwinian.
>>
FMA:
Unsupported assertion and actually contradicted by the evidence. ]
Nelson:
What evidence?
FMA:
Indirect
routes seem to be the way much of evolution happens.
Nelson:
Can you give me an example of an indirect route that can lead to an IC
system and what evidence supports it?
FMA:
Look at the many
homologous systems found for instance. And even if they are non-Darwinian,
they are still natural.
Nelson:
No homologous systems have nothing to do with how natural selection/random
mutation can produce an IC system. And they are Darwinian, homologous
structures are indicative of common descent.
<< FMA:
Even Behe admits that there are indirect routes,
although he seems to reject them without much supporting argument and
evidence.
Nelson:
Another handwave.
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 12:09:12 EDT