>FMAJ: Robison has shown a potential pathway to an IC system. Robison shows a
natural pathway to an IC system
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/review.html
Behe responded to the article but seems to have missed the point.
DNAunion: How did Behe miss the point? Surely Behe's objection to Robinson
claiming the TCA cycle was IC, then showing it wasn't, is valid. As Behe
points out, Behe never said the TCA cycle was IC. This comes awfully close
to a straw man argument (making a claim the opponent doesn't with the intent
of showing the claim to be false and thereby supposedly refuting the
opponent's position). I have seen many instances in which anti-IDists "move
the goal posts" to get something supposedly labeled as IC with the sole
intent of then showing that it could arise naturally, thereby (again,
supposedly) refuting the IC concept. This appears to be what Robinson did.
I also agree with Behe that Robinson did not reduce the mouse trap by
substituting a wood floor for the base - the same number of functional pieces
were present as where the same number of functions.
I also agree with Behe (though I think he may have not been clear in his
book) that his argument was not that pseudogenes themselves could not arise
naturally, but that the mechanisms needed to produce them (the mechanisms of
normal cellular information flow that malfunction to produce pseudogenes)
could not have.
>FMAJ: A classification of possible routes of Darwinian evolution. Richard
H.
Thornhill1 and David W. Ussery. Published in The Journal of Theoretical
Biology, 203: 111-116, 2000. "Possible routes of Darwinian evolution can be
classified into four fundamental categories, as outlined below."
DNAunion: Mike Gene posted about this article at ARN, and David Ussery even
posted there in response to Mike's post. Perhap's Mike would fill us in
(keeping in mind that it MIGHT not be proper to quote David Ussery here -
though quoting others' work does seem to occur quite frequently here).
>DNAunion: Anyway, could you provide more material as to how Behe's concept
of IC has been refuted?
>FMAJ: What has been shown is that 1) direct routes exist 2) indirect routes
may
exist. This means that ICness itself is not a reliable indicator of design.
DNAunion: Again, what is the exact natural "direct route" of generating IC
and what is the supporting evidence?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 02:37:47 EDT