Re: [asa] Innate design detector?

*It should be clear by now that neither complexity nor irreducible
complexity is really a problem for evolution.*

Can you clarify this -- are there now arguments that IC systems can arise
more or less intact, or are you referring to the standard responses
(cooption)?

Concerning cooption, here's something I'd asked a while back about cooption
/ exaptation from Angus Mengue's book Agents Under Fire. Resurfacing it
because it didn't draw any responses:

I'll probably oversimplify, but on exaptation, Menuge says that the cooption
of parts requires availability, synchronization, localization, coordination,
and interface compatability of the system's parts. For a
biological-mechanical system like the flagellum, a limited number of
protiens are available to do the specialized jobs of the paddle, rotor, and
motor, particularly considering interface compatibility. Though we can
perhaps identify parts from other systems that theoretically could be
coopted to make a flagellum, it seems highly improbable that the further
requirements of synchronization, coordination, and interface compatibility
could be met with respect to those parts in relation to the whole system.

 I have seen that Ken Miller and others cite a number of journal articles
showing parts that could have been coopted to form the flagellum. Do those
articles collectively satisfy all Menuge's requirements, or is a significant
amount of "time and chance of the gaps" still required? Or are Menuge's
requirments all wet?

On 11/4/06, Pim van Meurs <pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> It should be clear by now that neither complexity nor irreducible
complexity is really a problem for evolution. This also helps explain why
Behe is now asking for mutation by mutation pathways for IC systems. And yet
it's sufficient for ID to argue that it looks designed thus it must be...
> There appears some imbalance between what is good for the goose and good
for the gander.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: David Campbell < pleuronaia@gmail.com>
> To: asa@calvin.edu
> Sent: Friday, November 3, 2006 2:10:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [asa] Innate design detector?
>
>
>
> Perhaps geology can provide some useful data here. Complex molecules such
as clay minerals can be produced by ordinary chemical reactions in the
environment, yet they have a large number of components (atoms) arranged
into a specific configuration, giving them properties that are not present
if the components are reaaranged or partially removed. They thus have
specified complexity, yet any design must be attributed to fine tuning in
the laws of chemistry and physics rather than to intervention-style direct
action.
>
> --
> Dr. David Campbell
> 425 Scientific Collections
> University of Alabama
> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Nov 4 08:35:07 2006