Re: [asa] Behe's debate with himself...

Dehler, Bernie wrote:
> Dave- How could a cell be irreducibly complex, yet designed at the time
> of the big bang? See Behe’s last quote.

Hi Bernie,

It seems to me that Behe isn't talking about a cell being present at the big bang, he's talking about insertion of information into the system;

<cite>
ID [Theory] is compatible with a lot of different scenarios for how *the
information* was placed into the system. It could have been present in
the initial conditions of the Big Bang or added over time somehow.
</cite>

Which I think disarms the original claim of contradiction on Behe's part.

If the question then becomes: given Behe allows cells evolved, then doesn't this destroy his theory of Irreducible Complexity? To which the answer is "no" because Irreducible Complexity isn't intended to disprove the occurrence evolution, it's intended to question the mechanism - in particular, it's intended to question whether evolution can occur by small, step-wise, increments. In that respect Behe is effectively arguing for some sort of saltationist position - a reoccurring "hopeful monster" scenario, if you will - albeit at the biochemical level.

Blessings,
Murray.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 27 19:43:39 2009