You are aware, aren't you, that in the last ten years or so evolution has become an experimental laboratory science, and the arguments against multi-step evolution are being whittled away? Behe's Edge of Evolution was obsolete within weeks of its publication. Actually the specific claims he made were obsolete before he published, but he failed to do a simple literature search.
Since publication, two laboratory experiments have been published demonstrating adaptations that required multiple mutations before becoming adaptive.
[[You are aware, aren’t you, that in the last ten years or so evolution has become an experimental laboratory science, and the arguments against multi-step evolution are being whittled away?]]
Lol- being ‘whittled away’? That’s funny- Behe’s irreducible complexity still stands- apparently you are unaware of his rebuttals to those hwo tried to ‘whittle away’ his proposals? and just for hte record- IC exists in EVERY level, not just in certain systems like Behe once htought-
[[Since publication, two laboratory experiments have been published demonstrating adaptations that required multiple mutations before becoming adaptive.]]
That’s swell, and how does htis ‘whittle away’ IC again? It doesn’t- Lab tests show certai adaptions need several mutaitons? Big deal. You still have hte problems of Metainfo to deal with, as well as the problems associated with MACROEvolution- Seems ot me that all these tests really show are that natural selection is a force that drives MICROEvolution- Swell- We know MICROEvolution is a scientific fact- but we also know MACROEvolution is still a biologically impossible process that still hasn’t been shown in lab tests contrary to some misperceptions on the part of some who argue it’s an ‘established fact’
[[Behe’s Edge of Evolution was obsolete within weeks of its publication. Actually the specific claims he made were obsolete before he published, but he failed to do a simple literature search.]]
Got news for ya- Deconstructing the NON IC components of an IC system doesn’t make IC proposals ‘obsolete’- The ONLY thing oponents of Behe have managed to do is show what we already know- that IC systems CAN and DO contain some reducible components- You can remove an air filter from a carbeurator, but you can NOT remove the IRREDUCIBLE parts of the carbeurator and have it still run. The arguments agaisnt IC are intellectually dishonest arguments, and htose making them know full well that the actual IC parts can NOT be reduced without hte system malfunctioning.
Let’s remove hte metainfo from a living system, and htrow a myraid of mutaitons at hte core components and see how well we do- You will see quickly just how itneredependent systems are on this system of metainfo. Bottom line, Chemicals can not create this absolutely necessary system which is required for life, nor can nature provide it despite claism that it must have.
[[Behe’s Edge of Evolution was obsolete within weeks of its publication.]]
You know, that statement says quite a lot about just who and what you are willing to put your faith in.
Apparently, it is fashionable to misquote someone, and to launch false claims as some sort of ‘rebuttal to’ someone? Behe never stated that multiple mutations could appear at multiple sites- Those statign he did, are lying about what Behe actually said in his book- whic just goes to show, once again, how deceitful and dishonest these supposed ‘rebuttals’ of his really are- It’s quite a leap from dishonest ‘rebuttals’ to ‘made obsolete’- wouldn’t you agree?
Behe’s response to those who made the FALSE CLAIMS abotu hwat he said:
“But I certainly do not say that multipleamino acid replacements “can’t happen”. A centerpiece of The Edge of Evolution is that it can and did happen. I stress in Chapter 3 that in the case of malarial resistance to chloroquine, multiple necessary mutations did happen in the membrane protein PfCRT. I also of course emphasize that it took a huge population size, one that would not be available to larger organisms. But Carroll seems uninterested in making distinctions.”
http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNKWOEF4DT51SV2
you are basing your claim that Behe’s book was ‘made obsolete’ based on an undergraduate’s FALSE claims that were completely and honesalty REFUTED and exposed for lies that were said- Not very good ground for you to be standign on JS in regards to this particular issue. Carrol was made to look quite foolish, and infact, was even REFUTED by other laypeople
Carrol infact was EXPOSED as a less than honest and intellectually dishonest critic in the very book he unseuccesfully tried to ‘refute’