Whereas, they can baldly assert that irreducible complexity PROVES ID and disproves darwinism? All I'm asking for is some demonstration of this whacky contention. Since my interlocutors have failed, for thread after thread, to produce a deductive proof of this contention, I've taken to asking for the inductive scientific demonstration.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but every time I looked at the scummy water in my yard under a microscope, I saw hundreds of different-looking and -behaving flagellum, so I am forced to wonder what universe this is, exactly, where flagellum can't possibly be capable of evolutionary change. If that's so--why aren't critters with flaggelum universally endowed with the exact same flagellum?
It makes one wonder if Behe and his followers ever actually owned a microscope. And it certainly does not endow me with confidence that any of them ever even made an attempt to critically evalute this thesis by looking for counterexamples in the neighborhood.
Of course it does. Irreducible complexity proves design and Darwin himself admitted that it would disprove his theory. (BTW - since there were no human designers when bacteria arose, guess Who that designer was?)