[Ichneumon]

The "irreducible complexity." concept uses a mouse trap for an illustration. Since removing any one of the seven parts renders the trap useless it is irreductibly complex.

[...]

but they are extremely extrememly extremely... complex and if you try and simplify them, they are nothing, nadda zip. Just like a mouse trap minus any one component.

That's another funny thing about Behe and his followers. Not only do they simply *assert* (without bothering with that pesky "evidence" thing) that certain biological systems can't be successfully reduced, even their "intuitive" *examples* are wrong.

So a mouse trap is "irredicubily complex", as Behe and his followers, say, eh?

Sorry, wrong again. A reducibly complex mousetrap .

If Behe can make a mistake about whether something as simple as a *mousetrap* is "irreducibly complex", how can we trust his intuition on the harder stuff, like biological systems?

[Ophiucus]

If Behe can make a mistake about whether something as simple as a *mousetrap* is "irreducibly complex", how can we trust his intuition on the harder stuff, like biological systems?

When it comes to Behe and those who use his "argument," there is another aspect they comepletely ignore - there are biological injectors and flagellum that are simpler, use less parts, than their examples.

[biblewonk]

LOL, those are funny!

[frgoff]

I looked at that site. At no point was the mouse trap made less complex.

In the first step, he removes the catch and replaces it with another, less efficient catch made from bending and filing the spring. We still have a five-part mousetrap.

In the second step, he removes the hook, and replaces it with a less efficient latch to act as the hook. We still have a five-part mouse trap.

In the third step, he removes the hammer and replaces it with a less efficient hammer made by bending the spring (he even says as much in the description). We still have a five-part mouse trap.

In the final step he removes the base and replaces it with some other base (a floor). We still have a five-part mouse trap.

All the author has done is show that he doesn't understand irreducible complexity. He simply made a different form of the mouse trap that has all five components in different configurations, but all five components are still there. Not one was removed.