[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.

[balrog666]

We still have a five-part mouse trap.

All made out of one piece performing the needed 4 or 5 functions. Wow, it seems that it's you who can't count.

[Ichneumon]

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

Of course it was -- a full-blown mousetrap was reduced to nothing but a spring. All other pieces had been discarded.

But in any case I accidentally posted a link to a much older draft. Please check out this one instead.