[Tom Bombadil]

there was no way to prove to proponents of the theory that they were wrong.

Irreducible complexity could be falsified by demonstrating reducible complexity for the biochemical reactions cited in ID.

That is the sticking point. One side says "we don't know how they got that way...but we will someday", and the other side says "it could have been an act of creation".

It is nothing to get bothered about, both sides react to the facts but it isn't so much intelligent design that is the problem as it is the idea of irreducible complexity on a molecular level.

[MHalblaub]

"Irreducible complexity could be falsified by demonstrating reducible complexity for the biochemical reactions cited in ID."

First error:
In no way irreducible complexity (IC) is linked only with intelligent design.

Second error:
How do we know for sure that it is impossible for an evolutionary process to create any form of IC? We can't because every available definition of IC can't eliminate an evolutionary way to an IC status.

Third error:
Is it also impossible to show that IC doesn't exists as it is impossible to show that some deity doesn't exists. You can prove that one system is not IC but you can't show that IC is impossible at all.