You will notice I said, "peer reviewed". Neither article is. Second, I am familiar with both articles. That Matke's valiant stab at a detailed proposal is invariably the first, and usually the only, article cited as evidence, I take as a tacit confirmation that a detailed, rigorous account has yet to be published in the professional literature. I commend Matke for his effort, but it is not peer reviewed. Be that as it may, there is a lengthy 6 part response to both Matke and Miller here: Evolving the Bacterial Flagellum Through Mutation and Cooption . It has some pictures, too.
Miller can say the the flagellum has been unspun all he wants with his just-so Type III secretory systems stories, but the fact remains that the argument from ignorance with which he charges ID proponents really lies with evolutionary biologist who yet to publish detailed, peer reviewed accounts of how the flagellum evolved by Darwinian mechanisms.
Cordially,
"with which he charges ID proponents really lies with evolutionary biologist who yet to publish detailed, peer reviewed accounts of how the flagellum evolved by Darwinian mechanisms."
I take it you have scholarly information on this? Is there any particular reason this "flagellum" has become an OCD case for you?