[Mrs. Don-o]

The absence of "in-between" species is something that also perplexed Darwin, he said.

That jumped out at me, too.

This is related to what Michael Behe says about "Irreducible Complexity".

Intracellular organelles are incredibly complex, but it's hard to see how they could have evolved incrementally, because they don't function incrementally. I mean that if an organelle lacks, say, one component out of 1,000, it doesn't merely work 1/1,000th less efficiently: it doesn't work at all.

So it seems there would be a lack of selection pressure for intermediate forms.

[null and void]

So it seems there would be a lack of selection pressure for intermediate forms.

On the contrary. They were selected out.

[Bob434]

[[I mean that if an organelle lacks, say, one component out of 1,000, it doesn’t merely work 1/1,000th less efficiently: it doesn’t work at all.]]

He should have worded that a little more carefully because evolutionists make the silly argument that it could lose a NON ESSENTIAL component and still function- Behe of course did NOT mean that losing a non essential part would result in failure- He meant that losing one IRREDUCIBLY COMPLEX and necessary part would result in something being non functional. The evolutionist’s counter claims were very disingenuous because they knew exactly what he meant but misrepresented his statement