[spunkets]

"I have no idea what you're talking about."

I assume you wrote the post I replied to and this:
"If people are going to try to refute irreducible complexity they have to demonstrate some actual scenarios and calculation of the probabilities with respect to Behe's examples. They have tried and failed."

My post reufted ID as science w/o the need to consider anything more than ID in general, regardless of any particulars.

Your statement given here says that folks have failed to come up with the particulars that Behe ignores in his own calculation. IOWs Behe's calculation is NG.

[lasereye]

My post reufted ID as science

I must have missed where that occurred. I still can't find it.

[lasereye]

Maybe this was supposed to be it:

"ID says the laws of physics are insufficient to govern the world.",

whatever that means.