The Bacterial Flagellum

Way back in 1996 Behe published a book, Darwin's Black Box, claiming that so-called "Irreducibly Complex" (IC) systems disprove evolution. An IC system can be defined as one in which removing a part stops it working altogether. This supposedly means it cannot have evolved.

The argument has been soundly trashed, including in a court of law, but IDists still use it because... well what else do they have?

The modern argument involves two different definitions of IC, changing between them as convenient.

  • Definition 1: A system is IC if it fails if a component is removed.
  • Definition 2: A system is IC if there is no evolutionary route, direct or not, to it.

We see systems that fail if a component is removed, and they are IC, by definition 1. Then we quietly swap to definition 2. If the system is IC then it cannot have evolved.


The Bacterial Flagellum

One such system is the bacterial flagellum. This is a tail-like structure in some bacteria that spins to provide forward motion. This was cited by Behe in his book, and became the poster child for the D movement.

Since Behe published his book work was done to explore how it could have evolved via an indirect route. It was originally thought the type three secretion system (T3SS), a mechanism some bacteria use for injecting proteins into another cell, was a precursor, but it now looks as though the T3SS evolved from the flagellum. This dates from 2021.

It is interesting that it is evolutionary biologists who determined this, not creationists. I expect that is because evolutionary biologists do science, creationists do not.

So this is an area of on-going research, and I am aware of at least two groups working on it, one in the UK and one in Australia.

This page is about the Australian work, and only says how it is starting. 

One interesting point is that the project is valued at 1.8 million Australian dollars, so about 1.2 million US dollars. Bearing in mind the Discovery Institute has a revenue of over 9 million dollars a year, this is well within their reach. So why are they not doing any research on this?

I suspect it is because they know it will fail.

The UK team have published some results, working back from the 17-part system, to a 12-part system.

Clearly this is on-going work. That is what science is like - new results come to light, and it heads off in a new direction. I have faith that science will have an answer one day, probably in the next ten years.

In contrast, the DI clearly have no faith in their position.


Proving A Negative

If IDists want to claim there are no evolutionary routes, direct or otherwise, to an IC system, the burden of proof is on them to support that claim. If they cannot then the default position is that we do not know if indirect routes are possible or not, and that position is sufficient to defeat the IC argument.

If we do not know if a system could have evolved, it is nonsense to conclude evolution could not have happened.

This feels like it is obvious, but IDists will still try to claim the argument stands.


See also

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mmi.14246

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Southern Baptist Convention Position on Abortion

Evangelical Christians in the US are very strongly anti-abortion. However, it was not always so. As recently as 1970 the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) - the largest Protestant denomination in the US - advocated for legalising abortion. A Complete Reversal The landmark law case in the US was Roe v. Wade, in 1973, and abortion has been legal since that time. Jane Roe was the pseudonym of the woman wanting the abortion; Henry Wade the district attorney who stood for the state, prohibiting it. Roe was represented by two attorneys; one was Linda Coffee, a member of the SBC. The Baptist Press interviewed her after the successful conclusion of the trial. The decision of Roe v Wade was generally regarded as a good one by the SBC. To evangelicals of that time abortion was seen as a Catholic issue. You can find a list of abortion-related resolutions made by the SBC from 1971 onwards  here . It is clear that in 1971 they saw abortion - quite reasonably - as undesirable, but it was consi
Read more

Kent Hovind: Third wife in three years?

Kent Hovind is, perhaps the very worst of the creationists, so it is with some interest I note that he is now on this third wife in three years. For many years he was married to Jo Hovind, who ended up going to prison for a year due to her involvement in tax fraud. Once Kent got released from his rather longer prison sentence, it was not long before Jo filed for divorce (early 2016) - possibly to distance himself from any further gaol sentences. A few months later, 24th Sptember 2016, and he married Mary Tocco - not a full marriage, but a covenant before God. It looks like she got various assurances that Kent's new business was entirely honest before she got married. However, she later cam to realise that that was not really the case, and, again to avoid ending up in prison , she left him in November 2017. http://kehvrlb.com/mary-tocco-on-leaving-kent-hovind Less than a year later and he has a new wife, Cindi Lincoln, a former friend of Mary's. It is not clear if they
Read more

Hinman's "Argument From Transcendental Signifier"

ETA (23/Jun/20): I have just heard Joe is in hospital. I wish him a speedy recovery. All the best, Joe. This is an argument for God that Joe Hinman has presented several times on various of his sites: http://www.doxa.ws/Ontological/TS2.html https://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2020/05/transcendental-signifier-argument.html http://religiousapriori.blogspot.com/2011/06/transcendental-signifier-argument.html http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2018/01/premises-4-7-ts-argumet.html The argument is a seven step syllogism: 1. Any rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe must of necessity presuppose organizing principles (Ops) 2. OP's summed up in TS 3. Modern Thought rejects TS outright or takes out all aspects of mind. 4. Therefore, Modern thought fails to provide a rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe. 5. minds organize and communicate meaning 6. Therefore universal mind, offers the best understanding of TS 7. Concept of God unites TS with universal m
Read more