“At the heart of ID is the concept of irreducible complexity. This is more of an engineering concept than a scientific one but engineering is applied science or as I like to see it, real science. Irreducible complexity looks at the different functions in a design to see how they interact. This can be done with living organisms. By looking at the interaction of functions one could draw logical conclusions about what functions are interdependant and what functions are not. The interdependency of functionality of different processes makes a process of slow gradual evolution not plausible by logical observation.”
“The term intelligent design says that these interdependant processes and functions were designed to work together within the organism and would not work or would be functionally imparied if the different functions that work together were not always there together . Since there is no gradual mechanism that can explain this irreducible complexity we have to conclude that the organism was designed and built that way from the beginning.”
“You do not have to believe that God did designed and built it to recognize irreducible complexity and obvious concurrent dependent functionality, i.e. intelligent design.”
Steve40, that was a good explanation of ID.
I would like to point out of few things that ID proponents don’t like to talk about.
The first paragraph I quoted might sound like science to a non-scientist, but a real scientist would look at the same paragraph and say “what a bunch of baloney!”
“Irreducible complexity” is an invention of Michael Behe who is a laughing-stock of the entire scientific community. For example Behe claims the bacterial flagellum couldn’t have evolved, therefore it was magically created by the designer (God!). At the Dover trial powerful evidence was provided that demonstrated bacterial flagellum most definitely did evolve. Every single claim Behe has ever made was proved to be wrong at the Dover trial. Did Behe throw out his ideas? No, of course not. Behe is a professional liar and he continues to promote the same lies he was not able to get away with in Dover.
Your “Since there is no gradual mechanism that can explain this irreducible complexity we have to conclude that the organism was designed and built that way from the beginning.” should be changed to make it more honest to this: “Since BEHE INCORRECTLY CLAIMS there is no gradual mechanism that can explain this irreducible complexity we have to DISHONESTLY conclude that the organism was MAGICALLY CREATED that way from the beginning.”
With all due respect, Steve40, this is LYING: “You do not have to believe that God designed and built it to recognize irreducible complexity and obvious concurrent dependent functionality, i.e. intelligent design.”
ID proponents are most certainly invoking a magician here, and everyone knows, including you, the magician is God. ID proponents don’t want to admit their magician is God because then ID couldn’t be called science. They are not fooling anyone.
I’m all in favor of people believing anything they want. However, they should not lie about it. ID is a religious belief, and it’s most definitely not science. In fact, ID is anti-science. People should believe in the nonsense of ID if they want, but for God’s sake they shouldn’t lie about what it is. I pretty sure one of the Ten Commandments says something about lying being wrong.