How many religious institutions are in the business of producing arranged marriages?

[Boojatta]

Some people have relationships that are described with the words "it's complicated." Perhaps some of those relationships achieve not merely ordinary complexity, but irreducible complexity. If the process was guided by intelligent people who work at some religious institution, then we have an example of intelligent design producing irreducible complexity.

[littlewolf]

1. I though most arranged marriages were between families ...

[Boojatta]

2. Most of the world's dollars aren't in your bank account ...

but that doesn't have to stop you from wondering how many dollars are in your bank account.

[Jim__]

3. Isn't a watch an example of intelligent design producing irreducible complexity? - n/t

[Boojatta]

4. Yes.

According to Michael Behe, a mousetrap is another example. However, see this thread.

[cleanhippie]

5. I would say no, not at all, considering that everything can be reduced down to the sub-atomic level

And still have complex function.

[Jim__]

6. It's not about having "some" complex function; it's about having a specific complex function.

In the case of a watch you would have to start with a very few simple components whose existence as a system has a relatively high probability, and, at some point in its probable evolutionary history this system functions similarly to a watch - namely it functions as a relatively accurate timekeeper - and then show how this system can expand through changes of relatively high probability into the watch that you have.

In the case of the bacterial flagellum, one of Behe's prime biological examples, it has been shown that the original system was likely a Type III Secretion system (whose existence can be explained) and then simple mutations could have led from this secretory system to a primitive system that could be used for cellular mobility. From there, the continuing evolution to a flagellum does not appear to be irreducibly complex.

At this point, I don't believe there are any biological systems that are known to be irreducibly complex - granting that chemical processes in the early earthly environment could have led to a cell - I don't believe that process is fully understood. But, I don't think anyone questions that certain human designed systems are, indeed, irreducibly complex. My example was a watch; a Boeing 747 is probably the prime example.

I'm not a biologist, and I can't claim to understand all the evolutionary steps involved in these various mutations; but I have read biology papers that address this point. IOW, I may have some errors in detail, but I believe the general thrust is correct.

[cleanhippie]

7. Respectfully, if you are using anything from Behe as a valid argument...

Then it's pointless to continue. Everything that man has posited regarding a scientific theory has been thourougly debunked by many people much smarter than you or I, and as a result is not a credible source to use as a basis for an argument.

[Jim__]

8. The arguments that I made are actually against Behe's position.

Behe argues that there are biological systems that are irreducibly complex. I argued against that. As for talking about irreducible complexity, that's largely what the OP is about, and all of what this subthread is about.

[cleanhippie]

9. Ahh, my mistake then. I guess I need to read more carefully next time.