I have two questions about Behe-style IDism:
Why does the designer restrict every innovation to a single taxon? Why don’t octopi have vertebrate immune systems?
Why does the designer cobble together IC systems out of pre-existing parts? For example, making the bacterial flagellum out of the type three secretory system?
“Why does the designer restrict every innovation to a single taxon? Why don’t octopi have vertebrate immune systems?”
Because it works? For pretty much the same reason that evolution never produced vertebrate style immune systems in appendicularly advantaged slugs?
“Why does the designer cobble together IC systems out of pre-existing parts? For example, making the bacterial flagellum out of the type three secretory system?”
For the same reason that human designers who claim intelligence cobble together systems out of pre-existing parts? Why did humans make the first aircraft out of agricultural machinery and bicycle parts?
(Just playing devil’s advocate.)
I must say I’m disappointed. There are a number of IDists here at the SDMB. All I’ve asked are two straightforward (and IMO rather obvious) questions. And yet, not a single IDist has come forward to offer any answer. Aren’t any of you willing to at least state that you agree with Blake’s answer?
Then again, it’s not surprising. ID is really no different from creationism: they’re both based on God-of-the-Gaps. So should we be surprised that neither of them can muster any explanatory power?
It’s not exactly the politest thing in the world to taunt people and tell them what they believe just because they haven’t seen or aren’t interested in your thread. Heck, I’m barely interested in your thread, and I’m just a disembodied brain in a jar with nothing much better to do except try to remember what having a body felt like.
I guess you’re right, Apos. I’m just a little frustrated by the eternal behavior of the creationists around here. They generally know they’ll fail if they attack evolution head on, so they snipe on it without really talking turkey. I felt that some people were now doing that in the name of ID, so I wanted to try to flush them out a la the turkeytalk challenge.
Nonetheless, I still maintain that they will not and, in fact, cannot answer my questions. The usual reply one gets from IDists is “questions like that are about theology, not science.” ID utterly depends on saying no more than “it’s designed, period, the end.” If you start asking too many scientific questions about the nature of the designer, it becomes a little to clear that the designer cannot even remotely be the J-C God.
Well, maybe you’re doing such a good job of fairly representing their side of the debate that ID proponents feel like anything they could contribute would only detract from your eloquent statement of their views.
I’d say more, but I’m hard at work planning on an incredible journey through time and space that, if successful, will bring me instantaneously to the very moment when I open this thread again to see if anyone other than you has posted in it. See you in the fuuuuuuuttttttuuuuuuurrrrrrreeeeeee!!!
If you’re implying that I’ve misrepresented ID, then I’m going to have to ask you to back that up.
Well, it’s been a long three years of fighting decrepit inter-dimensional zombies that live outside of time and beyond sanity. Remember how surprised you were at the end of the Sixth Sense when Bruce Willis’ character turned out to be a child molestor? Well, let’s just say that nowhere near as surprising as finding out that the unspeakable creeping horrors that wait patiently for us just beyond the boundaries of this world just held a dress rehersal for their big puppet show production of Hamlet starring all our eviscerated precious organs, and featuring your lower intestinal tract as Rosencrantz.
Anyway, we don’t have much time, or, for that matter, hope, but before I spend a final day and night with my loved ones, I’ll just say: keep up the good work. Despite the overwhelming pile-on of ID proponents that your thread has attracted since my last visit here (god how I miss those innocent days!), you’ve admirably held your own, to the point where most of the ID’ers seem to have simply deleted their posts in prostrate shame. Enjoy your victory while the walls separating reality and the pus-spurting elder-god hordes still hold.
Well, this is the oddest thread I’ve read in a while… 
Could someone possibly explain what this thread is talking about?
Er…
…
Actually Satan did that… God went out for a smoke, and that rascal had messed up the secretory systems…
Hmm. In my world, “ID” means “infectious disease.” Apparently, that’s not what you’re looking for. Farewell, and I wish you luck!
You do realize that all creation, even the creation humans do, is nothing more than a replication of what occurs in nature. No innovation, no awe, no real reason to be proud of ourselves.
Funny, I don’t remember seeing any 1000-foot towers in nature, or objects flying to the moon, or any number of other engineering, technical or scientific accomplishments.
I guess I need to go on more nature hikes. I must be missing something.
In the meantime, I’ll still be proud of human accomplishment until someone comes up with a good reason why I shouldn’t. Further, I look forward to what our continually-evolving body of knowledge will yield.
In this thread “ID” means Intelligent Design.
I’m still trying to figure out “IC”. Bacterial flagellum are made from Integrated Circuits? 
IC = Irreducible Complexity.
The notion that some structures cannot have evolved because they are Irreducibly Complex–no prior evolutionary structure could have produced them because any previous stages would not have worked or survived long enough to have evolved into the structure we can examine.
Behe provides several examples–all of which have been demonstrated to have had precursor systems.
In my world, an Idist is someone who speaks Ido.
udo?
How many IDists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Don’t know - none of them have ever shown up to do it. But it’s okay, because Behe claimed to have done it - but the room was still dark afterwards.
**
For one thing, that’s Panglossian. Secondly, I’m not talking about “vertebrate-style” immune systems. I’m talking about gene-for-gene the vertebrate immune system. Why doesn’t the designer ever export an IC system from one taxon to another? Why do we instead find systems that are analogous, but not homologous?
(And btw- “appendicularly advantaged slugs”? Do you consider elephants to be mice with long noses?)
That would seem to prove once and for all that the designer isn’t the J-C God. After all, the Wright brothers weren’t smart enough to design a modern aircraft from the top down, and they had a limited budget.