Irreducible complexity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-03-2012, 09:11 PM
RE: Irreducible complexity




A child could understand this video and it clearly disproves the absurdity of irreducible complexity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2012, 05:20 AM
RE: Irreducible complexity
I have never heard of this "Irreducible complexity" thing. What is that? Can you explain that to me, maybe it will help me start believing in God again...

Big Grin

Did we ever heard of it, imagine the question on The THINKING Atheist forum...

YES, we did.

Smile

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2012, 05:31 AM
RE: Irreducible complexity
(22-03-2012 07:02 AM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  
(21-03-2012 07:58 PM)Eternal Wrote:  I have always seen irreducible complexity as the theists last attempt at beating the tide of evidence building against their beliefs, trying to beat science with science (if you can call it that).

We can only hope, but I'll not be betting on it being their last attempt.

Maybe last coherent attempt would of been better. The further it goes the more crazy and desperate they will get.

"Belief means not wanting to know what is true"
Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-04-2014, 10:13 PM
RE: Irreducible complexity
As a tack-on to this old conversation, I was listening to a debate on Dogma Debate today, (#114 Lawrence Krauss and Live Apologist, http://www.spreaker.com/user/smalleyandh...ologist_1) and I had a thought that others may be able to comment on.

On the debate the comment was made that it was easy to understand how a simple organism could evolve, but that the more complex ones can be seen as requiring a designer, aka, irreducible coplexity.

However, it seems to me that the more complex a system becomes over the course of evolving, the more potential it has to evolve even more complexly, in an almost exponential way. Simply because it has more material, more options, more possibilities to work with -- not just in material or components, but in terms of various attractions, shapes, capacities, etc.-- of all of its constituent parts. By the time something has become very complex and specialized, it is the product of so many levels of interaction and possibility, when tuned by the necessities of survival. I think the simpler organisms are more difficult to achieve, and that seems to be the case, since very early evolution was apparently very slow, but speeded up as complexity increased.

Has anyone every heard of an idea like this or thought about this? Am I smoking something I shouldn't be? I would love to hear what can be said about this!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Karyn Wolfe's post
16-04-2014, 11:01 PM
RE: Irreducible complexity
(16-04-2014 10:13 PM)Karyn Wolfe Wrote:  As a tack-on to this old conversation, I was listening to a debate on Dogma Debate today, (#114 Lawrence Krauss and Live Apologist, http://www.spreaker.com/user/smalleyandh...ologist_1) and I had a thought that others may be able to comment on.

On the debate the comment was made that it was easy to understand how a simple organism could evolve, but that the more complex ones can be seen as requiring a designer, aka, irreducible coplexity.

However, it seems to me that the more complex a system becomes over the course of evolving, the more potential it has to evolve even more complexly, in an almost exponential way. Simply because it has more material, more options, more possibilities to work with -- not just in material or components, but in terms of various attractions, shapes, capacities, etc.-- of all of its constituent parts. By the time something has become very complex and specialized, it is the product of so many levels of interaction and possibility, when tuned by the necessities of survival. I think the simpler organisms are more difficult to achieve, and that seems to be the case, since very early evolution was apparently very slow, but speeded up as complexity increased.

Has anyone every heard of an idea like this or thought about this? Am I smoking something I shouldn't be? I would love to hear what can be said about this!

Try this short thread and hyperlinks
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ubtraction

Throughout history conversions happen at the point of a sword, deconversions at the point of a pen - FC

I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's. - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2014, 01:09 AM
RE: Irreducible complexity
(16-04-2014 11:01 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(16-04-2014 10:13 PM)Karyn Wolfe Wrote:  As a tack-on to this old conversation, I was listening to a debate on Dogma Debate today,
Try this short thread and hyperlinks
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ubtraction
OK, interesting thread. To me, it ultimately makes the point that organisms may have a dynamic and non-linear process of evolving that includes expansion, trimming, simplifying, complexifying over time; in trying to "reverse engineer" that evolution, it's important to remember that it's not all in one direction (eg., mammals returning to the ocean). That adds depth to my thinking about the potential of complexity, where the organism/cell/creature is a community of parts, each with "motives," "needs," and "capabilities." Given the variety possible, you can't ever prove that something is irreducibly complex, even if you don't know the path the organism took.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2014, 06:55 AM
RE: Irreducible complexity
(16-04-2014 10:13 PM)Karyn Wolfe Wrote:  As a tack-on to this old conversation, I was listening to a debate on Dogma Debate today, (#114 Lawrence Krauss and Live Apologist, http://www.spreaker.com/user/smalleyandh...ologist_1) and I had a thought that others may be able to comment on.

On the debate the comment was made that it was easy to understand how a simple organism could evolve, but that the more complex ones can be seen as requiring a designer, aka, irreducible coplexity.

However, it seems to me that the more complex a system becomes over the course of evolving, the more potential it has to evolve even more complexly, in an almost exponential way. Simply because it has more material, more options, more possibilities to work with -- not just in material or components, but in terms of various attractions, shapes, capacities, etc.-- of all of its constituent parts. By the time something has become very complex and specialized, it is the product of so many levels of interaction and possibility, when tuned by the necessities of survival. I think the simpler organisms are more difficult to achieve, and that seems to be the case, since very early evolution was apparently very slow, but speeded up as complexity increased.

Has anyone every heard of an idea like this or thought about this? Am I smoking something I shouldn't be? I would love to hear what can be said about this!

I like your thinking, but maybe 'complexity' is not the correct measure. I think a more interesting measure would be variation. When there is more variety there is more opportunity for even more variety, and that is definitely exponential.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
17-04-2014, 04:02 PM
RE: Irreducible complexity
Serial endosymbiosis theory fixes the "serious problems" like plastids. That's good enough for me.

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: