Today we’re talking about the argument of creation, specifically irreducible complexity.
What’s that, you say?
In a nutshell, irreducible complexity means that certain biological systems couldn’t have evolved because the separate parts of these systems can’t function without the other system parts being fully formed. Irreducible complexity can be illustrated by a mousetrap. None of the parts – the spring, platform, hammer, etc. – could catch a mouse without the other parts being fully functional also. Irreducible complexity is seen in the human cell. Inter-working cellular parts couldn’t function unless fully formed, and evolutionists can’t answer how these biological machines could have developed gradually.
In fact, biochemist Michael Behe, who developed the idea of irreducible complexity, said:
If you search the scientific literature on evolution, and…how molecular machines—the basis of life—developed, you find an eerie and complete silence.
So, why do some scientists still believe in evolution? Well, the answer is that they have a particular worldview, but we’ll discuss that another time. Until then, find more apologetic resources at debunked.org. Stay bold!
Carl Kerby is the founder of Reasons for Hope and co-creator of the DeBunked apologetic video series. His radio feature, Fast Facts, is heard weekly on VCY America, Saturdays at 9:25 AM Central.
