Irreducible Creation

Now, for once let us return to the actual topic of the blog shall we? I am well aware that many argue that there is no scientific evidence of a creator, and that what is supported by evidence is evolution. But, why don't we pause for a moment and look at one of the more interesting examples that seem to do the opposite.

We can look at the example of any irreducible complexities in nature. I irreducible complexities are things that can not be built up piece by piece. They function only when they are all present and correctly assembled. For instance, we can see objects like these in small, single celled organisms. Many contain motor like flagella that they use to move. If any part of this structure is removed, it ceases to work. Now we may ask, how does such a thing evolve over time? It does not serve its function without all of its parts. So, either the irreducible machine literally evolved into being completely assembled all at once or, it simply evolved piece by piece. Both have their own problems. Obviously, the odds of it simply coming into existence ready made by pure chance borders on ridiculous. It is virtually impossible for such a thing to happen. If it were to evolve piece by piece, that would mean the organism would evolve over time with a useless lump attached to it until the motor was fully assembled. This idea seems to go against the principles of evolution, where the fittest survive and multiply while those with deformities, or unhelpful mutations die out. The same idea can be seen in the concept of an eye, and other areas. If these things are said to happen by chance, than we must burden ourselves with the sister assertion that such astronomical odds continuously saw themselves through. On the other hand, if a creator is behind this, then the idea of such a machine existing becomes logical. It is now irreducible because it was designed with an intelligent mind, not because a cell won the genetic lottery.

-BlackFox

(348)