Talk:Irreducible complexity

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rgamble (talk | contribs) at 11:27, 6 March 2002 (*Rebuttal, request for opinions. If majority feel I have introduced non-NPOV I will remove the 'offending' phrase.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
almost a standard bearer for Creationists in their attempt to disprove natural selection as a mechanism for evolution.
  1. It's not about Creationists vs. evolutionists, but intelligent design vs. evolutionists. "Can't tell the players without a scorecard."
  2. No one is trying to disprove natural selection -- where did you get that?

--Ed Poor


Perhaps a poor choice of wording, but the whole phrase includes "as a mechanism for evolution". Creationists are a subset of intelligent design and most creationists I talk to use this particular species as an example of irreducible complexity. If others believe that I have introduced a fallacy or non-NPOV into the article, I shall remove that phrase. However, do a search on "Bombardier Beetle" on the web before making the juedgement. --rgamble