TomNaegeleBlogs

For anyone seeking a solid scientific refutation of Darwinian evolution, Michael Behe’s work, Darwin’s Black Box is just the book for the job. A well known biochemist, Behe takes readers on a surprisingly lucid tour of several highly complicated processes such as blood-clotting, cell-movement, and the immune system.

These processes (and many others that go unmentioned) are what Behe terms, “irreducibly complex.” In other words, these intricate systems require such vast numbers of intertwined components in order to function, that they are essentially lilliputian Rube Goldberg machines.

What does such a discovery mean for Darwinian evolution? Simply, it cannot be true.

Darwin himself maintained that if a system was shown to require numerous interdependent parts in order to function at the most basic level, that system could not be the result of natural selection.

Behe illustrates this point wonderfully by frequently referencing a mousetrap analogy. Multiple parts are required in order for a mousetrap to function at all; therefore, the parts had to be assembled together by a designer. Natural selection would have nothing to work with if it did not already have a functioning mousetrap as a starting point.

Essentially, Behe simply scientifically proves what many already know to be true. Creation necessarily required a Creator. Why then do not scientists band together and announce this simple fact that so many already know to be true? Let’s ask Mr. Behe.

“Why does the scientific community not greedily embrace its startling discovery [of intelligent design]? Why is the observation of design handled with intellectual gloves? The dilemma is that while one side of the elephant is labeled intelligent design, the other side might be labeled God.”

Ah, yes indeed.