Mouse trap history disagrees with intelligent design (still under construction)
by JLD a1ias@gmx.net Abstract Advocates of intelligent design (ID) claim that irreducibly complex systems, like mouse traps that do not work if one part is missing, cannot evolve through continuously improving the initial function by slight, successive modifications of precursors. Historic traps, however, show intermediate designs between ad hoc traps and modern prefabricated traps. This reveals continuous improvement of the initial function of traps through slight, successive modifications of precursors. Therefore the ID claim about mouse traps in particular and irreducibly complex systems in general is false. In order to defeat ID, however, it must be cut of from its source believe that the Bible did not evolve and can therefore be trusted as authority against evolution. Applying the putative benchmarks of ID, irreducible complexity and specified complexity, to the Bible shows that it fulfils neither. Comparative evidence suggests, instead, that the Bible as well as other scripture evolved through religious adaptation by...