TWO of the more sophisticated arguments against Michael Behe’s irreducible complexity (IC) are as follows: Equivocation— Behe is equivocating between two different meanings of IC, a purely theoretical one that doesn’t care about the evidence, and an empirical one that says existing adaptations ...
In rebuttal, theists attempt to thwart this with the theory of irreducible complexity, or the belief that some traits are too complex to have been produced by evolution’s slow step-by-step process. Similar to the watch, theists believe life is too complex to have been affected by ...
We see this when apparently new and irreducible emergent phenomena arise from the combination of underlying parts. But this implies that the separate building blocks actually possess shared powers. We do not see in their basic separate state but they become apparent when they are properly combined....
Based on the complexity of the best known algorithm against the SIS prob- lem, one can set log q, r = O(log N ), thus making the proof size of order O( N λ log3 N ). 1.2 Related Work Zero-knowledge proofs were invented by Goldwasser et al. [GMR85]. It is useful to ...
According to a more recent version of the argument, known as intelligent design, biological organisms display a kind of complexity (“irreducible complexity”) that could not have come about through the gradual adaptation of their parts through natural selection; therefore, the argument concludes, ...