IC represents the understanding that any biological
structure requires that multiple pieces of genetic information have to be in-place
simultaneously before it can function and provide the organism with a survival
advantage. Michael Behe, the originator of this term, used a mouse-trap as an
illustration. All five parts – spring, lever, base, trip-rod, and hook – have to
be in their designed place before it is possible to catch a mouse.
Bruce Malone of searchforthetruth.org offers hundreds, perhaps even thousands of examples of this phenomenon:
Bruce Malone of searchforthetruth.org offers hundreds, perhaps even thousands of examples of this phenomenon:
·
The Bristle-thighed curlew is an amazing
bird! When the Alaskan-born chicks are
just five weeks old, the parents abandon them and migrate to the South Pacific.
For the next few weeks, the chicks go on a feeding frenzy, fattening themselves
for the same 5000-mile journey. The
young birds are on their own to find the tiny islands of Fiji in the vast
Pacific Ocean. They travel non-stop
without a guide and arrive with pinpoint accuracy to the same mudflats and
sandy beaches where their parents have flown.
It is unfathomable that such a guidance system could be
constructed gradually, as Darwinism requires. Each small step, requiring new
genetic information, would have to impart to the curlew a survival advantage or
it would represent an encumbrance. Malone therefore concludes that this system
requires a Designer:
·
The Creator coded within the curlew the route to
take. When there is a code, there must
be a code-maker, and that code-maker is the Creator God.
It is not the curlew alone that requires such a sophisticated
guidance system. Thousands of species, including other birds, butterflies,
salmon, and turtles, have comparable but evolutionarily unrelated navigational systems.
It strains credulity that a blind, undersigned process could have constructed
them.
Of course, the evolutionist can dream up a “possible” scenario,
although entirely lacking in evidence and details. Their fallback assertion is
the God-of-the-gaps argument, which denies the existence of any evidence for
the Designer. However, lacking any
evidence that anything has ever had a natural cause or that any substance is
natural – even the smallest atom is a marvel of design – a more likely scenario
is that naturalism persists only because of a pervasive cultural bias.
