From the video description:
"The bacterial flagellum has become an iconic example of the evidence against modern Darwinian theory as well as the evidence for intelligent design. Stephen Meyer, Scott Minnich and others scientists and scholars explore the facts about this amazing piece of nanotechnology, first made famous by biologist Michael Behe when he coined the phrase irreducible complexity."
The simplest living organisms we know of are single cell organisms, one of which is bacteria. However, even at the single-cellular level, the components of a bacterium are still incredibly complex molecular machines that come together to perform organized functions. One piece of evidence against the theory of evolution would be the bacterial flagellum, which is essentially the tail that some bacteria have to swim around. Since the theory of Darwinian macro-evolution posits that all complex lifeforms arose from simpler versions, the theory essentially states that the complexity of life entirely evolved from bacteria. But taking the theory backward, is there a point in the bacterial world where this fanciful evolutionary tale breaks down such that evolution cannot account for the development of an aspect of the bacteria? While there are many pieces of such evidence, the bacterial flagellum has risen to the top as a prime example of how Darwinian evolution can't simply account for its development, since the flagellum is a molecular machine that would need to be fully developed before it is possibly functional, thereby showing that it couldn't evolve slowly by being a beneficial attribute to the earliest bacteria that didn't posses a completely formed flagellum. Listen to Michael Behe explain this concept and the evidence is this very brief clip.
コメント