From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   https://scienceandculture.com/2025/08/woodpecker-is-a-stunning-e   
   ample-of-irreducible-complexity/   
      
   Someone just mentioned Karl Crawford recently, and the ID perps are   
   resurrecting that old creationist argument.  They are calling it an   
   example of irreducible complexity, but that is a lie so they put it in   
   their new Culture category instead of their Science category, and it is   
   a talk given at their Science and Faith conference, so it was just   
   something to fool the religious creationist rubes with.   
      
   Karl Crawford championed the scientific creationist evolution denial   
   argument about the impossibility for woodpeckers to have evolved, and   
   obviously some god was needed in order to create such a bird.  It was   
   pretty much like the scientific creationist argument that the bacterial   
   flagellum had to be a designed machine.  Gish would routinely put up a   
   slide of a flagellum and make that argument.  The ID perps seem to think   
   that both woodpeckers and flagellum are their type of irreducibly   
   complex.  That should tell you how bogus irreducible complexity has   
   always been for creationists like they have a the Discovery Institute.   
   Behe claims that his type of irreducibly complex systems could not have   
   evolved by natural means, but nothing that the ID perps have ever called   
   irreducibly complex was ever demonstrated to not be evolvable by natural   
   means.  Behe and the other ID perps have just made the claims, and have   
   never even attempted to verify that their claims have any validity.   
   Both Behe and Minnich lied about IC being scientifically testable during   
   the Kitzmiller court case, and both acknowledged that they had never   
   attempted such testing even though they both put up the same possible   
   bogus test.  No verification attempts have ever been attempted as far as   
   anyone is concerned, because if any testing has been done, the ID perps   
   haven't published any results of the testing, and that court case   
   happened 20 years ago.  The bench trial started Sept. 26, 2005.   
      
   I do not think that Crawford ever claimed to support the ID scam.  There   
   was some overlap, I think Crawford was still posting when the Wedge   
   document was leaked to the public, but ID was only a minor part of the   
   TO discussions in the late 1990's.  The old earth creationists running   
   the ID scam were pushing YEC like Crawford to extinction with their   
   incessant claims that ID perps were not as bogus as the scientific   
   creationists even though several of the original fellows had been   
   scientific creationists, and the ID perps had adopted their gap denial   
   arguments (the scientific creationists had routinely used all of the ID   
   perp's Top Six gap denial arguments).   
      
   I just posted a couple posts in a recent thread demonstrating that the   
   10 icons of evolution creationist obfuscation and denial arguments in   
   Wells' book were routinely used in the Gish gallop.  So even the ID   
   perp's obfuscation and denial switch scam, that they give the rubes   
   instead of any ID science, came from the Scientific Creationists, even   
   though the ID perps claim that the obfuscation and denial switch scam   
   has nothing to do with ID nor creationism.   
      
   Ron Okimoto   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)