Irreducible complexity

[ABikerSailor]

Atheists will try to tell us that this is not a valid argument. Let's apply this argument to something modern and concrete. The automobile. In its simplest form, it is irreducibly complex.

Battery
So you want to turn your car on? Obviously, this is the big boy you're going to need to get everything going.

Axle
Another important part of any car. How are you going to keep the fun rolling without these?

Brakes
Having trusty brakes is essential to driving a safe car. When you start to hear those things squeak at red lights, it might be time to head into the shop and get some new ones.

Pistons
These are best when they're pumping smoothly and quickly. Built to handle all those gasoline explosions, these are where your car gets its horses.

Fuel Injector
The successor to the carburetor, this little thing gets the gas from the fuel tank into the engine.

Radiator
The radiator is part of the system that keeps your car's engine from overheating. Here, the engine coolant has time to give off heat into the air before it goes back into the engine to pick up...more heat.

Transmission
Here's where the power turns into movement. The transmission takes the energy generated in the engine and transmits it to the connected wheels.

Spark Plug
The spark plug is what you use to get the car started. It uses an electric spark to ignite fuel in the engine's ignition chamber.

Now, can anyone tell me which part you can remove and still have a car that you would trust your life in? Take your time. I'll wait.

The History of Brakes
Here you see mechanical evolution at work in your example of a car. It's why irreducibly complexity is a strawman. Not a single scientist claims that life came fully formed. It was a series of very small steps.... just like your brakes.

Interestingly enough, the piston caliper brakes that cars now come with are a bit simpler than the original drum and shoe brakes (less moving parts), as well as work a lot better.

Velocity is one of my favorite channels.

 

[Magnificat]

You know, I finally figured out the problem I had with this thread, and it's the title "irreducible complexity", meaning that the OP thinks that a car is so complex, that it cannot be reduced anymore, which is what "irreducible" means.

Only problem is, the thing the OP posited in their first post is wrong. Many of the things that they said was "irreducible" could be simplified quite a bit simply by switching to an electric car.

Here.................................for those that don't want to look up those words, I give you the definitions.........................

irreducible
[ ir-i-doo-suh-buh l, -dyoo- ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR irreducible ON THESAURUS.COM
adjective
1. not reducible; incapable of being reduced or of being diminished or simplified further: the irreducible minimum.
2. incapable of being brought into a different condition or form.
3. Mathematics.

1. of or relating to a polynomial that cannot be factored.
2. of or relating to a group that cannot be written as the direct product of two of its subgroups.

complexity
[ kuh m-plek-si-tee ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR complexity ON THESAURUS.COM
noun, plural com·plex·i·ties for 2.
1. the state or quality of being complex; intricacy: the complexity of urban life.
2. something complex: the complexities of foreign policy.



I know...................it sucks when people bring logic and reason into a thread.

Apples and oranges. Gas powered cars and electric cars are two different things. Try again.

Doesn't matter, others have shown on here where VW had been using air cooled, gas powered engines in their cars that didn't require a radiator. There are always ways to make something complex a bit more simple. You've yet to demonstrate "irreducible complexity".

Tell you what, ass wipe. Remove the wheels from your car and tell us how that works out for you.

 

[forkup]

Atheists will try to tell us that this is not a valid argument. Let's apply this argument to something modern and concrete. The automobile. In its simplest form, it is irreducibly complex.

Battery
So you want to turn your car on? Obviously, this is the big boy you're going to need to get everything going.

Axle
Another important part of any car. How are you going to keep the fun rolling without these?

Brakes
Having trusty brakes is essential to driving a safe car. When you start to hear those things squeak at red lights, it might be time to head into the shop and get some new ones.

Pistons
These are best when they're pumping smoothly and quickly. Built to handle all those gasoline explosions, these are where your car gets its horses.

Fuel Injector
The successor to the carburetor, this little thing gets the gas from the fuel tank into the engine.

Radiator
The radiator is part of the system that keeps your car's engine from overheating. Here, the engine coolant has time to give off heat into the air before it goes back into the engine to pick up...more heat.

Transmission
Here's where the power turns into movement. The transmission takes the energy generated in the engine and transmits it to the connected wheels.

Spark Plug
The spark plug is what you use to get the car started. It uses an electric spark to ignite fuel in the engine's ignition chamber.

Now, can anyone tell me which part you can remove and still have a car that you would trust your life in? Take your time. I'll wait.

The History of Brakes
Here you see mechanical evolution at work in your example of a car. It's why irreducibly complexity is a strawman. Not a single scientist claims that life came fully formed. It was a series of very small steps.... just like your brakes.

Interestingly enough, the piston caliper brakes that cars now come with are a bit simpler than the original drum and shoe brakes (less moving parts), as well as work a lot better.

Velocity is one of my favorite channels.

Lol. Point taken. But I think it doesn't really disprove mine. Nice bit of trivia though.

 

[WinterBorn]

You know, I finally figured out the problem I had with this thread, and it's the title "irreducible complexity", meaning that the OP thinks that a car is so complex, that it cannot be reduced anymore, which is what "irreducible" means.

Only problem is, the thing the OP posited in their first post is wrong. Many of the things that they said was "irreducible" could be simplified quite a bit simply by switching to an electric car.

Here.................................for those that don't want to look up those words, I give you the definitions.........................

irreducible
[ ir-i-doo-suh-buh l, -dyoo- ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR irreducible ON THESAURUS.COM
adjective
1. not reducible; incapable of being reduced or of being diminished or simplified further: the irreducible minimum.
2. incapable of being brought into a different condition or form.
3. Mathematics.

1. of or relating to a polynomial that cannot be factored.
2. of or relating to a group that cannot be written as the direct product of two of its subgroups.

complexity
[ kuh m-plek-si-tee ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR complexity ON THESAURUS.COM
noun, plural com·plex·i·ties for 2.
1. the state or quality of being complex; intricacy: the complexity of urban life.
2. something complex: the complexities of foreign policy.



I know...................it sucks when people bring logic and reason into a thread.

Apples and oranges. Gas powered cars and electric cars are two different things. Try again.

Doesn't matter, others have shown on here where VW had been using air cooled, gas powered engines in their cars that didn't require a radiator. There are always ways to make something complex a bit more simple. You've yet to demonstrate "irreducible complexity".

Tell you what, ass wipe. Remove the wheels from your car and tell us how that works out for you.

You started with 8 things you claimed a car could not do without. How many are left? You start out with certain criteria, and then continually move the goalposts to try and salvage a weak and useless argument.

 

[forkup]

You know, I finally figured out the problem I had with this thread, and it's the title "irreducible complexity", meaning that the OP thinks that a car is so complex, that it cannot be reduced anymore, which is what "irreducible" means.

Only problem is, the thing the OP posited in their first post is wrong. Many of the things that they said was "irreducible" could be simplified quite a bit simply by switching to an electric car.

Here.................................for those that don't want to look up those words, I give you the definitions.........................

irreducible
[ ir-i-doo-suh-buh l, -dyoo- ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR irreducible ON THESAURUS.COM
adjective
1. not reducible; incapable of being reduced or of being diminished or simplified further: the irreducible minimum.
2. incapable of being brought into a different condition or form.
3. Mathematics.

1. of or relating to a polynomial that cannot be factored.
2. of or relating to a group that cannot be written as the direct product of two of its subgroups.

complexity
[ kuh m-plek-si-tee ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR complexity ON THESAURUS.COM
noun, plural com·plex·i·ties for 2.
1. the state or quality of being complex; intricacy: the complexity of urban life.
2. something complex: the complexities of foreign policy.



I know...................it sucks when people bring logic and reason into a thread.

Apples and oranges. Gas powered cars and electric cars are two different things. Try again.

Doesn't matter, others have shown on here where VW had been using air cooled, gas powered engines in their cars that didn't require a radiator. There are always ways to make something complex a bit more simple. You've yet to demonstrate "irreducible complexity".

Tell you what, ass wipe. Remove the wheels from your car and tell us how that works out for you.

History of the Wheel
Guess what. Seems the weel on a car is also a product of evolution.... Who could have known?

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, I finally figured out the problem I had with this thread, and it's the title "irreducible complexity", meaning that the OP thinks that a car is so complex, that it cannot be reduced anymore, which is what "irreducible" means.

Only problem is, the thing the OP posited in their first post is wrong. Many of the things that they said was "irreducible" could be simplified quite a bit simply by switching to an electric car.

Here.................................for those that don't want to look up those words, I give you the definitions.........................

irreducible
[ ir-i-doo-suh-buh l, -dyoo- ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR irreducible ON THESAURUS.COM
adjective
1. not reducible; incapable of being reduced or of being diminished or simplified further: the irreducible minimum.
2. incapable of being brought into a different condition or form.
3. Mathematics.

1. of or relating to a polynomial that cannot be factored.
2. of or relating to a group that cannot be written as the direct product of two of its subgroups.

complexity
[ kuh m-plek-si-tee ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR complexity ON THESAURUS.COM
noun, plural com·plex·i·ties for 2.
1. the state or quality of being complex; intricacy: the complexity of urban life.
2. something complex: the complexities of foreign policy.



I know...................it sucks when people bring logic and reason into a thread.

Apples and oranges. Gas powered cars and electric cars are two different things. Try again.

Doesn't matter, others have shown on here where VW had been using air cooled, gas powered engines in their cars that didn't require a radiator. There are always ways to make something complex a bit more simple. You've yet to demonstrate "irreducible complexity".

Tell you what, ass wipe. Remove the wheels from your car and tell us how that works out for you.

Not a problem. Saw a couple of episodes on the Velocity channel where they took an off road vehicle and replaced the wheels with tank tracks. I also saw them do it to a full sized truck as well.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Atheists will try to tell us that this is not a valid argument. Let's apply this argument to something modern and concrete. The automobile. In its simplest form, it is irreducibly complex.

Battery
So you want to turn your car on? Obviously, this is the big boy you're going to need to get everything going.

Axle
Another important part of any car. How are you going to keep the fun rolling without these?

Brakes
Having trusty brakes is essential to driving a safe car. When you start to hear those things squeak at red lights, it might be time to head into the shop and get some new ones.

Pistons
These are best when they're pumping smoothly and quickly. Built to handle all those gasoline explosions, these are where your car gets its horses.

Fuel Injector
The successor to the carburetor, this little thing gets the gas from the fuel tank into the engine.

Radiator
The radiator is part of the system that keeps your car's engine from overheating. Here, the engine coolant has time to give off heat into the air before it goes back into the engine to pick up...more heat.

Transmission
Here's where the power turns into movement. The transmission takes the energy generated in the engine and transmits it to the connected wheels.

Spark Plug
The spark plug is what you use to get the car started. It uses an electric spark to ignite fuel in the engine's ignition chamber.

Now, can anyone tell me which part you can remove and still have a car that you would trust your life in? Take your time. I'll wait.

The History of Brakes
Here you see mechanical evolution at work in your example of a car. It's why irreducibly complexity is a strawman. Not a single scientist claims that life came fully formed. It was a series of very small steps.... just like your brakes.

Interestingly enough, the piston caliper brakes that cars now come with are a bit simpler than the original drum and shoe brakes (less moving parts), as well as work a lot better.

Velocity is one of my favorite channels.

Lol. Point taken. But I think it doesn't really disprove mine. Nice bit of trivia though.

Wasn't trying to disprove your point, sorry if you thought that. I was using brake evolution as a way to possibly point to "irreducible complexity". Drum brakes when they first came out had a lot of parts and wear, so they came up with a way to "reduce the complexity", meaning they came up with calipers, which are much simpler mechanically as well as work a hell of a lot better.

The OP would have done well to point to something like that and use that as a possible "irreducible complexity", but apparently, they don't know much about cars and how they are built.

Matter of fact, the OP would do well to remember that VW isn't the only company that had air cooled engines. Porsche and Harley Davidson both did as well.

 

[forkup]

Atheists will try to tell us that this is not a valid argument. Let's apply this argument to something modern and concrete. The automobile. In its simplest form, it is irreducibly complex.

Battery
So you want to turn your car on? Obviously, this is the big boy you're going to need to get everything going.

Axle
Another important part of any car. How are you going to keep the fun rolling without these?

Brakes
Having trusty brakes is essential to driving a safe car. When you start to hear those things squeak at red lights, it might be time to head into the shop and get some new ones.

Pistons
These are best when they're pumping smoothly and quickly. Built to handle all those gasoline explosions, these are where your car gets its horses.

Fuel Injector
The successor to the carburetor, this little thing gets the gas from the fuel tank into the engine.

Radiator
The radiator is part of the system that keeps your car's engine from overheating. Here, the engine coolant has time to give off heat into the air before it goes back into the engine to pick up...more heat.

Transmission
Here's where the power turns into movement. The transmission takes the energy generated in the engine and transmits it to the connected wheels.

Spark Plug
The spark plug is what you use to get the car started. It uses an electric spark to ignite fuel in the engine's ignition chamber.

Now, can anyone tell me which part you can remove and still have a car that you would trust your life in? Take your time. I'll wait.

The History of Brakes
Here you see mechanical evolution at work in your example of a car. It's why irreducibly complexity is a strawman. Not a single scientist claims that life came fully formed. It was a series of very small steps.... just like your brakes.

Interestingly enough, the piston caliper brakes that cars now come with are a bit simpler than the original drum and shoe brakes (less moving parts), as well as work a lot better.

Velocity is one of my favorite channels.

Lol. Point taken. But I think it doesn't really disprove mine. Nice bit of trivia though.

Wasn't trying to disprove your point, sorry if you thought that. I was using brake evolution as a way to possibly point to "irreducible complexity". Drum brakes when they first came out had a lot of parts and wear, so they came up with a way to "reduce the complexity", meaning they came up with calipers, which are much simpler mechanically as well as work a hell of a lot better.

The OP would have done well to point to something like that and use that as a possible "irreducible complexity", but apparently, they don't know much about cars and how they are built.

Matter of fact, the OP would do well to remember that VW isn't the only company that had air cooled engines. Porsche and Harley Davidson both did as well.

Not much of a gearhead? The entire OP is just riddled full of holes. Him not knowing much about cars seems the least of his worries. I know very little about cars myself if I'm being honest. But I do love my trivia.

 

[Magnificat]

You know, I finally figured out the problem I had with this thread, and it's the title "irreducible complexity", meaning that the OP thinks that a car is so complex, that it cannot be reduced anymore, which is what "irreducible" means.

Only problem is, the thing the OP posited in their first post is wrong. Many of the things that they said was "irreducible" could be simplified quite a bit simply by switching to an electric car.

Here.................................for those that don't want to look up those words, I give you the definitions.........................

irreducible
[ ir-i-doo-suh-buh l, -dyoo- ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR irreducible ON THESAURUS.COM
adjective
1. not reducible; incapable of being reduced or of being diminished or simplified further: the irreducible minimum.
2. incapable of being brought into a different condition or form.
3. Mathematics.

1. of or relating to a polynomial that cannot be factored.
2. of or relating to a group that cannot be written as the direct product of two of its subgroups.

complexity
[ kuh m-plek-si-tee ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR complexity ON THESAURUS.COM
noun, plural com·plex·i·ties for 2.
1. the state or quality of being complex; intricacy: the complexity of urban life.
2. something complex: the complexities of foreign policy.



I know...................it sucks when people bring logic and reason into a thread.

Apples and oranges. Gas powered cars and electric cars are two different things. Try again.

Doesn't matter, others have shown on here where VW had been using air cooled, gas powered engines in their cars that didn't require a radiator. There are always ways to make something complex a bit more simple. You've yet to demonstrate "irreducible complexity".

Tell you what, ass wipe. Remove the wheels from your car and tell us how that works out for you.

Not a problem. Saw a couple of episodes on the Velocity channel where they took an off road vehicle and replaced the wheels with tank tracks. I also saw them do it to a full sized truck as well.

Ok. Remove the tank treads too. What do you have? Your arguments are pretty shallow. I've proven that a car requires a minimum number of parts in order to function. It doesn't matter whether you use wheels or tank treads. BTW. Tank treads are way more complicated than tires. So you aren't helping your argument at all. Your arguments are specious. A car requires seating for passengers. It requires a motive force. It requires something between it and the road that negates friction. These three things make it irreducibly complex. Now shut your Yap. You're only Embarrassing yourself.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, I finally figured out the problem I had with this thread, and it's the title "irreducible complexity", meaning that the OP thinks that a car is so complex, that it cannot be reduced anymore, which is what "irreducible" means.

Only problem is, the thing the OP posited in their first post is wrong. Many of the things that they said was "irreducible" could be simplified quite a bit simply by switching to an electric car.

Here.................................for those that don't want to look up those words, I give you the definitions.........................

irreducible
[ ir-i-doo-suh-buh l, -dyoo- ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR irreducible ON THESAURUS.COM
adjective
1. not reducible; incapable of being reduced or of being diminished or simplified further: the irreducible minimum.
2. incapable of being brought into a different condition or form.
3. Mathematics.

1. of or relating to a polynomial that cannot be factored.
2. of or relating to a group that cannot be written as the direct product of two of its subgroups.

complexity
[ kuh m-plek-si-tee ]
|
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR complexity ON THESAURUS.COM
noun, plural com·plex·i·ties for 2.
1. the state or quality of being complex; intricacy: the complexity of urban life.
2. something complex: the complexities of foreign policy.



I know...................it sucks when people bring logic and reason into a thread.

Apples and oranges. Gas powered cars and electric cars are two different things. Try again.

Doesn't matter, others have shown on here where VW had been using air cooled, gas powered engines in their cars that didn't require a radiator. There are always ways to make something complex a bit more simple. You've yet to demonstrate "irreducible complexity".

Tell you what, ass wipe. Remove the wheels from your car and tell us how that works out for you.

Not a problem. Saw a couple of episodes on the Velocity channel where they took an off road vehicle and replaced the wheels with tank tracks. I also saw them do it to a full sized truck as well.

Ok. Remove the tank treads too. What do you have? Your arguments are pretty shallow. I've proven that a car requires a minimum number of parts in order to function. It doesn't matter whether you use wheels or tank treads. BTW. Tank treads are way more complicated than tires. So you aren't helping your argument at all. Your arguments are specious. A car requires seating for passengers. It requires a motive force. It requires something between it and the road that negates friction. These three things make it irreducibly complex. Now shut your Yap. You're only Embarrassing yourself.

Moving the goalposts I see. If you wanted to say they have to have a way to provide forward momentum from the vehicle to the ground, you would have covered tank tracks as well, but you didn't, you used wheels.

But, if you really need to see something reduced to it's bare bones and still be viable transportation, here's one example of an electric unicycle scooter that has only 1 wheel.......................

single wheel scooter - Google Search

 

[OldLady]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So, the car parts just randomly throw themselves against each other and make new and better cars. Interesting

It's odd how this thread morphed. The idea of the OP was to attempt an analogy to show irreducible complexity is an argument against evolution (and cars).

To continue the analogy by saying cars don't just randomly throw parts together is actually an analogy that life didn't just throw organ parts together either. For the non-creationist, that's an argument for evolution; not against it.

.

The point of the OP was that something as simple as a car was designed yet you want us to believe that something trillions and trillions and trillions of times more complex: a functioning cell, was just throw together outback by proteins slamming into each other

 

[Magnificat]

OK. Let's try this. How many parts would it take you to build a car? You can't do it with one part. You can't do it with two, three, or even a dozen. No matter how few parts you use, you will reach a point where you cannot remove anything and have it function. That is the point of this thread. Prove me wrong.

 

[Wuwei]

No matter how few parts you use, you will reach a point where you cannot remove anything and have it function. That is the point of this thread.

That's the point? I thought the point was that atheists think irreducible complexity is not a valid argument against evolution. Now its about how to build the most reduced car.

.

 

[Faun]

Atheists will try to tell us that this is not a valid argument. Let's apply this argument to something modern and concrete. The automobile. In its simplest form, it is irreducibly complex.

Battery
So you want to turn your car on? Obviously, this is the big boy you're going to need to get everything going.

Axle
Another important part of any car. How are you going to keep the fun rolling without these?

Brakes
Having trusty brakes is essential to driving a safe car. When you start to hear those things squeak at red lights, it might be time to head into the shop and get some new ones.

Pistons
These are best when they're pumping smoothly and quickly. Built to handle all those gasoline explosions, these are where your car gets its horses.

Fuel Injector
The successor to the carburetor, this little thing gets the gas from the fuel tank into the engine.

Radiator
The radiator is part of the system that keeps your car's engine from overheating. Here, the engine coolant has time to give off heat into the air before it goes back into the engine to pick up...more heat.

Transmission
Here's where the power turns into movement. The transmission takes the energy generated in the engine and transmits it to the connected wheels.

Spark Plug
The spark plug is what you use to get the car started. It uses an electric spark to ignite fuel in the engine's ignition chamber.

Now, can anyone tell me which part you can remove and still have a car that you would trust your life in? Take your time. I'll wait.

Lol, take the battery off and put on a hand crank like Henry Ford did.

Even funnier for your silly little failed analogy is the fact that battery powered starters are part of the evolution of the modern automobile.


Oops.

Regardless of which one you use, it is required to start the car. OOPS!

Huh?

Don't know much about cars do you.

OK genius. How would you start a car without a crank or a battery?

LOLOLOL

Your analogy was just a battery. Now you've been forced to add a hand crank since your analogy was an abysmal failure.

But bringing this back to your OP, your car analogy is more akin to religion than to G-d. It's like you just spawned off Episcopalian from Catholic.

 

[ABikerSailor]

OK. Let's try this. How many parts would it take you to build a car? You can't do it with one part. You can't do it with two, three, or even a dozen. No matter how few parts you use, you will reach a point where you cannot remove anything and have it function. That is the point of this thread. Prove me wrong.

Then that is what you should have said. Now, is there a number requirement for wheels, or can you used just 1? Is there any requirement as far as the power source? And, is an enclosed passenger area required, or can it be open? Those are all questions you should answer before trying again, otherwise, every time you change something, you are simply moving the goalposts.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I wonder how many times you have to throw a tire and 5 lug nuts against the car until you got 1 tire perfectly affixed?

 

[WinterBorn]

OK. Let's try this. How many parts would it take you to build a car? You can't do it with one part. You can't do it with two, three, or even a dozen. No matter how few parts you use, you will reach a point where you cannot remove anything and have it function. That is the point of this thread. Prove me wrong.

The car is a machine, not a living thing.

 

[Faun]

OK. Let's try this. How many parts would it take you to build a car? You can't do it with one part. You can't do it with two, three, or even a dozen. No matter how few parts you use, you will reach a point where you cannot remove anything and have it function. That is the point of this thread. Prove me wrong.

Then that is what you should have said. Now, is there a number requirement for wheels, or can you used just 1? Is there any requirement as far as the power source? And, is an enclosed passenger area required, or can it be open? Those are all questions you should answer before trying again, otherwise, every time you change something, you are simply moving the goalposts.

Righties never think things through.

 

[Magnificat]

OK. Let's try this. How many parts would it take you to build a car? You can't do it with one part. You can't do it with two, three, or even a dozen. No matter how few parts you use, you will reach a point where you cannot remove anything and have it function. That is the point of this thread. Prove me wrong.

Then that is what you should have said. Now, is there a number requirement for wheels, or can you used just 1? Is there any requirement as far as the power source? And, is an enclosed passenger area required, or can it be open? Those are all questions you should answer before trying again, otherwise, every time you change something, you are simply moving the goalposts.

Why don't you simply tell us how many parts you would require to build any powered vehicle of your choice. You cannot deny the simple fact that it would require a minimum number of parts. You cannot deny the fact that you will eventually, in the simplification process, reach a point where you can not remove any more parts and still have it work. Do you deny this?