For example, Kenneth Miller cites the lab work of Barry G. Hall on E. coli, which he asserts is evidence that " Behe is wrong.

Behe is best known for his argument for irreducible complexity, which asserts that some biochemical structures are too complex to be adequately explained by known evolutionary mechanisms and are therefore more probably the result of intelligent design.

Biochemistry professor Michael Behe, the originator of the term irreducible complexity, defines an irreducibly complex system as one " composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning ".

While testifying at the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial Behe conceded that there are no peer-reviewed papers supporting his claims that complex molecular systems, like the bacterial flagellum, the blood-clotting cascade, and the immune system, were intelligently designed nor are there any peer-reviewed articles supporting his argument that certain complex molecular structures are " irreducibly complex.

Behe next introduces and defines the concept of irreducible complexity as a system with a series of parts in which the removal of any part causes the entire system to cease functioning, offering a springloaded-bar mousetrap as a familiar example.

In the same trial, Behe eventually testified under oath that " There are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred ".

For example, one of the clotting factors that Behe listed as a part of the clotting cascade was later found to be absent in whales, demonstrating that it is not essential for a clotting system.

Behe uses the analogy of a mousetrap to propose irreducible complexity: if a mousetrap loses just one of its parts, it can no longer function as a mousetrap.

Behe identifies one of the primary counter-arguments of irreducible complexity, gradual adaptation — that certain systems may have been co-opted from an original, unrelated role to assume a new function as an irreducibly complex system.

Though Behe has avoided committing himself to the view that God intervenes directly in nature to create purportedly irreducibly complex structures, Darwin's Black Box briefly speculates that divine intervention might have caused the direct creation of a cell from which all of life evolved, supporting creationist views of miraculous acts of creation, but ironically echoing Darwin's stated " view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one ".

Behe's thesis that irreducible structures are created in " one fell swoop " is opposed by other biochemists, including many who are devout Christians, and has, it is claimed by some, no support from the fossil record-something Behe would dispute.

Contrary to Professor Behe ’ s assertions with respect to these few biochemical systems among the myriad existing in nature, however, Dr. Miller presented evidence, based upon peer-reviewed studies, that they are not in fact irreducibly complex.

Behe has responded to some of these criticisms.

This was purportedly because the Thomas More Law Center refused to allow these witnesses to have their own attorneys present during deposition, but Discovery Institute director Bruce Chapman later said that he had asked them not to testify ( as well as Behe and Minnich, who testified anyway ).

Potentially viable evolutionary pathways have been proposed for allegedly irreducibly complex systems such as blood clotting, the immune system and the flagellum, which were the three examples Behe used.

If, after a few thousand generations, the bacteria evolved the bacterial flagellum, then Behe believes that this would refute his theory.

Professor Behe has applied the concept of irreducible complexity to only a few select systems: ( 1 ) the bacterial flagellum ; ( 2 ) the blood-clotting cascade ; and ( 3 ) the immune system.

In the following chapters, Behe discusses the apparent irreducible complexity of several biological systems, including the cilium, the bacterial flagellum, blood clotting, the immune system and intracellular gated and vesicular transport.

Dawkins further commented that it was an argument Darwin himself had anticipated, and that the example of a bacterial flagellum used by Behe had in fact been refuted by Kenneth R. Miller in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.

A second definition given by Behe ( his " evolutionary definition ") is as follows:

Notably, Behe credits philosopher William Paley for the original concept, not von Bertalanffy, and suggests that his application of the concept to biological systems is entirely original.

In 2001, Michael Behe wrote: " here is an asymmetry between my current definition of irreducible complexity and the task facing natural selection.

In the last chapter of Darwin's Black Box, Behe goes on to explain his view that irreducible complexity is evidence for intelligent design.

Behe has responded to critics of his clotting cascade arguments by suggesting that homology is evidence for evolution, but not for natural selection.

We will now consider the purportedly “ positive argument ” for design encompassed in the phrase used numerous times by Professors Behe and Minnich throughout their expert testimony, which is the “ purposeful arrangement of parts .” Professor Behe summarized the argument as follows: We infer design when we see parts that appear to be arranged for a purpose.

Expert testimony revealed that this inductive argument is not scientific and as admitted by Professor Behe, can never be ruled out.

" " This argument for the existence of God was advanced early in the 19th century by Reverend Paley " " The only apparent difference between the argument made by Paley and the argument for ID, as expressed by defense expert witnesses Behe and Minnich, is that ID's ' official position ' does not acknowledge that the designer is God.

Michael J. Behe ( ; born January 18, 1952 ) is an American biochemist, author, and intelligent design advocate.

Behe is a Roman Catholic, and is married to Celeste Behe.

Intelligent design proponent Michael Behe contends that the system is an example of irreducible complexity and therefore could not have evolved, an argument which is rejected by scientists as logically and factually flawed.

The fine-tuned Universe argument is a central premise or presented as given in many of the published works of prominent intelligent design proponents, such as William A. Dembski and Michael Behe.

Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution ( 1996, first edition ; 2006, second edition ) is a book written by Michael J. Behe and published by Free Press in which he presents his notion of irreducible complexity and claims that its presence in many biochemical systems indicates therefore that they must be the result of intelligent design rather than evolutionary processes.

Behe suggests that such a paradigm shift in biology ( and particularly in evolution ) is imminent due to recent discoveries ( circa 1996 ) in biochemistry.

Behe argues that organs and biological features which are irreducibly complex cannot be wholly explained by current models of evolution.

Behe and others have suggested a number of biological features that they believe may be irreducibly complex.

It may be that irreducible complexity does not actually exist in nature, and that the examples given by Behe and others are not in fact irreducibly complex, but can be explained in terms of simpler precursors.

Behe argues that the theory that irreducibly complex systems could not have been evolved can be falsified by an experiment where such systems are evolved.

Behe has been accused of using an " argument by lack of imagination ", and Behe himself acknowledges that a failure of current science to explain how an " irreducibly complex " organism did or could evolve does not automatically prove the impossibility of such an evolution.

A review on the pro-evolution website talk. origins, described the book as "... an exposition of the Frontiers of Ignorance " and that within it systems were labeled " irreducibly complex " if Behe was not able to envision a simpler system that still worked.

Minnich, Behe, and Paley reach the same conclusion, that complex organisms must have been designed using the same reasoning, except that Professors Behe and Minnich refuse to identify the designer, whereas Paley inferred from the presence of design that it was God.

The review also stated that the theory was unfalsifiable ( echoing Miller ), with faulty logic that worked because Behe did not provide crucial facts that would illustrate its failings.