Comments on: The Flagellum, Design Considerations http://telicthoughts.com/the-flagellum-design-considerations/ An independent blog about intelligent design Fri, 09 Jan 2009 06:26:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: DonaldM http://telicthoughts.com/the-flagellum-design-considerations/#comment-5082 DonaldM Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:08:29 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=380#comment-5082 Just a sidenote, but I seem to recall a comment from Ken Miller (I wish I had the exact quote -- perhaps someone will recall it) a while back to the effect that before we (meaning Behe, et.al.) eliminate the possibility of a Darwinian pathway for the evolution of the flagellum, at least give us (the Darwinists) time to figure out how it works. I suppose that Miller meant that the more we understood about how the flagellum works, the easier it would be to construct the Darwinian pathway that created it. Given this new work, I wonder what Miller think now -- easier or more difficult to construct that pathway? I think door #2 seems more likely! Just a sidenote, but I seem to recall a comment from Ken Miller (I wish I had the exact quote — perhaps someone will recall it) a while back to the effect that before we (meaning Behe, et.al.) eliminate the possibility of a Darwinian pathway for the evolution of the flagellum, at least give us (the Darwinists) time to figure out how it works. I suppose that Miller meant that the more we understood about how the flagellum works, the easier it would be to construct the Darwinian pathway that created it. Given this new work, I wonder what Miller think now — easier or more difficult to construct that pathway? I think door #2 seems more likely!

]]> By: DonaldM http://telicthoughts.com/the-flagellum-design-considerations/#comment-5081 DonaldM Tue, 22 Nov 2005 16:03:50 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=380#comment-5081 Good piece, Steve. I can't help but note the contrast of your article, which outlines the significant challenges and details involved in designing a flagellum and Nick Matzke's article: <a href="http://www.talkreason.org/articles/flagellum.cfm" rel="nofollow">Evolution in (Brownian) space: a model for the origin of the bacterial flagellum</a> Somehow, Matzke seems to bypass all the detailed design considerations that must be explained if the Darwinian account is to hold. Dembski's response, <a href="http://www.designinference.com/documents/2003.11.Matzke_Response.htm" rel="nofollow">Biology in the Subjunctive Mood: A Response to Nicholas Matzke</a> also give some idea of the significant hurdles involved. Good work! Good piece, Steve. I can't help but note the contrast of your article, which outlines the significant challenges and details involved in designing a flagellum and Nick Matzke's article: Evolution in (Brownian) space:
a model for the origin of the bacterial flagellum Somehow, Matzke seems to bypass all the detailed design considerations that must be explained if the Darwinian account is to hold. Dembski's response, Biology in the Subjunctive Mood:
A Response to Nicholas Matzke also give some idea of the significant hurdles involved.

Good work!

]]> By: Rock http://telicthoughts.com/the-flagellum-design-considerations/#comment-5068 Rock Mon, 21 Nov 2005 18:16:06 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=380#comment-5068 Excellent work, Steve Peterman. Interesting how a design approach leads in new and fruitful directions, isn't it? I noticed how a traditional mechanical design approach runs into problems involving combinatorial design (e.g., issues of tolerances and fittings). Like solving a jigsaw puzzle, combinatorial design selects from a given parts list, each part having given fits and tolerances, and its not an option (it is a constraint) to "shave the edges" (machine) the parts to fit. So selection replaces machining. It reminds me of the poetic statement that upon close comparison, close inspection, each blade of grass, reveals an exquisite intricacy and precision of design that one does not see in human design. (Who said that, BTW? I would have quoted, but I can't remember.) Excellent work, Steve Peterman.

Interesting how a design approach leads in new and fruitful directions, isn't it? I noticed how a traditional mechanical design approach runs into problems involving combinatorial design (e.g., issues of tolerances and fittings).
Like solving a jigsaw puzzle, combinatorial design selects from a given parts list, each part having given fits and tolerances, and its not an option (it is a constraint) to "shave the edges" (machine) the parts to fit.
So selection replaces machining.
It reminds me of the poetic statement that upon close comparison, close inspection, each blade of grass, reveals an exquisite intricacy and precision of design that one does not see in human design.
(Who said that, BTW? I would have quoted, but I can't remember.)

]]> By: MikeGene http://telicthoughts.com/the-flagellum-design-considerations/#comment-5043 MikeGene Sun, 20 Nov 2005 01:18:48 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/?p=380#comment-5043 Nice essay, Steve. It provides plenty of material to chew on. Nice essay, Steve. It provides plenty of material to chew on.

]]>