Is there a difference between “IC” and “complex IC”? Behe does not quantitatively describe such a distinction, but he does, I think, employ it qualitatively.
The Cit+ trait is IC, and this should not be up for debate. It checks all of Behe’s boxes. But of course that can’t falsify the idea, because…well then the idea would be falsified! And we can’t have that.
So the question is, given this novel trait involving multiple interrelated components that are all required for the novel function, for which we have a documented, step by step, directly observed evolutionary history characterized at the molecular level…why doesn’t this example falsify the IC hypothesis?