# Rich Lenski takes down Michael Behe and his ID creationism: Part IV

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Tags:** Science\
**Created:** [March 7, 2019, 9:27pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208 "2019-03-07T21:27:12Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Patrick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b2d939/32.png) [@Patrick](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Patrick)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 9:27pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/1 "2019-03-07T21:27:12Z")

</div>

> **[Rich Lenski takes down Michael Behe and his ID creationism: Part IV](https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/03/07/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/)**
>
> Rich Lenski, an evolutionary biologist at Michigan State, has put up his fourth (and penultimate) post on his website (Telliamed Revisited) criticizing Michael Behe’s new Intelligent Design b…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:03pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/2 "2019-03-07T22:03:39Z")

</div>

Thanks for posting this. Evolutionary biologists persists in misrepresenting Behe’s claims.

> Anybody remember Behe’s first book, _Darwin’s Black Box_ , published in 1996? There, Behe claimed evolution doesn’t work because biological systems exhibit so-called “irreducible complexity,” which he defined as “… a single system 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.”

When he substitutes " a formable challenge" with “doesn’t work” he minimizes his burden of proof. If Lenski had a solid position he would have no need to do this.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T\_aquaticus](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t_aquaticus/32/1249_2.png) [@T\_aquaticus](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T_aquaticus)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:07pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/3 "2019-03-07T22:07:51Z")

</div>

The example of the evolved viral protein Lenski describes in the article fulfills that challenge. The new function of the final viral protein required the irreducibly complex interaction of 4 different mutations, and Lenski was able to show how it evolved step by step.

The article is definitely worth a read.

> **[Evolution goes viral! (And how real science works)](https://telliamedrevisited.wordpress.com/2019/03/06/evolution-goes-viral-and-how-real-science-works/)**
>
> This is the fourth in a series of posts about a new book by Michael Behe, Darwin Devolves. Behe is a leading proponent of intelligent-design creationism (IDC), which asserts that known processes ca…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:11pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/4 "2019-03-07T22:11:15Z")

</div>

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> The example of the evolved viral protein Lenski describes in the article fulfills that challenge. The new function of the final viral protein required the irreducibly complex interaction of 4 different mutations, and Lenski was able to show how it evolved step by step.

Viral protein that invades bacteria. You think this solves the problem of irreducible complexity?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T\_aquaticus](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t_aquaticus/32/1249_2.png) [@T\_aquaticus](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T_aquaticus)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:13pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/5 "2019-03-07T22:13:15Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> Viral protein that invades bacteria. You think this solves the problem of irreducible complexity?

Yep. The adaptation to OmpF on the surface of E. coli required 4 specific mutations, and the adaptation didn’t work without all 4 mutations. That is irreducibly complex. Lenski shows how this adaptation evolved step by step. I don’t want to ruin the punch line for you, so go read it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:16pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/6 "2019-03-07T22:16:09Z")

</div>

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> Yep. The adaptation to OmpF on the surface of E. coli required 4 specific mutations, and the adaptation didn’t work without all 4 mutations.

Again T you are trying to prove you can fly to mars because you have shown you can fly 100 ft. The flagellum and blog clotting was the challenge in Darwins black box. This involved multiple interactive proteins.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T\_aquaticus](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t_aquaticus/32/1249_2.png) [@T\_aquaticus](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T_aquaticus)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:17pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/7 "2019-03-07T22:17:50Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> Again T you are trying to prove you can fly to mars because you have shown you can fly 100 ft. The flagellum and blog clotting was the challenge in Darwins black box. This involved multiple interactive proteins.

The challenge put forth by Behe applies to all irreducibly complex systems, including the irreducibly complex adaptation that evolved in lambda phage.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Timothy\_Horton](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/timothy_horton/32/9410_2.png) [@Timothy\_Horton](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Timothy_Horton)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:18pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/8 "2019-03-07T22:18:28Z")

</div>

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> The example of the evolved viral protein Lenski describes in the article fulfills that challenge. The new function of the final viral protein required the irreducibly complex interaction of 4 different mutations, and Lenski was able to show how it evolved step by step.
> 
> The article is definitely worth a read

That’s some excellent work by Lenski and especially by his grad student Justin Meyer (hopefully no relation to Stephen Meyer). I can’t wait to see how Klinghoffer at the DI spins these results. 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Art](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/art/32/3805_2.png) [@Art](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Art)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:19pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/10 "2019-03-07T22:19:26Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> Again T you are trying to prove you can fly to mars because you have shown you can fly 100 ft. The flagellum and blog clotting was the challenge in Darwins black box. This involved multiple interactive proteins.

Bill, you are the reason the Rams’ last FG attempt missed.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:19pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/11 "2019-03-07T22:19:33Z")

</div>

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> The challenge put forth by Behe applies to all irreducibly complex systems, including the irreducibly complex adaptation that evolved in lambda phage.

Support this claim with a quote from Behe’s words.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T\_aquaticus](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t_aquaticus/32/1249_2.png) [@T\_aquaticus](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T_aquaticus)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:23pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/13 "2019-03-07T22:23:30Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> Support this claim with a quote from Behe’s words.

> [@](#):
>
> By _irreducibly complex_ I mean a single system 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.
> 
> –Michael Behe, “Darwin’s Black Box”

There is nothing indicating that he is only talking about the bacterial flagellum or the blood clotting cascade.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:26pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/14 "2019-03-07T22:26:44Z")

</div>

> [@Art](#):
>
> Bill, you are the reason the Rams’ last FG attempt missed.

Just trying to put the GP back to its original position 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:29pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/15 "2019-03-07T22:29:12Z")

</div>

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> There is nothing indicating that he is only talking about the bacterial flagellum or the blood clotting cascade.

There is also no statement that all irreducible complex systems can’t evolve. You are playing word games and it is making the evolutionist side look silly.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T\_aquaticus](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t_aquaticus/32/1249_2.png) [@T\_aquaticus](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T_aquaticus)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:33pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/16 "2019-03-07T22:33:06Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> There is also no statement that all irreducible complex systems can’t evolve. You are playing word games and it is making the evolutionist side look silly.

If irreducibly complex systems can evolve, why do you keep mentioning them?

Also, I said that Behe’s challenge has been met. Here is the whole quote:

> [@](#):
>
> By _irreducibly complex_ I mean a single system 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. An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly (that is, by continuously improving the initial function, which continues to work by the same mechanism) by slight, successive modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional. An irreducibly complex biological system, if there is such a thing, would be a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution.  
> –Michael Behe, “Darwin’s Black Box”

The function of binding to OmpF on the surface of E. coli didn’t exist until 4 mutations were present. It required all 4 parts to be in place before you got OmpF binding function. This is the challenge for evolution, and Lenski demonstrated how that challenge has been met.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:35pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/17 "2019-03-07T22:35:53Z")

</div>

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> If irreducibly complex systems can evolve, why do you keep mentioning them?

Because from Behe:

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> An irreducibly complex biological system, if there is such a thing, would be a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Timothy\_Horton](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/timothy_horton/32/9410_2.png) [@Timothy\_Horton](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Timothy_Horton)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:39pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/18 "2019-03-07T22:39:18Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> There is also no statement that all irreducible complex systems can’t evolve. You are playing word games and it is making the evolutionist side look silly.

_Someone_ is making himself look silly with his rocket powered goal posts and it isn’t the evolutionist side. 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T\_aquaticus](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t_aquaticus/32/1249_2.png) [@T\_aquaticus](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T_aquaticus)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:50pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/19 "2019-03-07T22:50:43Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> Because from Behe:

Notice that it doesn’t say “just the bacterial flagellum and blood clotting cascade are a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution”. Also notice that Lenski has met that challenge.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![colewd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecd19e/32.png) [@colewd](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/colewd)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:52pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/20 "2019-03-07T22:52:04Z")

</div>

> [@T\_aquaticus](#):
>
> Notice that it doesn’t say “just the bacterial flagellum and blood clotting cascade are a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution”. Also notice that Lenski has met that challenge.

He has started to try and meet the challenge. The cell is full of irreducible complexity especially the eukaryotic cell.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:52pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/21 "2019-03-07T22:52:30Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> > There is nothing indicating that he is only talking about the bacterial flagellum or the blood clotting cascade.
> 
> There is also no statement that all irreducible complex systems can’t evolve. You are playing word games and it is making the evolutionist side look silly.

@colewd, there is an unfortunate pattern of Behe supporters misquoting Behe. I’m not sure we can dismiss what Behe has clearly written based on your conjecture as to what he really means.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![T\_aquaticus](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/t_aquaticus/32/1249_2.png) [@T\_aquaticus](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/T_aquaticus)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2019, 10:52pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208/22 "2019-03-07T22:52:54Z")

</div>

> [@colewd](#):
>
> He has started to try and meet the challenge. The cell is full if irreducible complexity especially the eukaryotic cell.

So we could find the evolutionary history of 3 billion irreducibly complex systems, but if there is just 1 we haven’t explained then the challenge has not been met?

[Next page](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/rich-lenski-takes-down-michael-behe-and-his-id-creationism-part-iv/5208.md?page=2)