The presence of irreducible complexity in biological systems is another roadblock for naturalistic theories of evolution. It is hard to image how you could get to the top of the Burj Khalifa if you had to jump, but the task becomes easier when you learn there are stairs. This slow and gradual idea is how evolutionists explains the molecules-to-man idea that once seemed impossible to imagine. This works if all of steps can be used to build on one another, but what if this were not the case?
Darwin recognized this limit and acknowledge it in Origin of Species. In his book "Darwin's Black Box", Micheal Behe describes the biochemical details of several systems that need all of their parts present to function. Since removing one of the protein involved in blood-clotting causes catastrophic results, the system has irreducible complexity. This irreducible complexity is not only present within living organisms but also between them in ecological interactions. The interaction of fish and shrimp in cleaning symbiosis is one example. A large fish allows a small fish or shrimp to clean parasites from its mouth and then swims off without eating the cleaner. How could this relationship and other irreducibly complex systems, have evolved one step at a time?
Even if Darwin's idea can explain the maintenance of traits and variation within a kind, they do not address the actual origin in the first place. Darwin used the phrase "from use and disuse, from direct and indirect actions of the environment" to describes the origin of traits. This is exactly the view held by Lamarck, who is often contrasted with Darwin. Using a trait does not mean it will be passed to the offspring in a different form (stretching giraffe necks is often used as an example). As science has gathered more information about heredity, the idea of use and disuse has been shown to be false.
The origin of this new information is thought by neo-Darwinists to occur by random mutation-random mutations are the raw material for evolution. The case of fruit fly mutation and flu virus are often used as examples to support evolution. However, these mutations cannot explain the increase or origin of information in living systems. The creationist model-that information was created by the Supreme Designer-fits the observations much better than naturalistic evolution.
