Quote
For goodness' sake, explain what you are on about. Or this thread will die due to lack of sense.

Russ claimed in another thread that he thought the eye is irreducibly complex, which is a creationist idea that has been around a while. I showed him different steps in the evolution of the eye which begin with the simplest form, an eye spot that can detect light and dark. What's more, all of these evolutionary steps are still evident and can be studied in different organisms today.

Are you claiming that the mechanism for movement is irreducibly complex?

Irreducible Complexity is a separate hypothesis. I do not see it as incompatible with mine.

Is the hypothesis I propose valid or not?
Does it involve ID or not?
Is it testable?
Can it be improved?

These are the kind of questions that make sense here. Oh, and defining terms was on-topic.

I'd also be interested if you can produce evidence which could falsify it.

Beyond that, I simply demonstrate that it exists, in spite of evolutionist arguments from incredulity that no testable ID hypothesis exists.

Sorry for using purple - didn't know the other skin makes that look like a link.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson