Yeah this is so ridiculously impossible it's almost a waste of time to bother debunking.
You're clearly just quoting an old text from grade school. There's literally ZERO scientific information in your WOT.
Life exhibits an abundance of irreducibly complex systems. The scientific literature is EMPTY of any quantitative model that allows for an evolutionary origin for any living system or subsystem.
Evolution thrives as a philosophy and a political sacred cow in the educational establishment – regardless of evidence or logic. Richard Lewontin is a Harvard professor of genetics and an ardent Marxist and evolutionist. Here’s his point of view (from Johnson, p. 71):
“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
The evolutionist is fully committed to materialism. There is no evidence that will allow him to consider supernatural design and creation. The resulting blindness is reminiscent of Romans 1:25, in that he “served the creature more than the Creator.”
Michael Behe has written a marvelous book entitled Darwin’s Black Box — The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. He defines the concept of irreducible complexity as follows:
“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 — in principle — be produced by numerous, successive small steps. If biological systems (such as the eyeball or the CELL) exhibit irreducible complexity, then Darwinism is, frankly, sunk without a trace.
Behe used the illustration of a simple mousetrap as such a system. A mousetrap includes a base to hold all the parts, a hammer to smash the little critter, a spring, a catch, a holding bar, and everything fastened neatly together and in the right proportion. Take away any component and it just doesn’t work — at all! The mouse gets away.
You can also consider a bicycle, an automobile, and a jet aircraft as irreducibly complex systems. You could arrange these on a chart showing increasing complexity. But one clearly cannot conceive of one “evolving” by successive modifications into the other. Especially since any such “commercial product” would have to be fully functional at every step to survive in the marketplace.
Biological systems are incredibly complex — and irreducibly so — when looked at in the proper light: namely, the electron microscope’s “light,” revealing the incredible nano-machines that make living things work. Behe considers the cilium as a “simple” example. A cilium is the hair-like “whip” attached to certain cells to allow locomotion. A sperm cell has a cilium that allows it to swim. Stationary cells in the respiratory tract use cilia to move mucus, enabling expulsion of foreign matter. Cilia in the Fallopian tubes move in coordinated waves to enable the fertilized egg to implant in the uterus. No cilia – no life.
