Irreducible complexity- the challenges have been rebutted (if not refuted)

The Darwinian theory of Natural Selection has been accepted for many years now. Some scientists even prematurely accepted this theory as fact. However in 1993 a group of scientists from Berkley, Cambridge, Munich, and The University of Chicago have shown otherwise. The principal of Irreducible Complexity has been established that completely debunks Darwin’s theory of evolution labeling it as not being an adequate explanation for some of today’s findings.
The Darwinian Theory of Natural Selection states that nature is selective scrutinizing the slightest variations, rejecting those that are bad, preserving those that are good. He also states that if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, his theory would absolutely break down. Another theory called Biological Predestination attempted to give a continuous argument dealing with the origins of life without intelligent design which brings together a theory that proteins were chemically attracted to each other and formed a chain that then managed to fold itself into a molecular machine outside of a cell. Dr. Dean Kenyon, Author of Biochemical Predestination, when challenged to explain how proteins could be assembled without DNA instruction was unable to prove that they could and began to doubt his own theory.
Darwin did his best with what he had at the time to explain what he had seen just as early man had tried to explain lightning and thunder as a supernatural event. However I am not saying that the supernatural does not exist. The principal of Irreducible Complexity has been proven best by the Bacterial Flagellum. This bacterium has the design of a motor, appropriately called a Flageller motor, which is much like ones found on a boat. A drive shaft, engine, and a quarter turn hook for a propeller are all present. Scientists don’t use these terms out of convenience but because that is what they are. If any one of these was not present at the same time the others came about, the propeller would not function and would do nothing to help in the survival of the bacterium and thus according to Darwinian Theory would not have been carried on to the offspring of the organism.
However another Idea had been spurned from Irreducible complexity. This theory is called co-option. Co-option states that possibly a cell can borrow existing parts from other cells to build a new mechanism. Molecular Biologist Scott Minnich from the University of Idaho would argue the contrary. Dr. Minnich states that in the case of the Bacterial Flagellum there are at least thirty parts that could not have come from other molecular machines and only ten that could have been borrowed. Dr. Minnich goes on to say plainly that the flageller motor could not have been a product of Darwinian Theories. So then how is it that this propeller exists? Maybe it was the product of some intelligent designer as the evidence suggests, say today’s Scientists.
Furthermore The thought that proteins formed and joined together in a functional way in some primordial pool is way out there! Scientists have found that the only way proteins are formed into a functional way is in the cells of an already existing organism. Something called DNA goes through a process which is called transcription which copies the DNA into a separate strand. This separate strand is called messenger RNA. The RNA is then moved from the nucleus of the cell to the ribosome which manufactures a chain of amino acids. This chain of amino acids is then taken to a barrel shaped machine which folds the chain into a functioning molecular machine. After the amino acids are arranged this newly built molecular machine is then moved to the part of the cell where they are to do their job.
And so the theory of Natural Selection and Biochemical predestination falls apart just as Darwin himself said and as Dean H. Kenyon knows. Leading Scientists to use a more observational method in examining evidence. They can no longer rule out Intelligent design as a possibility but must except what the evidence clearly shows.

You claim that evolution Is an observed fact. Give one unambiguous observed example of acctual trans-species evolution. Note interspecies adaptation does not qulify.

No it was not a cut and paste job. Everything I have writen was taken from personal reserch notes none of which came from a website.

Sidelined,Check out this sight and it might answer your question. I don’t know how much you know about quantum physics so I would suggest reading the whole thing however pay extra attention to the section on fig. 5 http://www.flash.net/~russ3/quantameta.htm

LoudMouth,You’ve nearly proven my point by saying :
Actually, I have personally made proteins outside of cells. Well not exactly, I used E. coli lysate devoid of DNA to produce protein from an introduced plasmid. It's known as in vitro protein expression . The system I used was from Roche, read more here. It still uses systems derived from DNA, but is done in the absence of cells, or in a "primordial soup" situation.
LoundMouth You are an entity that posses intelligence and if you had not made these proteins in this primordial soup it never would have happened without your external influence, without your intelligence and ability to create. If you could show me an account in which this has happened without an intelligent entity causing it to happen I would honestly appreciate it.