http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-04/uoo-eo040406.php Proponents of ID, the newest breed of creationists, using a style of argument very similar to their predecessors, point to certain things in nature and say, "See, Evolution CAN'T POSSIBLY explain this."
Just because we don't have a current explanation, they conclude that no explanation is possible. This is really argument from ignorance. This new study has shown how something that was previously concluded to be "Irreducibly Complex" by the IDers probably came about by natural mechanisms.
Maybe now they will acknowledge their mistake and we can get on with it. But it's equally a mistake to think that IR has been disproven. It was never a good scientific principle to begin with and didn't need refutation. That scientists have done so is useful information. But if this advance had never been made, IR is still not a useful formulation for science.
