Woah, big words! I'll try to make this simpler, irreducible complexity means the object is so complicated in such a way that if it were missing any part, the rest of it would be useless.

     This argument is also very common, yet it is probably the most devastating... to evolution, that is. Keep in mind that this argument is not about origins (how we got here) it's about evolution, and how crazy it is.

     Here is one example of an irreducibly complex machine: a mouse trap. There are four parts to the mouse trap, the platform, the spring, the catch, and the hook. Did you know if it were missing just one of these, the whole thing would stop working?

     How does this apply to biological evolution? (The evolution of life). Well, what if we started out with only our lungs? Did you know our lungs can't work without a heart? What if we started out with only a heart? Did you know that our heart needs kidneys? What if we started with only our kidneys? Did you know our kidneys need lungs?

     So what's my point? These three organs, the lungs, the heart, and the kidneys, all need each other. They are interdependent. With out one, the others couldn't work.

     So, what do you ask the evolutionist? Ask them this: Which evolved first, the lungs, heart, or kidneys?