Writing computer software isn't engineering. It is computer "science", at best.
I take it you've never heard of software engineering. Which doesn't surprise me, given how ignorant you've shown yourself to be.
I have not used my engineering expertise as proof, I have used IC as proof.
Except irreducible complexity isn't proof of anything. It's nothing more than logic, and fallacious logic at that. Logic doesn't work when you try to use it to disprove things that really exist.
So you guys think the cardiovascular system was able to evolve in gradual incremental steps via random mutations. the heart wouldn't do much good without the veins and arteries, the viens and arteries wouldn't do much good without a heart, and half a heart would do much good. Not to mention you have the interface with the respiratory system via the lungs so the cardiovascular system wouldn't be much good without the lungs. lol
Which just goes to show how little you understand biology. I keep telling you to do yourself a favor and actually learn something about it, but I guess you're content to keep making a fool of yourself.
Biological organs and systems aren't made of Lego blocks, and incremental evolution doesn't involve adding or removing 'pieces'. So talking about only having "half a heart", for example, is just plain silly, or having a heart without veins and arteries for that matter. That isn't how evolution works in the first place, no matter what you might think. A less-evolved form of the heart still works, and a less-evolved cardiovascular wouldn't be missing arteries or veins. You just make your position look ridiculous by using such strawmen.