Intelligent Design The Future
Summary: The ID The Future (IDTF) podcast carries on Discovery Institute's mission of exploring the issues central to evolution and intelligent design. IDTF is a short podcast providing you with the most current news and views on evolution and ID. IDTF delivers brief interviews with key scientists and scholars developing the theory of ID, as well as insightful commentary from Discovery Institute senior fellows and staff on the scientific, educational and legal aspects of the debate.
On this episode of ID the Future, biologist Ann Gauger talks with host Andrew McDiarmid about new research challenging the common claim that the field of population genetics rules out a single-couple human origin. She and Stockholm University statistical mathematician Ola Hössjer have just published a paper in the journal BIO-Complexity modeling the scenario using a newly developed computer algorithm. The results, Gauger says, show that the genetic data does not rule out Adam and Eve. Their results are not proof, she emphasizes, just possibility; and different assumptions could produce different estimates as to when such a first human couple lived. See more on the backstory at Evolution News. Gauger and Hössjer are also building a site with additional information. It’s still being fleshed out but already contains a page with animations to help explain their new model.
On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid catches up with philosopher Jay Richards at the recent COSM conference in greater Seattle. The two discuss the history of George Gilder’s Telecosm conferences and how the first one gave birth to a book Richards edited and contributed to 18 years ago, Are We Spiritual Machines? Ray Kurzweil vs. the Critics of Strong A.I. Is the “singularity” coming, as Kurzweil argues there and elsewhere, when machines equal and then quickly surpass human intelligence? Does “machine learning” really mean learning? Will “Skynet” wake up? Jay describes Kurzweil’s sunny version of strong AI and the dystopian version. Then he argues the other side, namely that human beings possess something beyond the purely material, something even the most powerful computers will never possess.
On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid shares biologist Ann Gauger’s recent article on emerging clues to life’s design, and how the “Darwinian Regime” tends to ignore them. One stubborn bit of biological evidence Gauger highlights is the fact that cells can’t make life-essential ATP, NAD, and other metabolic co-factors without having ATP, NAD, and the other co-factors there first. It’s a “daisy chain of causal circularity woven by what must be an intelligent designer,” Gauger comments. Or as she also puts it, “It’s chickens and eggs, all the way down.”
On this episode of ID The Future from the vault, Robert Crowther explores the dangers and potential of artificial intelligence with Dr. Robert Marks, Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Baylor University and co-author of Introduction to Evolutionary Informatics. Marks uses John Searle’s “Chinese Room” analogy to explain why computers do not have understanding and never will. At the same time, Marks predicts that continuing advances in technology will further augment our abilities.
On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid brings listeners a pair of Michael Egnor responses to atheist biologist Jerry Coyne, who recently argued that if God existed, we’d have sense organs to detect Him. We do have that organ, says Egnor. It’s reason, the means by which we can infer the reality of a designing mind behind nature. Through reason we can infer the unseen from the seen--everything from the existence of unseen electrons to the existence of an unseen intelligent designer from the evidence of design in nature. Egnor notes that while humans have this “sense” organ, we are free to use it poorly in any given situation, even to ignore where the evidence points.
On this episode of ID the Future from the vault, Sarah Chaffee discusses an article by Adam Laats and Harvey Siegel in Education Week. While Laats and Siegel make important points that schools should teach about evolution, and students should be asked to understand, not accept the theory, they leave out much of what origins science education is really about.
On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid concludes his two-part conversations with Michael Aeschliman, author of the newly revised and expanded The Restoration of Man: C. S. Lewis and the Continuing Case Against Scientism. Here Aeschliman places Lewis among a strong line of thinkers critiquing scientism, including the philosopher/mathematician Blaise Pascal, who showed that scientific knowledge on its own could never be sufficient for being fully human; the theologian and physicist Stanley L. Jaki, who brilliantly integrated science and theology; and the great English author Jonathan Swift, whose satirical work skewered the illusions of scientific reductionism.
On this episode of ID the Future, Michael Aeschliman, author of the newly revised and expanded The Restoration of Man: C. S. Lewis and the Continuing Case Against Scientism sits down with host Andrew McDiarmid to explore Lewis’s The Abolition of Man, its defense of natural law, and its bracing takedown of scientism. Aeschliman says that Lewis did this using classic arguments not always popular in today’s intellectual climate, yet never refuted. As Aeschliman further notes, Lewis also powerfully illustrated the shortcomings and dangers of scientism in his final Space Trilogy novel, That Hideous Strength.
On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid reads the afterword to Michael Aeschliman’s newly revised and expanded The Restoration of Man: C. S. Lewis and the Continuing Case Against Scientism. As Aeschliman explains, Lewis neither deified nor defied science, but he did insist that science idolatry was the grave and present danger of our age. In this excerpt, Aeschliman, professor of Anglophone Culture at the University of Italian Switzerland (Lugano), focuses on Lewis’s brilliant critique of scientism in The Abolition of Man and elsewhere in his work, and on some key thinkers, past and present, who joined Lewis in the fight. It’s a battle, Aeschliman explains, against “the vanity of reason unhinged from ethics,” amidst “a culture that oscillates between the toxic and the trivial.” How did Lewis propose to counteract the polluting effects of scientism? Listen in to find out. And for a deeper dive, pick up a copy of The Restoration of Man.
On this episode of ID the Future from the vault, Sarah Chaffee examines what it looks like to teach the controversy over Darwinian evolution, explaining why students should learn more, not less, on the topic. Listen in as she looks at a lesson plan overview for a unit on neo-Darwinism, and highlights 3 points of scientific controversy that teachers can discuss.
On this episode of ID the Future we hear the final portion of a three-part series featuring Discovery Institute’s Stephen Meyer and David Berlinski along with distinguished Yale computer science professor David Gelernter, who recently gave up Darwinism thanks in part to their books. Led by Uncommon Knowledge host Peter Robinson, they discuss the hard problem of consciousness, how Darwinism functions as a religious dogma that punishers dissenters, and whether biology can ever “get over Darwin and move on.” This interview is presented here courtesy of Peter Robinson and the Hoover Institution.
This episode of ID the Future features Part 2 of Peter Robinson’s conversation with Yale computer scientist David Gelernter and Discovery Institute senior fellows Stephen Meyer and David Berlinski. Here in Part 2, the four men discuss the problem of early and late mutations in embryological development, and the apparently fatal pick-your-poison challenge this poses for modern Darwinism. Then they move on to discuss Gelernter and Berlinski’s reservations with the theory of intelligent design, including--for Gelernter, at least--the problem of apparent bad design in nature. The episode concludes with Meyer addressing this challenge.
On this episode of ID the Future we hear part one of an uncommon trio of experts speaking on the mathematical challenges to Darwinian evolution. Stephen Meyer and David Berlinski, both senior fellows of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, join David Gelernter, a distinguished Yale mathematician, who recently gave up Darwinism based on their work. The conversation is led by Uncommon Knowledge host Peter Robinson.
On this episode of ID the Future, the second in a series, host Andrew McDiarmid reviews three more displays of design in nature. Researchers in Scotland have shown that beavers, once considered by some as nuisances good only for their pelts, are actually great biodiversity engineers. The water lily is another marvel of hydraulic engineering that’s inspiring new designs for desalination plants. And the familiar walnut shell is made of cells interlocked more tightly than any 3-D puzzle ever invented, making it tough enough to need a hammer to open. It’s inspiring new packaging design ideas. See more on these design wonders at Evolution News.
On this classic episode of ID the Future, author Douglas Axe continues his conversation with Eric Metaxas about Axe’s book Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life is Designed and his account of how he lost his position at a Cambridge research lab because of the implications of his research findings. Axe also talks about the currently polarized atmosphere in science, the reliability of the design intuition, and the larger implications of living in a designed universe. For more from The Eric Metaxas Show, visit www.metaxastalk.com