History
Icon-add-to-playlist Icon-download Icon-drawer-up
Share this ... ×
...
By ...
Embed:
Embedded player size:
Embedded player preview:
Icon-play-large
Peer-Reviewed Scientific Literature Building a Compelling Case for ID
Time-length-icon 18m 28s
Plays-icon 1,941
Icon-like
Publish-date-icon February 6, 2012
Icon-add-to-playlist Add to Playlist
Icon-download-mini Download Episode

Subscribe-itunes-badge
EPISODE DESCRIPTION

On this episode of ID The Future, Casey Luskin puts to rest once and for all the common assertion by opponents of intelligent design that there are no scientific papers supporting the claims of ID. This wasn't true in 2005 when Eugenie Scott of the NCSE stated it on MSNBC and it certainly isn't true six years later. Luskin discusses the most recent scientific paper, by Stephen Meyer and Paul Nelson, and talks about the importance of the peer-reviewed scientific literature: "These papers collectively make a case that intelligent causation is necessary to produce the sort of biological complexity that we are discovering in the cell today."

COMMENTS
Comments are disabled for this podcast
x
Embed Code
After customizing your player (optional), copy and paste the embed code above. The code will change based on your selections.
Color:

Size:
300x85
440x85
620x85
Custom
Width: px
Height: 85px

Min. width: 200px


Start playing automatically?
No Yes
Help | Terms | Privacy | Partners | PRO Support
© 2014 PodOmatic, Inc.