History
Icon-add-to-playlist Icon-download Icon-drawer-up
Share this ... ×
...
By ...
Embed:
Embedded player size:
Embedded player preview:

On this episode of ID The Future, Discovery Institute senior fellows David Berlinski and Michael Denton, both long-time critics of neo-Darwinism, discuss their primary objections to neo-Darwinian theory. For Berlinski, a mathematician and author of 1, 2, 3: Absolutely Elementary Mathematics, the problem is quantitative and methodological. For Denton, a scientist and author of Nature's Destiny: How the Laws of Biology Reveal Purpose in the Universe, the problem is empirical. Don't miss this engaging discussion!

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin interviews Wayne Rossiter, author of Shadow of Oz: Theistic Evolution and the Absent God. Rossiter shares about his conversion away from atheism in 2008, and the writing of his book on theistic evolution.

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID The Future, Andrew McDiarmid talks to Dr. Ann Gauger, a senior research scientist at Biologic Institute and co-author with Dr. Douglas Axe of a new paper recently published in the journal BIO-COMPLEXITY that probes the limits of evolutionary optimization. Gauger explains how she and Axe tested popular hypotheses for protein origins and discovered that while mutation and selection can improve the proficiency of good designs through small adjustments, they seem unable to convert fortuitous selectable activities into good designs. Enjoy the interview, then read the full paper here!

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID the Future, Sarah Chaffee discusses scientific uncertainty in evolution education. She notes how experiencing the dynamic tension between alternate viewpoints increases learning. Furthermore, unanswered questions are central to scientific inquiry, spurring research and discovery.

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID The Future, we explore how the attacks on skeptics of man-made global warming are similar to those against proponents of intelligent design. Host David Boze talks with Casey Luskin about examples of these attacks, why they are happening, and how to handle them.
Says Luskin: "Academic freedom for dissenters from global warming and dissenters from Darwinian evolution are being marginalized and, in some cases, being censored in many of the same ways." Tune in to learn more about this interesting development!

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin continues his discussion on the taxonomy of information. He explains how intelligent design employs the scientific method, uses principles of uniformitarianism, and enables scientific advances.

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin continues his discussion on the taxonomy of information. He delves into the definitions of semantic information and complex & specified information, detailing their relationship and explaining how to use information to make a design inference.

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin discusses the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. Ten years ago, on December 20, 2005, Judge John E. Jones ruled in Kitzmiller v. Dover that intelligent design is religion and not science. His decision was based on faulty reasoning and misrepresentation of intelligent design. Listen to a recent lecture by Casey Luskin who covered the trial for Evolution News. Here in part three he discusses whether Judge Jones employed judicial activism.

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin discusses the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. Ten years ago, on December 20, 2005, Judge John E. Jones ruled in Kitzmiller v. Dover that intelligent design is religion and not science. His decision was based on faulty reasoning and misrepresentation of intelligent design. Listen to a recent lecture by Casey Luskin who covered the trial for Evolution News. Here in part two he discusses whether intelligent design requires a supernatural creator.

[PLAY]

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin discusses the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. Nearly ten years ago, on December 20, 2005, Judge John E. Jones ruled in Kitzmiller v. Dover that intelligent design is religion and not science. His decision was based on faulty reasoning and misrepresentation of intelligent design. As we approach the 10 –year anniversary of Dover, listen to a recent lecture by Casey Luskin who covered the trial for Evolution News in his role as then Science Education Policy Program Officer. In this first segment of a three part series Casey recaps how the trial came about.

[PLAY]

Previous Page  |  Next Page