Author: Casey Luskin

rough colored ocean wave falling down at sunset time

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 24, 2025

Tagged
, Casey Luskin, common ancestry, common design, Darwinism, ENCODE, engineering principles, Engineering Research Group, epigenetics, Evolution, Evolutionary Biology, Fossil Record, genome, Intelligent Design, intelligent design predictions, irreducible complexity, Junk DNA, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, non-coding DNA, origin of life, orphan genes, teleology, Tree of Life}

Casey Luskin on the Rising Tide of Intelligent Design Research

_{Casey Luskin
December 24, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

Any scientific theory for the origin of life and the universe is only as strong as its research program. For intelligent design, this is good news. On today's ID The Future, Dr. Casey Luskin describes the current growth and scientific maturity of the Intelligent Design (ID) movement. Luskin describes the progress of ID across three main areas: successful scientific predictions, the unresolved failures of Neo-Darwinism to account for life, and the growth of the ID community as well as scientists outside ID who are looking for alternatives to modern evolutionary proposals. Dr. Luskin compares the growth of the ID research program to a snowball; it started small and faced early setbacks, but it is now rapidly picking up size, speed, and scientific weight as it rolls forward. Read More ›

Classical columns on government building with colorful sky

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 17, 2025

Tagged
, Casey Luskin, constitutional law, Darwinism, Dover case, Dover Trial, Dover v. Kitzmiller trial, Evolution, ID research program, Intelligent Design, Judge Jones, legal cases, Materialism, Neo-Darwinism, Over After Dover, peer-reviewed intelligent design papers, peer-reviewed research, public school science teaching}

Casey Luskin: How the ID Movement Has Flourished Since the Dover Trial

_{Casey Luskin
December 17, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

Was the modern intelligent design (ID) movement "over after Dover," as many ID critics hoped it would be? Quite the opposite. In the last two decades ID has flourished as a scientific research program and continues to gain momentum in both academia and the public square. On today's ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid concludes his conversation with geologist, legal scholar, and Dover trial expert Dr. Casey Luskin. In this segment, marking the 20th anniversary of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial of 2005, the pair examine the outcome of the Dover trial, in which a judge ruled that intelligent design was a religious viewpoint, not science, and therefore unconstitutional to teach in public schools. Luskin explains why the Dover ruling was highly flawed and unreliable and how it misrepresented the definition of science and the arguments of ID proponents. Luskin also reveals how the ID movement has flourished in the twenty years since Dover. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

Judge with gavel sitting at wooden table, closeup

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 15, 2025

Tagged
, Casey Luskin, Darwinism, Dover case, Dover intelligent design trial, Dover Trial, Dover v. Kitzmiller trial, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Judge Jones, legal cases, Materialism, Neo-Darwinism, Over After Dover, public school science teaching}

Casey Luskin: ID Over After Dover? Not Even Close

_{Casey Luskin
December 15, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

Over After Dover. That was the hopeful mantra of many critics of intelligent design (ID) after the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial in 2005. They were hoping a federal judge could issue a decree from on high that would stop the ID movement cold in its tracks and neo-Darwinism could go back to being unquestioned, unchallenged orthodoxy. But was it over after Dover? Not even close. On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid marks the 20th anniversary of the Dover trial by beginning a two-part conversation with geologist, legal scholar, and Dover trial expert Dr. Casey Luskin. Luskin takes us back to 2005 to give us his unique perspective on the events that led to the Dover trial, his own personal experiences of the case, and the position the Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture held on the issues at stake. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 10, 2025

Tagged
, bad design, Brian Miller, Casey Luskin, Darwinism, Emily Reeves, engineering, engineering principles, Engineering Research Group, Evolution, flawed design, four-bar linkage system, glucose transporter, glycolysis, ID 3.0 research, Intelligent Design, Jonathan McLatchie, recurring design logic, suboptimal design, two-component regulatory systems}

When Engineering Meets Biology: More From Our Scientist Roundtable

_{Casey Luskin
December 10, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

A Quick Message From Host Andrew McDiarmid: Hey thanks for joining me! Did you know that although ID The Future is free content, it’s not free to produce? If you’re enjoying the interviews, commentaries, and readings you hear on the podcast, would you consider partnering with me to create more new content next year? Support the CSC today to help me generate another amazing lineup of interviews with ID scientists and scholars. Thanks for your support! When biologists use principles of engineering to study living systems, they can gain a richer, deeper understanding of how and why life works. But most biologists are trained to view design as the product of a blind, purposeless, gradual evolutionary process. Today on ID Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 8, 2025

Tagged
, anticipatory system, complex specified information, Darwinism, engineering, Evolution, Evolutionary Biology, Intelligent Design, irreducible complexity, language processing, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, sexual reproduction, specified information, sperm cells}

Scientist Roundtable: Examples of Intelligent Design in the Human Body

_{Casey Luskin
December 8, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

It's easy to be blown away by the examples of engineering prowess in the human body. But it can be challenging to turn that evidence into a robust argument for intelligent design you can share with skeptical friends and colleagues. To help you learn to do that, host Andrew McDiarmid begins a roundtable discussion with not one, not two, not three, but four guests to the podcast, all part of our team of resident scientists at Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture: geologist and lawyer Casey Luskin, biochemist and metabolic nutritionist Emily Reeves, biologist Jonathan McLatchie, and physicist Brian Miller. The first half of the discussion kicks off with a review of the basics of design detection, including various methods for empirically detecting the hallmarks of design in nature. After that, these four experts take turns diving into examples of extraordinary design in the human body. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
November 19, 2025

Tagged
, Altenberg 16, complexity barrier, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary creation, Intelligent Design, Jacob Vasquez, Materialism, modern synthesis, multiple coordinated mutations, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, origin of life, Royal Society of London, selective advantage, theistic evolution, third way, Truthful Hope}

Casey Luskin: Theistic Evolution and the Limits of Neo-Darwinism

_{Casey Luskin
November 19, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

Did God use evolution to create life? On this ID The Future, we’re sharing the second half of a recent conversation with Dr. Casey Luskin that originally aired on the Truthful Hope podcast. Casey is critiquing theistic evolution, the view that God used evolutionary mechanisms to create life. In today's episode, he continues by next addressing the inadequacy of natural selection and random mutation to generate biological complexity. Luskin also points out that even non-ID scientists have expressed skepticism about the explanatory power of neo-Darwinism. All this makes it very hard to justify the position of theistic evolutionists, who claim God uses evolution to create life. In reality, the more we learn about the complexity and design of life, the less adequate neo-Darwinism is as an explanation. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
November 17, 2025

Tagged
, abiogenesis, Casey Luskin, Charles Darwin, chemical evolution, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary creation, Intelligent Design, Jacob Vasquez, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, origin of life, self-replicating molecules, theistic evolution, Truthful Hope}

Did God Use Evolution to Produce Life? Why Theistic Evolution Fails

_{Casey Luskin
November 17, 2025

Uncategorized

2}

Some people attempt to reconcile belief in God with the standard evolutionary account of life's origins by combining the two. Theistic evolution is the view that God used evolutionary mechanisms to create life. But does this view stand up to scrutiny? Today, Dr. Casey Luskin critiques this perspective in the first half of a conversation that originally aired on the Truthful Hope podcast. The conversation kicks off with some clarity over terms, including what is meant by “evolution.” The theistic evolution perspective, also sometimes called evolutionary creation, accepts the standard scientific evolutionary account—the same view held by atheists—and simply adds the theological claim, "but this is how God did it". Critically, these proponents reject the idea that design can be empirically or scientifically detected in nature. As Luskin highlights, the central scientific problem with theistic evolution is that it inherits all the numerous scientific problems associated with the standard evolutionary account. This first half of the conversation rounds out with examples of those problems, specifically from the issue of the origin of life. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

Strong and brave Firefighter Going Up The Stairs in Burning Building. Stairs Burn With Open Flames.

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
September 17, 2025

Tagged
, altruism, Casey Luskin, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary psychology, group selection, heroism, Intelligent Design, kin selection, Marvel universe, Materialism, Morality, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, reciprocal altruism, Richard Dawkins, scientific worldview, selfish gene}

Why Evolutionary Psychology Can’t Explain Heroism

_{Casey Luskin
September 17, 2025

Uncategorized

2}

If evolutionary psychology explains every complex human behavior as well as its opposite, does it really explain anything? Today, host Andrew McDiarmid concludes his conversation with geologist and attorney Dr. Casey Luskin about which scientific theory of origins best explains human altruism, cooperation, and morality. McDiarmid recently engaged in some lively discussion under his recent article exploring scientific worldview in the Marvel universe. Specifically, some readers claimed evolution can explain human kindness, heroism, and teamwork. So McDiarmid turned to Luskin, who has spent time researching human origins as well as attempts to explain the origin of human behaviors. Here in Part 2, the pair zoom into altruism to see if evolution can adequately explain it. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

Help Concept hands reaching out to help each other in dark tone.

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
September 15, 2025

Tagged
, adaptive strategies, altruism, Casey Luskin, Charles Darwin, cooperation, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary advantage, evolutionary psychology, evolutionary theory, Fantastic Four, human behavior, Intelligent Design, logical fallacy, love, Marvel universe, Materialism, Morality, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, predictive power, Religion, sacrifice, scientific worldview, selective advantage, survival of the fittest}

Which Origins Theory Better Explains Altruism and Morality?

_{Casey Luskin
September 15, 2025

Uncategorized

2}

Do evolutionary models adequately account for the reality of human altruism, moral conviction, and cooperation? Does intelligent design offer a better explanation? On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid begins discussing these questions and more with geologist and attorney Casey Luskin. McDiarmid's recent article exploring scientific worldview in the Marvel universe generated some lively back-and-forth in the comments section, particularly about whether evolutionary processes could account for humans looking out for other humans. Luskin tackles the question head-on, putting it in the larger context of evolutionary psychology's penchant for explaining every possible human behavior through the lens of a Darwinian past. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Look for Part 2 in a separate episode. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
September 3, 2025

Tagged
, Cambrian Explosion, Casey Luskin, co-option, complex specified information, Darwinism, Evolution, Fossil Record, God of the gaps, God of the gaps argument, human evolution, human origins, Intelligent Design, irreducible complexity, Lucy fossil, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, objections to intelligent design, Truthful Hope}

How to Respond to Common Criticisms of Intelligent Design

_{Casey Luskin
September 3, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

God of the gaps. Lucy as human ancestor. Co-option to explain away irreducible complexity. Perhaps you've heard some of the most common objections to intelligent design, but do you know how to adequately respond to them? On today's ID The Future, geologist and lawyer Casey Luskin explains how to refute these and other objections to intelligent design as he concludes a conversation with host Jacob Vasquez that originally aired on the Truthful Hope podcast. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›