ID the Future Intelligent Design, Evolution, and Science Podcast

IDTF-thumbnail
IDTF-thumbnail

Stephen Meyer Expounds On Recent Debate With Alex Berezow on The Michael Medved Show

In this episode of ID The Future, Andrew McDiarmid catches up with Dr. Stephen Meyer to clarify two important points raised during his recent discussion with Alex Berezow of Real Clear Science on the Michael Medved Show. Berezow uses developmental hox genes and the research of Richard Lenski as examples of the creative power of the mutation/selection Darwinian mechanism. Here, Meyer points out that although hox genes can produce changes in an organism during development, the changes are usually deleterious and are expressed after body plan formation has already been established. Meyer also clarifies the results of Richard Lenski’s E. coli long-term evolution experiment, showing that even the modest change in function reported by the experiment does not diminish the problem of the origin of information as detailed in Dr. Meyer’s book Darwin’s Doubt.

Read More ›
IDTF-thumbnail
IDTF-thumbnail

Common Objections to ID: Intelligent Design Isn’t Science

On this episode of ID the Future, hear why the often-heard claim that intelligent design isn’t science is false, as Andrew McDiarmid explains the top reasons why ID is science.

Read More ›
IDTF-thumbnail
IDTF-thumbnail

Dr. Ann Gauger: Biology Still Surprises Us

On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid talks with biologist Ann Gauger about the ability of biology to continually surprise us — even when we think the science is settled. Dr. Gauger discusses some scientific “facts” that have since been disproved, and also reflects on her own experiences as a student, and later as a researcher, as she has realized that life is much more sophisticated than we could have imagined.

Reviewing Cosmos: The Mistreatment of Science History

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin and Andrew McDiarmid continue their discussion of the recent TV series Cosmos. Hear why the show’s treatment of the history of science attracted much criticism from science historians, and how the show gives false information about the relationship between religion and science.