ID the Future Intelligent Design, Evolution, and Science Podcast
Topic

Cambrian Explosion

DISCO_210401_TakingLeaveOfDarwinCover_v3

Author Neil Thomas Takes Leave of Darwin, Pt. 2

On this ID the Future, Taking Leave of Darwin author Neil Thomas and host Jonathan Witt continue their conversation about Thomas’s journey from Darwinian materialism to theistic humanism and a thorough skepticism of Darwinian theory. Here Thomas links the heroic posturing of modern atheists Richard Dawkins and Bertrand Russell, on the one hand, and on the other, the heroic fatalism of poetry stretching back to the early Middle Ages and, further still, to the ancient Greeks. Thomas also draws a link between the animistic thinking of much ancient pagan thought and the magical powers attributed to the Darwinian mechanism. Thomas explains why he now views the latter as essentially “crypto-animism.” In their wide-ranging conversation, Thomas and Witt also touch on Read More ›

forked road

An ID Debate, Pt. 2: Joshua Swamidass and Günter Bechly

Today’s ID the Future concludes a debate over the merits of intelligent design and modern evolutionary theory. Günter Bechly is a distinguished German paleoentomologist who was an atheist and Darwinist but became convinced of theism after he finally decided to read some of the books written by leading ID proponents and found their arguments far stronger than he had been led to believe from second-hand accounts. S. Joshua Swamidass is a computational biologist at Washington University in Saint Louis who says ID may or may not be true in some part of what it affirms, but while he believes in a Creator, he doesn’t find the central arguments of intelligent design proponents logical and cogent. He also is more sanguine Read More ›

An ID Debate: Joshua Swamidass and Günter Bechly, Pt. 1

Today’s ID the Future features a debate over the merits of intelligent design. Günter Bechly is a German paleoentomologist heard many times on ID the Future, who says the science convinced him that intelligent design is true. S. Joshua Swamidass is a computational biologist at Washington University in Saint Louis who says ID may or may not be true in some part of what it affirms, but for him, the science doesn’t lead you to it. They met in a dialogue hosted by Justin Brierley on his Unbelievable? podcast, reposted here with Brierley’s permission. This is the first half of the conversation. The second half is coming to IDTF soon.

cloudina-carinata-early-metazoan-worn-shaped-stockpack-adobe-stock.jpg
Cloudina Carinata, early metazoan worn-shaped

The Demise of the Artifact Hypothesis

paleoentomologist Günter Bechly makes the case that recent findings have put the nails in the coffin of this “artifact hypothesis.” He goes on to argue that these findings are “not just a tiny problem but a fatal problem” for modern Darwinism. Read More ›
rosette-nebula-stockpack-unsplash.jpg
rosette nebula

Cosmos: Possible Worlds’ ‘Most Plausible’ Creation Myths

On this episode of ID the Future, philosopher Jay Richards hosts science historian Michael Keas in another conversation about Neil deGrasse Tyson’s series Cosmos: Possible Worlds. They talk this time about what the show itself calls its “most plausible creation myth… for the origin of life,” involving hydrothermal vents in the deep ocean floor — with no mention at all of the equally deep scientific problems with the idea. Tyson’s imagination wanders from there to a moon of Saturn to the Cambrian explosion, everywhere supposing that just because one or two necessary conditions exist for life, that’s all the explanation that’s needed. Richards and Keas ably explore why this is untrue. 

who question.jpg
Who Question with Copyspace, Chinese Language

David Berlinski Pays Tribute to Phillip Johnson

On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid reads from David Berlinski’s new book Human Nature. The excerpt is a tribute to Phillip Johnson and his 1991 book Darwin on Trial. Berlinski calls the work a “Majestic Ascent.” Johnson, he writes, not only brought evolution into question logically and scientifically; he brought the case where it belongs, before “the considered reflection of the human race.” Berlinski himself reflects on various empty attempts to build a scientific theory on prior commitments to materialism. “Darwin’s theories,” he says, “are correspondingly less important for what they explain, which is very little, and more important for what they deny, which is roughly the plain evidence of our senses.”

uk-still-meyer-gelernter
Video still from Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson

David Gelernter, Stephen Meyer, David Berlinski Challenge Darwinism, Pt. 1

Part one of an uncommon trio of experts speaking on the mathematical challenges to Darwinian evolution. Stephen Meyer and David Berlinski join David Gelernter with Peter Robinson moderating. Read More ›
Summer-Seminar-2019-5327-6000px

Stephen Meyer on His CSC Summer Seminar Talks

On this episode of ID the Future, Stephen Meyer, Director of the Center for Science and Culture, discusses the two lectures he gave to a private audience at Discovery Institute’s 2019 Summer Seminar on Intelligent Design. One talk focused on the fossil record, and the other on the Big Bang.

Stephen Meyer Teases the Dallas Conference on Science and Faith

On this episode of ID the Future, Kirby Anderson, host of the nationally syndicated Point of View radio show, interviews New York Times bestselling author Stephen Meyer about the Dallas Conference on Science and Faith. Read More ›
IDTF-thumbnail
IDTF-thumbnail

A Paleontologist on Why the “Cambrian Explosion” Label Persists

On this episode of ID the Future, Sarah Chaffee interviews German paleo-entomologist Günter Bechly on the Cambrian explosion, the relatively sudden appearance of new body plans in the fossil record an estimated 550 million years ago. Dr. Bechly explains how the Cambrian explosion has been challenged by non-experts with an anti-ID bias, yet remains very much a real event in the opinion of specialists in the field — and with the continuing failure of Darwinian explanations, a strong source of evidential support for intelligent design.

Read More ›