Tag: common descent | Page 2

^{Type
post

Author
Michael Behe

Date
July 30, 2021

Tagged
aesthetic judgment, bad design, common descent, Darwinian Mechanism, Darwinism, devolution, Evolution, Immanuel Kant, Intelligent Design, Jim Madden, Michael Behe, Natural Selection, optimal design, Pat Flynn, purpose, purposeful arrangement of parts, random mutations, random variation, science stopper, the problem of evil, Thomism, Thomists, unguided evolution, vertebrate eye}

Darwin Devolves Author Michael Behe Tangles with Two Philosophers, Pt. 3

_{Michael Behe

July 30, 2021

Uncategorized}

On this ID the Future, ID biologist Michael Behe continues fielding tough questions from philosophers Pat Flynn and Jim Madden. Here in Part 3 of 3, Behe responds to the claim that some designs in biology are bad designs and to criticisms leveled at ID from some Thomists. Also in the mix, the issue of academic pressure to distance oneself from ID, even before those involved understand what the theory of intelligent design actually is. Madden also asks Behe what reforms he’d pursue if he suddenly found himself in charge of the National Academy of Sciences. Tune in to hear Behe’s response, and much more. This three-part series is borrowed, with permission, from Flynn’s podcast, which can be found on his YouTube channel.

^{Type
post

Author
William A. Dembski

Date
May 19, 2021

Tagged
abiogenesis, argument from evil, chance, common descent, conservation of information, Douglas Axe, Evolution, genetic code, homochirality, Intelligent Design, Junk DNA, law of small probability, Miller-Urey experiment, minimal complexity of a cell, multiple universes, multiverse, Natural Selection, origin of life, probabilistic resources, replicator, self-reproducing machines, simple life, theistic evolution, universal probability bound}

James Tour Interviews William Dembski, Pt. 2

_{William A. Dembski

May 19, 2021

Uncategorized}

Today’s ID the Future again features Rice University synthetic organic chemist James Tour and intelligent design pioneer William Dembski. Here in Part 2 they discuss information theory, probability theory, the origin of life, evolution, the multiverse hypothesis, and Dembski’s contributions to the theory of intelligent design. Their conversation is borrowed, with permission, from Dr. Tour’s Science & Faith podcast.

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
January 27, 2021

Tagged
Ann Gauger, Brian Miller, Casey Luskin, citrate, common descent, common design, Darwin Devolves, degradative mutations, dependency graph model, devolution, Douglas Axe, E. coli, Evolution, evolutionary tree, genetic data, genetics, human origins, ID 3.0, Intelligent Design, Jeremy England, Jerry Coyne, Journal of BIO-Complexity, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Michael Behe, Ola Hössjer, origin of life, polar bear evolution, Richard Lenski, Scott Minnich, useful adaptations, William Dembski, Winston Ewert}

Casey Luskin Returns, Teases a New Book, Celebrates ID 3.0

_{Casey Luskin

January 27, 2021

Uncategorized}

On today’s ID the Future, Rob Crowther continues his conversation with Casey Luskin, the intelligent design proponent who previously worked for Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture and has now returned. As Luskin explains, he left to pursue a PhD in geology at the University of Johannesburg in South Africa. The two discuss the wild conspiracy theories circulated by opponents of intelligent design when Luskin stepped away from Discovery Institute five years ago. Luskin also tells about an upcoming book he’s been working on with William Dembski, another intelligent design proponent who stepped away from day-to-day ID work and is now putting a foot back in the ID waters. Also on tap in today’s conversation, Luskin and Dembski’s upcoming appearance at the 2021 Dallas Conference on Science and Faith, and advances in the ID 3.0 research initiative, including some recent peer-reviewed papers.

walnuts black hats on stone and gray background. Creative food design poster. Macro view selective focus photo

^{Type
post

Author
Robert P. Waltzer

Date
July 6, 2020

Tagged
__edited, cardiopulmonary system, Charles Darwin, common descent, hemoglobin, information, Intelligent Design, irreducible complexity, neutral evolution, Proteins, Tree of Life}

In a Nutshell: Three Great Problems for Evolution

_{Robert P. Waltzer

July 6, 2020

Uncategorized}

On this episode of ID the Future, Andrew McDiarmid continues his conversation with Robert Waltzer, chair of the department of biology at Belhaven University and co-author of Evolution and Intelligent Design in a Nutshell, on three big problems faced by naturalistic evolutionary theory. First, it appears that science has turned up several instances of what is known as irreducible complexity, something that Darwin himself said would falsify his theory if ever discovered. Second, various proposed “trees of life” conflict with each other, a problem that has grown worse as additional evidence and methods have arisen, a trend that makes theories of common descent difficult to sustain. And third, we know of no case where information is generated or improved without intelligent action behind it. Evolutionists still hold on to their theories, but why are they not more open at least to debate and criticism? Professor Waltzer suggests multiple possibilities.

^{Type
post

Author
Andrew McDiarmid

Date
June 29, 2020

Tagged
__edited, Change Over Time, common descent, ENCODE project, gradualism, historical science, irreducible complexity, Junk DNA, macroevolution, Microevolution, Natural Selection, non-coding DNA, Nutshell}

Robert Waltzer on Evolutionary Theory’s Room for Humility

_{Andrew McDiarmid

June 29, 2020

Uncategorized}

On this episode of ID the Future, biologist and professor Robert Waltzer talks with host Andrew McDiarmid about Waltzer’s chapter in the new Discovery Institute Press volume Evolution and Intelligent Design in a Nutshell. Waltzer’s chapter covers some key terms in the evolution/ID conversation that are often misunderstood or misused. These include the word “evolution” itself, “change over time,” “common descent,” and “natural selection.” He offers quick definitions and explains some of the confusion surrounding them. Waltzer also describes an encouraging success story of his about fostering open dialogue and exploration of the evidence for design in nature.

^{Type
post

Author
Daniel Reeves

Date
June 1, 2020

Tagged
__edited, Alfred Russell Wallace, cells, Charles Darwin, common descent, Darwinism, DNA, explanatory deficits, Extended Evolutionary Synthesis, Gerd Müller, Günter Bechly, Homology, Intelligent Design, irreducible complexity, Isaac Newton, macroevolution, Microevolution, modern synthesis, molecular machinery, nanomachines, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, protoplasm, Robert Boyle, Royal Society of London, speciation, survival of the fittest, teleology}

Of Natural Selection, Explanatory Deficits, and Bunnies Dark and Light

_{Daniel Reeves

June 1, 2020

Uncategorized}

On this episode of ID the Future we hear the first part of Discovery Institute Education Outreach Associate Daniel Reeves’ talk at the 2020 Dallas Science and Faith Conference. Reeves outlines the meaning of natural selection, and traces its history, starting from Darwin’s early understanding, in the days when cells were viewed as just blobs of protoplasm. Reeves carries the story from there through the neo-Darwinian modern synthesis and into the extended evolutionary synthesis, culminating in a 2016 meeting of the Royal Society on the theory’s continuing — and still unresolved — explanatory deficits.

^{Type
post

Author
Günter Bechly

Date
April 8, 2020

Tagged
__edited, anagenesis, cladogenesis, common descent, Darwin finch beaks, evo devo, foraminifera, freshwater snails, gradualism, macroevolution, Microevolution, Punctuated Equilibrium, speciation}

Günter Bechly: Still More Evidence Against Darwinian Gradualism

_{Günter Bechly

April 8, 2020

Uncategorized}

On this episode of ID the Future, paleontologist Günter Bechly speaks again with host Andrew McDiarmid about the growing case against Darwinian gradualism. Bechly points out two more cases where fossil discoveries refuted Darwin’s prediction of gradualism in species transitions. In one of the classic showcases for such alleged transitions, between two species of deep-sea protists called foraminifera, more recent research showed their speciation to be abrupt and not an ancestor-descendent sequence. And fossil freshwater snails from Germany, once viewed as another textbook example of gradual speciation, were discovered not to be separate species at all. Is there a paradigm change coming in evolutionary studies? Nothing fits the data better than intelligent design.

^{Type
post

Author
Günter Bechly

Date
April 6, 2020

Tagged
__edited, anagenesis, Australopithecenes, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus anamensis, cladogenesis, common descent, Fossil Record, gradualism, human evolution, Johannes Haile-Selassie, Larry Moran, Lucy, Niles Eldredge, Punctuated Equilibrium, speciation, stasis, Stephen Jay Gould}

Günter Bechly Says Goodbye to Darwinian Gradualism

_{Günter Bechly

April 6, 2020

Uncategorized}

On this episode of ID the Future, paleontologist Günter Bechly and host Andrew McDiarmid discuss Bechly’s article “Ape-Man Waves Goodbye to Darwinian Gradualism.” Bechly touches on the oldest australopithecine fossil skull ever found, from 3.8 million years ago. The researchers behind the find are confident of its age but puzzled because the discovery undercuts one of the best examples of alleged gradual transition between two hominid species, and it also doesn’t fit well with common theories of phylogenetic relationship. The evidence poses a significant problem for the Darwinian mechanistic paradigm, but can be readily explained with an intelligent design approach.

^{Type
post

Author
Jonathan Wells

Date
January 22, 2020

Tagged
__edited, Charles Darwin, common descent, DNA sequencing, Galileo, Icons of Evolution, leafhopper, orphan genes, Phillip E. Johnson, Phillip Johnson, Samuel Johnson, taxonomically restricted genes, Zombie Science}

Honoring Phillip Johnson, Pt. 2: Jonathan Wells and Paul Nelson

_{Jonathan Wells

January 22, 2020

Uncategorized}

Today’s episode of ID the Future comes from a Berkeley, California symposium honoring the recently deceased Phillip Johnson. Biologist Jonathan Wells recalls how he met Johnson and the huge influence he had on Wells’ own research and writing. Then philosopher of biology Paul Nelson reminisces on Johnson’s keen intellect, his eye for hidden assumptions, his awareness that “we are not of our own devising,” and on the mountain range of new knowledge opening up to us in biology, one that scientists knew little about even 30 years ago and that Nelson says points strongly away from Darwin’s idea of common descent.

^{Type
post

Author
Ann Gauger

Date
October 30, 2019

Tagged
__edited, Adam and Eve, BIO-Complexity, common descent, DNA, Evolution, first human couple, genes, genetic diversity, genetics, human origins, models of evolution, population genetics, single-couple human origin, theistic evolution}

New Gene Research: A Single-Couple Human Origin is Possible

_{Ann Gauger

October 30, 2019

Uncategorized}

On this episode of ID the Future, biologist Ann Gauger talks with host Andrew McDiarmid about new research challenging the common claim that the field of population genetics rules out a single-couple human origin. She and Stockholm University statistical mathematician Ola Hössjer have just published a paper in the journal BIO-Complexity modeling the scenario using a newly developed computer algorithm. The results, Gauger says, show that the genetic data does not rule out Adam and Eve.