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

complex specified information

the-murmurations-of-starlings-in-evening-light-stockpack-ado-320902230-stockpack-adobe_stock
The Murmurations of Starlings in evening light
Image Credit: Menno Schaefer - Adobe Stock

Mama Bear Apologetics Takes on Atheist Richard Dawkins

Today’s ID the Future out of vault puts atheist Richard Dawkins’s book Outgrowing God under the microscope and reveals multiple ways his argument smashes up against contrary scientific evidence. Walking us through the critique are author and Mama Bear Apologetics founder Hillary Morgan Ferrer and her co-host, Amy Davison. The two co-hosts rebut several pro-evolution arguments from Dawkins with strong evidence of sophisticated engineering order in animal life. Read More ›
IDTF 1992 Stephen Meyer Did Belief in God Make Modern Science Possible Post Graphic
Astronomer by Candlelight, by Gerrit Dou. Public domain.

Stephen Meyer: Did Belief in God Make Modern Science Possible?

On this ID The Future, philosopher of science Dr. Stephen Meyer sits down with Praxis Circle’s Doug Monroe to offer insights into the intersection of science, philosophy, and religion. In this section of a multi-part interview, Dr. Meyer begins by discussing the nature of information. He explains the difference between mathematical information, or Shannon information, and specified information, a more meaningful type of information that conveys the quality of the content, not just the quantity of it. Dr. Meyer then turns to the theistic assumptions that fueled the scientific revolution. Why did modern science begin where and when it did? What was the spark that ignited that famous flowering of human scientific thought? Dr. Meyer has answers. Read More ›
Romanesco broccoli close up. The fractal vegetable is known for it's connection to the fibonacci sequence and the golden ratio. Fun food for any practical scientists that loves mathematics
Image licensed from Adobe Stock

A New Design Inference for a New Generation

Is there an empirical method to determine whether a system is the product of chance or design? On this ID The Future, physicist Brian Miller concludes a two-part conversation with Dr. William Dembski about a new updated second edition of his classic book The Design Inference. In many ways, the 2nd edition of The Design Inference is a brand new book. Dr. Dembski teases out what is new and updated, and he also discusses what it was like to team up with software engineer Winston Ewert on the project. He even gives us a sneak preview of his next book, covering the conservation of information. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›
sunset-over-mount-rushmore-south-dakota-usa-stockpack-adobe-stock
Sunset over Mount Rushmore, South Dakota, U.S.A.
Image Credit: jovannig - Adobe Stock

Bill Dembski Reflects on The Origins of a Classic

Hailed as "sparklingly original" and an "important contribution", mathematician William Dembski's 1998 book The Design Inference gave the modern design hypothesis a firm empirical footing and quickly inspired demonization and dismissal from disgruntled Darwinists. Twenty-five years later, Dembski's arguments stand firm, and a second edition with fresh analysis and insight is now available to a new generation of truth seekers. On this ID The Future, physicist Brian Miller invites Dr. Dembski to take us back to the 1980s to tell us the story of how The Design Inference came to be. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Look for Part 2 next! Read More ›
mama bear cubs
Female Eurasian brown bear and her cubs in boreal forest
Image Credit: giedriius - Adobe Stock

Mama Bear Apologetics Takes on Atheist Richard Dawkins

Today’s ID the Future puts atheist Richard Dawkins’s book Outgrowing God under the microscope and reveals multiple ways his argument smashes up against contrary scientific evidence. Walking us through the critique are author and Mama Bear Apologetics founder Hillary Morgan Ferrer and her co-host, Amy Davison. Dawkins invokes the beautiful order evident in the murmuration of bird flocks as evidence that complexity can evolve from simple algorithmic rules. But Ferrer explains why the phenomenon of bird murmuration doesn’t even begin to approach what we find when sophisticated engineering order emerges in the growth of embryos. Ferrer also considers the challenges of re-engineering sperm thermoregulation to move from how it works in marine life to how it works in land animals. Read More ›

tuskless elephant
Tuskless female elephant with trunk in mouth
Image Credit: geoffsp - Adobe Stock

Michael Behe: Evolution, Devolution, Design

Today’s ID the Future features three recent Evolution News essays by Lehigh University biology professor and Darwin Devolves author Michael Behe, as read by host Andrew McDiarmid. In the first, nothing shows the feebleness of Darwinism quite so much as breathless stories about new results that turn out to be much ado about nothing. In this case, it’s some recent speculation about the rise of “lactase persistence” in many human adults. Then it’s onto malaria, much beloved of evolutionists, not for its lethality but as a demonstration of evolution in action. But Behe dissects the latest news story on the topic to show that the touted malaria evolution is, once again, malaria gnawing off the proverbial leg to achieve a Read More ›

RGH cover no text
Return of the God Hypothesis, ROGH, Meyer

Stephen Meyer: One God or Many Universes?

In this ID the Future, Stephen Meyer takes a deep dive into the case for not only intelligent design, but also for a designer of the cosmos who is immaterial, eternal, transcendent, and involved. Meyer draws on evidence for design at the origin of life, in the origin of plants and animals, and from the fine tuning of the laws and constants of chemistry and the initial conditions of the universe. He connects all this to the scientific evidence that the universe is not eternal but had a beginning—the Big Bang. What about the main materialistic alternative for explaining this suite of evidence—the idea that there is a multiverse with our universe just being one of the lucky universes with Read More ›

casey-luskin-unbelievable-point

Casey Luskin and Adam Shapiro Debate Intelligent Design, Pt. 1

On today’s ID the Future, design theorist Casey Luskin, an editor of The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith, and science historian Adam Shapiro, co-author of Science and Religion: A Very Short Introduction, debate the meaning and prospects of intelligent design. Here in this first half of their conversation with host Justin Brierley of the Unbelievable? podcast, the focus is on how the term intelligent design is used, or misused, and its relationship to theological issues. The interview is used by permission of Justin Brierley.

cosmos
Image Credit: Sergey Nivens - Adobe Stock

Casey Luskin on Why Intelligent Design is Worth Defending

Today’s ID the Future spotlights The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith. Host Eric Anderson interviews one of the anthology’s co-editors and contributors, geologist Casey Luskin. The two focus on just one of Luskin’s contributed essays, one that addresses two primary questions: Is intelligent design true? And is it worth expending the energy to defend it against powerful opposition? Luskin answers both questions in the affirmative, and explains why he sees the new anthology as a great resource in the cause of intelligent design.

Image Credit: rolffimages - Adobe Stock

Casey Luskin Reviews Three Views on Christianity and Science

On today’s ID the Future, host Tom Gilson and guest Casey Luskin discuss a new book Luskin recently reviewed at Evolution News, Three Views on Christianity and Science. Luskin, associate director of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, summarizes the three views covered in the book: the independence view presented by Michael Ruse, the dialogue view presented by Alister McGrath, and the constrained integration view presented by Bruce Gordon. Luskin critiques the first two and argues that the dialogue view, in practice, quickly devolves into a monologue where religion is supposed to sit down and shut up the moment there is a point of difference between religion and consensus science. He says this is doubly problematic because (a) scientists Read More ›