Scout or soldier? When it comes to our opinions and beliefs, there's a bit of both in all of us. But which mindset is more beneficial? On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid welcomes Dr. Jonathan McLatchie to discuss the characteristics of a scout mindset and how it relates to the debate over evolution and the evidence for intelligent design. Get full show notes at idthefuture.com. Read More ›
Woman listening to music at home during coronavirus pandemic
Cerumen, tympanic membranes, and ossicles, oh my! On this ID The Future, lend us your ears as host Andrew McDiarmid invites Dr. Jonathan McLatchie to give us a tour of our magnificent sense of hearing. Dr. McLatchie reviews the anatomy of the human ear with all its interconnected parts, from the oracle (ear lobe) to the curly cochlea in the inner ear. Along the way, he explains why intelligent design is a more reasonable explanation for our sense of hearing than a blind Darwinian evolutionary process. Read More ›
If the phrase "Bayesian calculus" makes you run for the hills, you're not alone! Bayesian logic can sound intimidating at first, but if you give it a little time, you'll understand how useful it can be to evaluate the evidence for design in the natural world. On this ID The Future, Dr. Jonathan McLatchie gives us a beginner's guide to Bayesian thinking and teaches us how it can be used to build a strong cumulative case for intelligent design, as well as how we can use it in our everyday lives. Enjoying the podcast? Leave a written review at Apple Podcasts to help new listeners find the show! Read More ›
The RNA world is proposed by some to explain how early life began before DNA. But is RNA capable of maintaining a life-friendly self-replication rate? On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid welcomes back Dr. Jonathan McLatchie to discuss another headache for the RNA world scenario. Before a trial and error process like natural selection can even get started, self-replicating molecules must have a minimal accuracy rate to copy genetic material effectively. The required fidelity rate is estimated to be 2%. Any error rate higher than that results in error catastrophe for organisms. The average error rate in RNA copying is estimated to be around 17%, vastly higher than the estimated maximum error threshold for survival. McLatchie explains the implications of this for chemical evolutionary theories like the RNA world hypothesis. He also explains how a Bayesian approach to this evidence can provide us with the likeliest explanation for the origin of biological life. "The sorts of features that we observe in life are not particularly surprising if we suppose that a mind is involved," says McLatchie. But things like minimal self-replication fidelity are wildly surprising on a naturalistic hypothesis. Read More ›
