Tag: Neo-Darwinism | Page 7

^{Type
post

Author
Günter Bechly

Date
March 2, 2022

Tagged
abrupt appearance, archeopteryx, artifact hypothesis, Cambrian Explosion, Carboniferous, Casey Luskin, Climbing Mount Improbable, Darwinian gradualism, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary discontinuities, evolutionary gradualism, flying insects, fossil forgeries, Fossil Record, fossil record explosions, Fossils, Günter Bechly, human evolution, Neo-Darwinism, origin of flowering plants, paleontology, Piltdown man, Precambrian, Richard Dawkins, sudden appearance, The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith, Theory of Evolution, transitional forms, transitional fossils}

Debunked Transitional Fossils Just the Tip of the Iceberg

_{Günter Bechly

March 2, 2022

Uncategorized}

On today’s ID the Future Casey Luskin hosts distinguished German paleontologist Günter Bechly to discuss Bechly’s essay in the recent Harvest House anthology, The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith: Exploring the Ultimate Questions About Life and the Cosmos. Darwinian evolution predicts a gradually branching tree of living forms, with one form shading into another over long periods of evolution, with each transitional step almost too modest to notice. Does the fossil record suggest such a pattern? Quite the opposite, Bechly says. Instead the pattern of the fossil record is consistently one of sudden appearance, and evolutionists have yet to successfully construct a single robustly populated series of gradually transitioning fossils that move chronologically from one form to a distinctly different morphology. Darwinism would lead us to expect such transitional sequences all over the fossil record, and yet evolutionists, searching assiduously for more than 160 years, have yet to construct a single one of these. Bechly debunks the hype around some fossil sequences, such as that said to have been assembled from ape-like to human. He explains the difference between “transitional forms” as paleontologists generally use the term and the meaning of the term for evolutionists attempting to defend modern Darwinism. And he and Luskin also discuss fossil forgeries, how to tell real from fake fossils, and four explosions of morphological novelty in the history of life.

The student is sitting at the table and is looking for excuses for not being ready for the lesson. Photo by Dmitriy on Adobe Stock

^{Type
post

Author
Paul Nelson

Date
February 14, 2022

Tagged
amino acids, Casey Luskin, cells, common descent, Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith, Craig Venter, Darwinism, DNA, Eugene Koonin, evolutionary theory, genetic code, genetic codes, Jacques Monod, last universal common ancestor, Life’s Greatest Secret, LUCA, Matthew Cobb, Michael Syvanen, Neo-Darwinism, Paul Nelson, Proteins, Richard Dawkins, RNA, scientific predictions, testability, universal common ancestor, universal common descent, variant genetic codes}

How Universal Common Descent Survives Failed Predictions

_{Paul Nelson

February 14, 2022

Uncategorized}

On today’s ID the Future, philosopher of biology Paul Nelson discusses his chapter in a recent Harvest House anthology edited by host Casey Luskin, The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith. Nelson says the theory of universal common descent, a key component of modern evolutionary theory, has generated multiple predictions that have failed. The prediction he discusses here is that there would turn out to be a single universal genetic code, since that’s what we should expect if all life on earth is descended from the last universal common ancestor (LUCA). Findings over the past three decades have proven that prediction spectacularly wrong. How does the theory of universal common descent shrug off this contrary empirical finding? The trick for LUCA in this and similar cases is to shift blame for failure to an ancillary theory. It’s a clever move, says Nelson, but it comes at a cost.

^{Type
post

Author
Neil Thomas

Date
January 26, 2022

Tagged
Alfred Russel Wallace, Charles Darwin, Darwinism, DNA, Eugenics, Evolution, Fossil Record, Francesco Redi, Francis Crick, Friedrich Max Müller, genetic information, Hank Hanegraaff, human evolution, human language, Intelligent Design, Louis Pasteur, Mel Brooks, Michael Denton, Miller-Urey experiment, Naturalism, Neil Thomas, Neo-Darwinism, Niles Eldredge, Noam Chomsky, origin of life, panspermia, physicalism, Punctuated Equilibrium, Richard Dawkins, Robert Cornish, Scopes Monkey Trial, sociobiology, spontaneous generation, Stephen J. Gould, substance dualism, Taking Leave of Darwin, The Descent of Man, Theism, Thomas Aquinas, William Harvey, Young Frankenstein}

Neil Thomas Talks Darwin, Aquinas, OOL and … Young Frankenstein

_{Neil Thomas

January 26, 2022

Uncategorized}

On this ID the Future, Taking Leave of Darwin author Neil Thomas continues a lively conversation with radio host Hank Hanegraaff. In this second in a three-part series, the two touch on the fossil record’s challenge to Darwinism, Gould and Eldredge’s rescue attempt, the question of whether Darwin’s best known contemporary defender is dishonest or merely self-deluded, the wishful thinking surrounding origin-of-life studies, the failed attempts to reduce the mind to mere brain chemistry, and the morally repugnant pro-eugenics ideas rooted in Darwinism and touted in the textbook at the heart of the famous Scopes Monkey Trial. The conversation is posted here by permission of Hank Hanegraaff. Get Neil Thomas’s book here.

^{Type
post

Author
Emily Reeves

Date
January 17, 2022

Tagged
apologetics, Brian Miller, Casey Luskin, convergence, Dallas Conference on Science and Faith, Dallas Science and Faith Conference, Daniel Reeves, Denton Bible Church, design optimality, Emily Reeves, Eric Hedin, Evolution, Homology, Intelligent Design, Neo-Darwinism, Ray Bohlin, South Africa, Stephen C. Meyer, Stephen Meyer, Texas}

Emily Reeves Previews Dallas Science/Faith Conference 2022

_{Emily Reeves

January 17, 2022

Uncategorized}

On this ID the Future, host Andrew McDiarmid sits down with Emily Reeves, one of the speakers for the January 22, 2022, Dallas Science and Faith Conference. The two walk through the lineup of speakers for the conference (Stephen Meyer, Brian Miller, Casey Luskin, Ray Bohlin, and others), tease some of the talks, and discuss how to join the one-day event live, either in person in the Dallas area or online. For more about the conference, slated for this Saturday, and to sign up, go here.

^{Type
post

Author
Brian Miller

Date
January 10, 2022

Tagged
Brian Miller, Casey Luskin, CELS conference, cichlid fish, Conference on Engineering in Living Systems, Darwinism, design logic, engineering, Evolution, finch beak, finches, fitness landscape, four-bar linkage, fruit flies, gravity well model for adaptation, Intelligent Design, intelligent design predictions, labrid fish, Mark W. Westneat, mutational hotspots, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, phenotypic plasticity, population genetics, random variation, stickleback fish, Systematic Biology, systems biology, tracking model for adaptation}

Engineers Crash the Evolution Party, Rethink Biological Variation

_{Brian Miller

January 10, 2022

Uncategorized}

On today’s ID the Future, physicist and engineer Brian Miller sits down with host Casey Luskin to survey exciting developments in intelligent design research that are driven by an engineering model for understanding and studying variations in species. ID researchers are pushing this work, but so too are systems biology researchers outside the intelligent design community. Tune in to hear Miller and Luskin discuss everything from fruit flies, finch beaks, and stickleback fish to mutational hotspots, phenotypic plasticity, and the gravity well model of biological adaptation.

^{Type
post

Author
Eric Cassell

Date
December 20, 2021

Tagged
aircraft navigation, aircraft navigation systems, algorithms, animal behavior, animal instincts, animal migration, Casey Luskin, chemotaxis, complex programmed behaviors, computer programming, CPBs, desert ant, Eric Cassell, eusocial insects, Evolution, foraging, GPS, honey bees, inertial navigation, innate behavior, insect behavior, instincts, Intelligent Design, migration, navigation, navigation sensors, Neo-Darwinism, odometer, path integration, polarized light compass, programmed behaviors, social insect colonies, sun compass, systems engineering}

Animal Algorithms Webinar: Desert Ants and Honey Bees

_{Eric Cassell

December 20, 2021

Uncategorized}

Today’s ID the Future brings listeners the first half of a recent live webinar featuring author Eric Cassell fielding questions about his intelligent design book, Animal Algorithms: Evolution and the Mysterious Origin of Ingenious Instincts. Center for Science and Culture associate director Casey Luskin hosts. They begin the webinar discussing Cassell’s unique set of qualifications for writing the book, and then they move into a conversation about the amazing desert ant, a master navigator from birth, able to integrate multiple navigation sensors despite having an incredibly tiny brain. Cassell argues that these innate skills point to algorithms programmed into the ant’s brain and genome, and that such programming is far better explained by intelligent design than by any blind evolutionary process. Also making an appearance in this first half of the webinar: the integrated wonder of the honey bee colony.

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
December 15, 2021

Tagged
antibiotic resistance, appearance of design, Big Bang, Biological Information, Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith, Creationism, Darwinian dogma, design detection, design triangulation, DNA, evolutionary creationism, fine tuning, genetic information, God, ID 3.0, information theory, intelligent cause, Intelligent Design, intelligent design research, Molecular Machines, Neo-Darwinism, pharmacology, positive case for intelligent design, Richard Dawkins, Science and faith, systematics, Theism, theistic evolution, unguided evolution, vestigial organs, young earth creationism}

Casey Luskin on the Nature and Fruits of Intelligent Design

_{Casey Luskin

December 15, 2021

Uncategorized}

On today’s ID the Future, guest Casey Luskin and host Eric Anderson untangle the differences between creationism, intelligent design, and theistic evolution. There are important distinctions as well as areas of overlap, Luskin explains, but the theory of intelligent design focuses on the book of nature, rather than on the Bible or some other sacred book, and offers evidence that certain features of the natural world are best explained by reference to an intelligent cause. The case for intelligent design includes negative arguments against competitor explanations, such as neo-Darwinism, as well as positive evidence for design. And Luskin notes that increasingly this paradigm is fueling fruitful scientific research in everything from protein science to pharmacology and cosmology. To support this important work and Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, click here for options.

^{Type
post

Author
Eric Cassell

Date
November 10, 2021

Tagged
algorithms, altruism, Animal Algorithms, animal colonies, ants, bees, Biological Information, castes, complex programmed behavior, Darwinian Evolution, Darwinism, division of labor, drone swarms, drones, Eric Cassell, eusocial, inclusive fitness, insect genomes, insect social behavior, insect social colonies, instincts, Naturalism, Neo-Darwinism, novel genes, ORFans, orphan genes, pheromones, queen, Robert J. Marks, superorganisms, swarm intelligence, swarms, taxonomically restricted genes, termites}

Amazing Insect Colonies vs. Evolution

_{Eric Cassell

November 10, 2021

Uncategorized}

On today’s ID the Future, Animal Algorithms author Eric Cassell delves into another fascinating portion of his new book, the programmed social behaviors of colony insects and the challenge these instinctive behaviors pose for modern evolutionary theory. Cassell and host Robert J. Marks discuss the complex caste system of these colonies, the impressive signaling systems they use to communicate, and how technologists study these tiny-brained creatures to learn tricks for developing and improving drone swarm technology. How could a mindless evolutionary process have evolved these sophisticated colonies, where various castes appear essential to the functioning and survival of the colony, and possess their division-of-labor skills instinctively? Some colony members also behave altruistically, a fact that Charles Darwin himself conceded posed a challenge to his theory. And what about all the growing number of orphan genes researchers are finding among colony insects—genes without any apparent evolutionary ancestry in the history of life? This too, Cassell argues, poses a major challenge to evolutionary theory. Cassell argues that underlying these complex instinctive social behaviors are complex algorithms not unlike those we find in computers; and, as he argues in the book, the best explanation for their origin is intelligent design. Learn more about the book, read the endorsements from a range of scientists and engineers, and pick up your copy here.

^{Type
post

Author
Jonathan Wells

Date
October 13, 2021

Tagged
cancel culture, Casey Luskin, common descent, Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith, Darwinism, Discovery Institute, dogmatic Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary theory, Extended Evolutionary Synthesis, Icons of Evolution, Intelligent Design, Is Darwinism a Theory in Crisis?, Jonathan Wells, Neo-Darwinism, scientific dogmatism, scientific Materialism, scientific paradigm, the journal Nature, The Myth of Junk DNA, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn, Zombie Science}

Is Darwinism a Theory in Crisis?

_{Jonathan Wells

October 13, 2021

Uncategorized}

Today’s ID the Future spotlights The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith, and specifically, an essay in the new anthology by biologist Jonathan Wells, “Is Darwinism a Theory in Crisis?” As Wells and host Casey Luskin note, the essay title alludes to philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn’s influential 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Kuhn argued there that if one studies the history of scientific revolutions, one finds that when the scientific evidence has begun to turn against a dominant scientific paradigm—when its days are numbered— its adherents do not simply concede defeat. Instead they use all their institutional power to suppress dissent and punish proponents of any competing paradigm. This is the period of crisis, which can last for years and even decades. Wells contends that modern evolutionary theory is a current instance of a dominant paradigm in crisis. He briefly makes the case in this episode, and at greater length in his essay, which appears in the newly released anthology from Harvest House Publishers, edited by William Dembski, Casey Luskin, and Joseph Holden. Find it at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and other booksellers.

^{Type
post

Author
Stephen C. Meyer

Date
September 13, 2021

Tagged
Allen Sandage, Altenberg 16, Atheism, beginning of the universe, Big Bang, BioLogos, Brian Keating, confirmation bias, Darrel Falk, Eugene Koonin, exotic naturalism, fine tuning, fine tuning of the universe, Francis Crick, God and the Astronomers, Günter Bechly, imaginary time, James Tour, Materialism, metaphysical hypotheses, methodological naturalism, Michael Shermer, multiverse, Neo-Darwinism, origin of life, oscillating universe model, panspermia, Return of the God Hypothesis, Richard Dawkins, RNA World hypothesis, Robert Jastrow, skepticism, steady state theory, Stephen C. Meyer, Stephen Hawking, Theism, theistic evolution}

Stephen Meyer and Skeptic Michael Shermer, Pt. 1

_{Stephen C. Meyer

September 13, 2021

Uncategorized}

Today’s ID the Future spotlights the first part of a lively and cordial conversation between host and atheist Michael Shermer and Stephen Meyer, author of Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe. In this first of the four-part series, the two touch on everything from Meyer’s three key lines of evidence for theism to a quick flyover of less well-known materialistic origins theories, including the oscillating universe model, panspermia as an explanation for the origin of the first life on earth, and Stephen Hawking’s idea of imaginary time. Meyer lumps many of these ideas under what he terms exotic naturalism and suggests that the atheists who defend these explanations are multiplying exotic and unobserved entities to hold at bay a much simpler and more reasonable explanation for the evidence—namely, intelligent design. But is Meyer simply guilty of confirmation bias in arriving at his conclusion? Meyer turns the question around and suggests that it’s those who are wedded to methodological materialism who appear to be led by a confirmation bias. The interview is reposted here by permission of Michael Shermer.