ID the Future Intelligent Design, Evolution, and Science Podcast

reductionist philosophy

Emergency ekg monitoring. Blue glowing neon heart pulse. Heart beat. Electrocardiogram

Gary Habermas on the Scientific Evidence for Near-Death Experiences

Is there strong scientific evidence for near-death experiences? On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid speaks with Dr. Gary Habermas about his chapter evaluating the evidence for near-death cases in the new book Minding the Brain: Models of the Mind, Information, and Empirical Science. As Dr. Habermas explains, most near-death accounts contain both objective and subjective elements. Personal testimony about other realms can't be independently corroborated, but objective evidence rooted in this world can be confirmed and evaluated. "I can't verify heavenly discussions or heavenly sites," says Habermas, "so the kind of NDE data I'm talking about virtually always occur on this earth in normal kinds of situations, like parking lots or in your home two miles away. That's where the evidence comes from." Dr. Habermas relays several examples of near-death cases with strong evidential support. He also lays out five different lines of verifiable phenomena. Tune in to learn more about the scientific case for this intriguing phenomenon. Read More ›

How to Destroy Love with Darwinism

On today’s ID the Future, host Andrew McDiarmid presents an Evolution News essay, “How to Destroy Love with Darwinism.” Altruism as defined by evolutionists means “behavior by an animal that may be to its disadvantage but that benefits others of its kind.” It’s not an easy fit with Darwinism, since Darwinian evolution is all about passing your favored genes onto your offspring. How can a creature do that if she gives her life for another, particularly when it’s not even her own children, and before she has produced any offspring? Such individuals fail to pass on their own genes — a seeming conundrum for Darwinism. Evolutionists have made some progress (they think) explaining such things with theories of group selection or kin selection. But those explanations face some fresh challenges and don’t even begin to explain self-sacrificial acts done for non-kin, a behavior we see among humans. From a design perspective, though, such behaviors are not baffling, for they are not genetically determined acts, as if humans are only wet robots governed by genes. They are acts of true self-sacrificial love, done freely and made possible because reality is more than matter and energy, and humans are more than just DNA survival machines.