Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Podcasts in the intelligent design controversy

arroba Email

Listen to these, and don’t have a fight with someone on your cell phone while driving:


Moving the Goalpost: How Darwin’s Theory Survives

It’s easy to win the game when you can move the goalpost.

On this episode of ID the Future, biologist and Discovery Institute Senior Fellow Jonathan Wells explains how Darwinism, unlike football, has only one rule: survival of the fittest. The fittest are those who survive, and Darwinists are determined to survive at all costs—even if it means moving the goalpost.

Go here to listen.

(Note: This one is quite interesting because Wells talks about how his observation that a specific type of speciation needed by Darwinism has not been observed was recently distorted in a science mag to say that speciation – as such – has never been observed. This tells me that the commitment of many scientists to Darwinism is not to the idea of speciation as such, but to a broader philosophical commitment to a method by which it must happen, a method that supports broader philosophical ideas. Remember that 78% of evolutionary biologists are pure naturalists – no God and no free will.)


Is the Cell Like a Computer?

On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin interviews Dr. Donald Johnson, author of Probability’s Nature and Nature’s Probability: A Call to Scientific Integrity. As both a chemist and a computer scientist, Dr. Johnson explains how the cell uses programming code, much like a computer, and he elucidates how the information is processed and converted from proteins into DNA. Listen in as Dr. Johnson shares the science of how the cell is like a computer.

Donald E. Johnson holds PhDs in Computer & Information Sciences from the University of Minnesota and in Chemistry from Michigan State University. He can be reached at his website,ScienceIntegrity.net.

Go here to listen.

(Note: In two important ways, cells are not like computers.

When my machine is bust, it is just bust, and my local nerd must visit. If I need a new one, it must be bought and unpacked, and inevitably, I will need him back again as something is sure to go wrong. Millions of cells die every day and are replaced, with no loss of function. Fancy that, computer!)


Alfred Russel Wallace: Champion of Natural Selection or Intelligent Design?

On this episode of ID the Future, CSC’s Robert Crowther takes a look at Alfred Russel Wallace, who, along with Darwin, co-presented the theory of natural selection in letters to the Linnean Society of London over 150 years ago. Contrary to Darwin, Wallace actually believed that it was possible to detect design in nature. What would modern Darwin defenders make of Wallace today? Listen in and find out.

Go here to listen.

(Note: Actually, they have been doing a number on Wallace for centuries, as Mike Flannery points out. Go here or here for an example. Wallace, with thought design played a role in evolution, was just not as useful for propaganda purposes and was of a much lower social class than Darwin. Here is somewhat from my review of Flannery’s book.)


Deepening Darwin’s Dilemma With Jonathan Wells

This episode of ID the Future features biologist and Discovery Institute Senior Fellow Jonathan Wells, who explains why Darwin saw the Cambrian explosion as a serious argument against his theory. Darwin countered it by supposing that fossils of the ancestors of Cambrian animals once existed, but were destroyed.

Listen in and learn how the discovery of microscopic and soft-bodied Precambrian fossils makes Darwin’s excuse sound hollow.

Go here to listen.

(Note: It gets better. The Smithsonian sat on the Cambrian fossils for decades because they did not support Darwin’s theory. Yes, yes, that Smithsonian, currently alleged to have pressured California Science Center into cancelling a Cambrian film that – I gather – raises the Cambrian problem. [Almost all modern phyla of life forms appeared rather suddenly about 550 million years ago. This is just not the story Darwin was telling and he knew it and so did his supporters, and now so do more and more people.])

Any chance all those dusty drawers in the Smithsonian’s cellar will be seized as evidence? Maybe we could learn something, and not about the current functionaries’ e-mails.

Free advice to the public in general, not to anyone in particular: Do NOT feed bones to the shredder. Nor paper clips. Never feed anything but paper to the shredder, and feed paper with staples only if the firm warrants that the shredder will accept staples.]


“A Matter of Dismal Wet Plops”: Stephen Meyer Interviews David Berlinski on Darwinism

This episode of ID the Future features a clip from the recent “Signature in the Cell” event in Tampa, FL, featuring Stephen Meyer, Michael Medved, David Berlinski and Tom Woodward. Listen in as Dr. Meyer interviews Dr. Berlinski about the questions that led him to criticize Darwinism.

Go here to listen.

(Note: Besides being brilliant, Berlinski, a mathematician, is as funny as heck – not always a common combination. We are all familiar, I suppose, with the genius who doesn’t get a joke. Well, that’s not him, as the title of this pod suggests. I had a lot of fun reading his Devil’s Delusion, a shot at publicly funded nonsense in science, of which many people are getting royally tired. Science advisor to Marie Antoinette, check your e-mail.

Never forget: Most people fund science because they think it will help find cures for cancer or get one’s country a Nobel Prize in physics [and ain’t we proud!] or offer one’s kid a stable, respectable job wearing a lab coat. So take that away – make science mean folly about Stone Age Man, exposed e-mail plots, court cases about broken contracts, reasonable doubts subjected to inquisition and persecution – and what happens?

One thing that might very well happen is that people who used to just sigh and pay the bill might start thinking differently. As in … we’ve got the headache already, Now, where is the payload?)

Scot.David, you reached me here. People generally can always reach me at oleary@sympatico.ca My personal view is that cosmic Darwinism is dead, along with biological Darwinism, but too many people make their living fronting the nonsense for most responsible entities to actually look at the evidence. Anyone can feed that sort of "news" to a TV big-hair news presenter - their supposed evidence is "irrefutable." Of course it is irrefutable, because all serious means of refuting it are ruled out of order. In fact, you can be in the middle of a perfect storm of snow and yet hear the weather presenter gassing about "global warming." You wanna pay for all that? Pay for it then. I try to get out of it whenever and wherever I can. Global warming may well be happening, and radical speciation may well happen too - what we DON'T have is reasonable explanations. All we have is Chicken Little claiming that the sky is falling and Darwinists claiming that Darwin should be compared with Lincoln. Yeah, really. And that is the basis of the controversy. Note: ca = Canada, NOT California. Helpful to keep that in mind, re a mental map. Warning to no one in particular, and certainly not to Scot.David: I can be one mean granny when people abuse my In Box. O'Leary
Denyse, I wasn't sure how to get this to you, but I think I have found more irrefutable proof of ID, if you follow the link. It is a screen capture of the cosmic background, so perhaps it is more suitable for The Privaleged Planet, one of my favorite books. But I knew you would be interested, and plus, I can't count of Gonzalez to publish here while the news is hot. http://www.newscientist.com/embedded/dn18489-whats-hidden-in-the-cosmic-microwave-background Scot.David

Leave a Reply