Intelligent Design the Future

Left to their own devices, the natural result of physics and chemistry is death, not life. So how are we still breathing? On this ID The Future, host Eric Anderson concludes his conversation with physician Howard Glicksman about some of the remarkable engineering challenges that have to be solved to produce and maintain living organisms such as ourselves. Glicksman is co-author with systems engineer Steve Laufmann of the recent book Your Designed Body, an exploration of the extraordinary system of systems that encompasses thousands of ingenious and interdependent engineering solutions to keep us alive and ticking. In the “just so” stories of the Darwinian narrative, these engineering solutions simply evolved. They emerged and got conserved. Voila! But it takes more than the laws of nature to keep us from dying.

In Part 1, Glicksman discussed how two laws of nature - diffusion and osmosis - must be innovated by living systems to avoid cell death. In this episode, Glicksman provides another example: how we regulate the flow of water and blood through our bodies without the excess leakage or shrinkage that can lead to cell death. The protein albumin is crucial. Along with helping to transport minerals and hormones, albumin vitally maintains blood volume by regulating the water flow in and out of the capillaries. How does our liver know how to make albumin, or how much of it to make? Can a gradual Darwinian process be credited with these essential innovations? Or do they bear hallmarks of design? Listen in as Dr. Glicksman explains this remarkable system, just one of many engineering feats our bodies perform every day to keep us alive.

On this episode of ID the Future, host Andrew McDiarmid continues his series with Nancy Pearcey discussing the arguments of her 2018 article "You Guys Lost! Is Design a Closed Issue?". Here, Pearcey explains what historians know, but few of the rest of us do: If anything, Charles Darwin’s science grew out of his naturalistic philosophy, not the other way around. "He started with a philosophical conviction," says Pearcey, "and then started looking for a theory to validate it." Pearcey also discusses one of Darwin's fiercest defenders, his “bulldog” T.H. Huxley, who liked Darwinism more for its philosophy than its science. And even Darwin admitted the evidence wasn’t all it could or should be. A closer examination of Darwin's ideas, and his frank and honest acknowledgements about his own theory, shows he wasn't nearly as dogmatic as many of his followers. This is an important thing to remember as we continue to evaluate the legacy of Darwin's arguments today.

Scientists agree that our universe is finely tuned for the existence of life. But is the fine-tuning a happy accident or the result of foresight? On this ID The Future, host Brian Miller continues his conversation with Rabbi Elie Feder and Rabbi Aaron Zimmer, hosts of the Physics to God podcast. Feder has a PhD in mathematics and has published articles on graph theory. Zimmer has training in physics, and has studied mathematics, philosophy, and psychology. Both men also have extensive rabbinical training. Through their podcast, Feder and Zimmer invite both secular and religious listeners on a journey through modern physics as they offer rational arguments for an intelligent cause of the universe.

In the conclusion to their discussion, Feder and Zimmer explain why the cosmological constant is one of their favorite examples of fine-tuning. They also share the importance of exploring the teleological causes, or purposes, of natural phenomena. To help listeners grasp the difference between efficient causes and teleological causes, they give the example of a carpenter who builds a table. Is the carpenter the cause of the existence of the table? Or is the idea of the table in the carpenter's mind the cause? Or both? Using modern physics, say Feder and Zimmer, an objective justification for the purpose of the universe can be made. Enjoy this provocative and illuminating discussion! Don't miss Part 1 of the conversation, available here: https://idthefuture.com/1787/

Do you recognize the number 1/137.035999206? It might seem arbitrary, but if the fine structure constant were any higher or lower than it is, you might not exist! On this episode of ID The Future, host Brian Miller kicks off an engaging conversation with Rabbi Elie Feder and Rabbi Aaron Zimmer, hosts of the Physics to God podcast. Feder has a PhD in mathematics and has published articles on graph theory. Zimmer has training in physics, and has studied mathematics, philosophy, and psychology. Both men also have extensive rabbinical training. Through their podcast, Feder and Zimmer invite both secular and religious listeners on a journey through modern physics as they offer rational arguments for an intelligent cause of the universe. In Part 1 of a two-part discussion, Feder and Zimmer share their background and the inspiration for their podcast. They also explain their focus on the constants of physics - specific numbers and values built into the laws of nature that are the same everywhere. What do these numbers mean? How are they measured? Why are they important? Do they hint at design, or are they "magic numbers that come to us with no understanding," as noted physicist Richard Feynman put it? A physicist himself, Miller is the perfect host to unpack the efforts of Feder and Zimmer. It's time to get more intimately acquainted with the strange and wonderful numbers that hold our universe together!

Is the Cosmos one big happy accident? Are science and religion mortal enemies? On this episode of ID the Future from the vault, Casey Luskin talks with Discovery Institute Senior Fellow Jay Richards about distortions and outright falsehoods presented in the 2014 reboot of the Cosmos TV series. Dr. Richards discusses how Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey presents science and religion as enemies by misrepresenting the lives of key figures in the history of modern science. "If you're going to tell that story of the warfare between Christianity and science, you absolutely have to have a martyr," says Richards. Both Copernicus and Galileo died peacefully, so the show spends an unusual amount of time animating the story of Dominican friar and mystic Giordano Bruno and his persecution by the Catholic Church. The problem? Bruno isn't a central character in the story of modern science, and he was executed for alleged theological crimes, not scientific ones. Richards goes on to discuss the show's misrepresentation of scientific giant Isaac Newton and even of the monotheistic ideas of the ancient Chinese philosopher Mozi. "What you get is the sense that religion and Christianity were either an enemy of science or at best they were incidental beliefs to early modern science that made no difference to scientific discovery. It's just not true."

On this ID The Future, we're pleased to share Daily Wire host Andrew Klavan's recent interview with Dr. Casey Luskin. Klavan loves science, but he smells a rat when famous scientists like Richard Dawkins use their displaced authority to make proclamations about science's relationship with religion. So after reading Luskin's recent Daily Wire article about progressives and their long history of banning intelligent design from the classroom, Klavan invited Luskin on his show to help his viewers better understand the theory of intelligent design and the reality of the evolutionary paradigm.

Luskin starts with the meanings of evolution and the questions that guide intelligent design researchers. He cites plenty of examples of design from biology and cosmology. Klavan then asks how badly people get censored for considering design perspectives in their work. Luskin explains, using the case of physicist Eric Hedin and his treatment at Ball State University as an example. Luskin rounds out the conversation by explaining how intelligent design uses the scientific method to detect the hallmarks of design in both living systems and the universe at large. "Science never gives us, under any conditions, absolute certainty," Luskin notes. "What it can allow us to do, though, is we can use the methods of historical sciences to infer the best explanation for a given situation given what we know about how the world works."

When left to their own devices, the laws of nature tend toward death, not life. So what does it take for life to exist? On this ID The Future, host Eric Anderson talks with physician Howard Glicksman about some of the remarkable engineering challenges that have to be solved to produce and maintain living organisms such as ourselves. Glicksman is co-author with systems engineer Steve Laufmann of the recent book Your Designed Body, an exploration of the extraordinary system of systems that encompasses thousands of ingenious and interdependent engineering solutions to keep us alive and ticking. In the "just so" stories of the Darwinian narrative, these engineering solutions simply evolved. They emerged and got conserved. Voila! But in this chat, Anderson and Glicksman explain that it takes more than the laws of nature to keep us from dying. "Chemicals on their own don't have any desire or tendency to turn into living organisms," says Anderson. "They tend to degrade, they tend to break down, they tend to go back to their basic constituents." Glicksman and Anderson discuss examples, including how the human body handles friction, heat transfer, and the crucial task of maintaining chemical balance at the cellular level. And where does all this essential innovation come from? Glicksman points to an intelligent cause that transcends matter and energy.

On this classic episode of ID the Future, host Eric Metaxas continues his conversation with biologist and professor Dr. Douglas Axe. The subject is Axe’s book Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life is Designed and his account of how he lost his position at a Cambridge research lab because of the implications of his research findings. Axe discusses the polarized atmosphere in science today, driven by an unreasonable commitment to materialism. He describes the prevailing attitude this way: "Either you're with us and on board on these issues or you are anti-science. That is a very unhelpful position for scientists to be taking." Axe also talks about the reliability of our built-in design intuition and the implications of living in a designed universe. Metaxas notes that though many adopt a Darwinian narrative of life, few are prepared to follow the logic of an accidental cosmos all the way. This is Part 2 of a two-episode interview. Listen to Part 1 here: https://idthefuture.com/1780/

Have scientists made life in a laboratory? Two-thirds of the public think the answer is yes. What do you think? This episode of ID The Future is the third installment in a series of four conversations between philosopher of science Dr. Stephen Meyer, author of Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, and Dr. James Tour, a world-leading synthetic organic chemist at Rice University. Dr. Tour has recently been engaged in a series of back-and-forth responses to attacks on his work from YouTube science communicator Dave Farina. This has given Tour a new opportunity to critique experts in the field of abiogenesis and allows an interested public to better evaluate both sides of the argument.

In Part 3, Meyer and Tour continue their critique of the claims of chemist Lee Cronin, including his experiments on the formose reaction, autocatalysis, his attempts to conjure up lipids in oil, and more. Along the way, Tour explains how he got into the debate in the first place, providing some background on his interactions with Farina and how it led him to call out experts in the field. Tour and Meyer are careful to remind us just what life is and what it takes to build it. And on several occasions, you’ll enjoy Meyer’s insight into the big picture. These simulation experiments, says Meyer “are actually showing the difficulty of making life-relevant molecules…via an undirected process.” In other words, origin of life researchers are doing sophisticated chemistry with multi-million dollar equipment that can only be done in a modern lab! In the process, they’re showing us just how implausible chemical evolutionary theories actually are.

This is Part 3 of a 4-part series. Watch the video versions of these conversations at Dr. Meyer's YouTube Channel: @DrStephenMeyer

On this ID The Future, Liberty McArtor, host of the Know Why Podcast, interviews Jonathan Witt on the compatibility of science and faith, both past and present. Witt is Executive Editor at Discovery Institute Press, as well as a Senior Fellow and Senior Project Manager with Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture. His latest book, co-written with Finnish bio-engineer Matti Leisola, is Heretic: One Scientist's Journey from Darwin to Design. In his conversation with McArtor, Witt describes the unique time and place that helped inspire the rise of modern science. "They had the Judeo-Christian worldview," Witt notes, "and that fired the imaginations and ordered the reasoning of those that gave birth to the scientific revolution." Witt also reviews some of the abundant scientific discoveries of the last century that are causing even committed materialists to question or reject the neo-Darwinian explanation. The all-too-common assertion that science and faith are at odds with one another is outdated. Listen in to understand just a few of the reasons why! With thanks to Liberty McArtor and the Know Why Podcast for permission to cross-post this interview.