Stephen C. Meyer Philosopher of Science
Author

Editor

Has Craig Venter Produced Artificial Life?

Click here to listen. This episode of ID the Future features an excerpt from an interview on the Albert Mohler program featuring CSC Director Stephen Meyer, author of the recent book, Signature in the Cell. Was there intelligent design in the recent experiments on artificial life? Listen in as Meyer discusses the science behind the latest headlines.

Ayala: “For the record, I read Signature in the Cell”

At Evolution News & Views Jay Richards weighs in on whether Francisco Ayala read and understood Signature in the Cell: Over at BioLogos, Professor Francisco Ayala has responded to Signature of Controversy—the collection of responses to criticisms of Signature in the Cell. As with the previous Ayala response at BioLogos, this one includes an introduction by Darrell Falk.  The burden of Ayala’s response is to wax indignant that some of us have suggested, based on his original “response” to Signature in the Cell, that he had not actually read the book. Why would we suggest that? Well, because he so profoundly misrepresented Meyer’s thesis.  Here’s what he said: “The keystone argument of Signature [sic] of the Cell is that chance, by itself, cannot account for the genetic information found in the Read More ›

Which Steve said “design is an excellent and irrefutable explanation”?

Q: Which Steve said design is an excellent and irrefutable explanation? Hint: He didn’t write Signature in the Cell. This incredible interaction came at last Friday night’s presentation of Signature in the Cell by Stephen Meyer at Biola University in front of 1,400 attendees and hundreds more watching the event streamed live on the internet. In a panel discussion after his lecture, Meyer met two of his critics head-on, one of whom essentially conceded that intelligent design is a better explanation than an unguided process like Darwinian evolution. You can view a video of the Q&A and Debate here. The critics were Steve Matheson, a theistic evolutionist from Calvin College, and Arthur Hunt, a Darwinist and biologist from the University of Kentucky. Both have written critically of SITC and intelligent design and Read More ›

Stephen Meyer Presents Signature in the Cell at Free Event in Southern California

Readers in Southern California should take note: Dr. Stephen Meyer is going to present his groundbreaking work, Signature in the Cell, at a free event at Biola University in less than two weeks. This is the same book which garnered accolades (Times Literary Supplement and “Daniel of the Year“) and earned the ire of Meyer’s critics, some of whom will be on a panel responding to him at this event. Dr. Meyer has presented at Heritage Foundation, the Seattle Art Museum, at Mackenzie Presbyterian University in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and various other spots stateside — but this is his first time presenting SITC in SoCal. The details are below: May 14, 2010 Signature in the Cell Event hosted by Biola UniversityTime: 7 – 10 Read More ›

Stephen Meyer in Brazil to Speak at Mackenzie University Intelligent Design Conference

Stephen Meyer is in Brazil this week at the “Intelligent Design: Science and Religion” conference at Mackenzie University in Sao Paolo, one of Brazil’s oldest and most prestigious universities. He speaks tonight at 8:00PM, and tomorrow night as well, about Signature in The Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, which soon will be published in Brazil in Portuguese. Also in attendance is University of Idaho biologist Scott Minnich, who will be speaking tomorrow morning at 10:30AM about “Irreducible Complexity and the Bacterial Flagellar Motor: Assessment of Recent Controversies”. On Wednesday at 10:30AM Minnich will be speaking about “Evolution and Pathogenesis: New Insights into one of Darwin’s Dilemmas.” On Wednesday night there will be a panel discussion at 7:30PM on the topic of “Intelligent Design: Read More ›

Stephen C. Meyer changes the game in the intelligent design fight with Signature in the Cell

A new review of Signature in the Cell is just out in The Journal of the International Society of Philosophical Enquiry. It brings to the forefront of the overall debate the perspective of a software engineer and logician. Specifically, Harry Kanigel, former executive director, Information Technology at UBS Investment Bank, whose expertise is in computer algorithms. So he knows a thing or two about digital information. His reviews starts strong:  Stephen C. Meyer changes the game in the intelligent design fight with Signature in the Cell, a big book that methodically, but agreeably, constructs an argument that intelligence in some unspecified form, is responsidble for the bio-molecular machinery in the cell and, therefore, for first life. Meyer’s argument is, at its heart, logical and statistical Read More ›

8 PCR Tubes.jpg
A researcher put a strip of 8 PCR tubes on the thermal cycler for DNA amplification
Photo by HYUNGKEUN on Adobe Stock

Stephen Meyer Responds to Stephen Fletcher’s Attack Letter in the Times Literary Supplement

Ever since Thomas Nagel selected Signature in the Cell as one of 2009’s best books, the Times Literary Supplement has had a vigorous back and forth in its letters section. The last salvo published was by Loughborough University chemistry professor Stephen Fletcher. The response below was submitted by Stephen Meyer to TLS, but they opted not to publish it. To the EditorThe Times Literary Supplement Sir — I see that the Professor Stephen Fletcher has written yet another letter (TLS Letters, 3 February, 2010) attempting to refute the thesis of my book Signature in the Cell. This time he cites two recent experiments in an attempt to show the plausibility of the RNA world hypothesis as an explanation for the origin of the first life. Read More ›

Is Intelligent Design Bad Theology? A Response to Mark Vernon’s “Review” of Signature in the Cell

Over the years, ID proponents have spent much of their time developing the theoretical tools for inferring design and developing the empirical case for design in fields such as cosmology, astronomy, origin of life studies, and molecular biology. In contrast, many critics have spent their time attacking the supposed theology behind ID. In the last few weeks, The Guardian (in the UK) has been publishing responses to the following question: “Is Intelligent Design Bad Theology?” Philosophers Michael Ruse and Stephen Fuller have weighed in on the question. Recently, Mark Vernon responded to the question by “reviewing” Stephen Meyer’s book, Signature in the Cell. Based on his interpretation of Meyer’s argument, Vernon concludes that ID is “bad science, bad theology, and blasphemy.” That puts it strongly. Read More ›

On Not Reading Signature in the Cell: A Response to Francisco Ayala (Part 2)

[This is part 2 of Stephen Meyer’s response to Francisco Ayala’s critique of Signature in the Cell. Read part 1 here, or download the entire response as a PDF.] The closest that Ayala comes in his review to recognizing the central affirmative argument in the book is his rather clumsy attempt to refute the idea of intelligent design by insisting that existence of “nonsensical” or junk sequences in the human genome demonstrates that it did not arise by intelligent design. As he claims explicitly, “according to Meyer, ID provides a more satisfactory explanation of the human genome than evolution does.” Again, I have to wonder whether Professor Ayala even cracked the pages of the book. My book is not about the origin of the human genome, Read More ›

Listen in as Stephen Meyer Debates Peter Atkins on the U.K.’s Premier Radio

Premier Radio UK aired a debate recorded earlier this week between Signature in the Cell author Stephen Meyer and noted Oxford University chemist and “new atheist” Peter Atkins. The debate is part of the kick off of promotion for Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, which arrives in the UK on DVD this month.  Both Atkins and Meyer are accomplished scholars with very different viewpoints. The at times testy back and forth between them is as entertaining as it is enlightening.  Click here to listen to the debate, which is about an hour long.