Tracing the development of science over two millennia, the exhibition challenges a popular misconception about the relationship between the Bible and science.
Scientifically speaking, the Miller experiment was a non-starter. Then when the atmosphere they used was called into question, the icon was doubly dead.
This is a major advance for intelligent design. Congratulations to Dr. Meyer, to PragerU, and thank you to our supporters for making all that we do possible.
By enlarging his scope to include the origin of the universe, Meyer reveals why science confirms not merely a generic design in nature but a personal God.
DeepMind, the AI company that beat human Go gamers with AlphaGo, has made progress in solving the protein folding problem. But who deserves the credit?
Oparin is back. Some origin-of-life researchers are using his coacervate theory without giving him credit or realizing they are retreading dead-end ideas.
What atheists and materialists can’t explain is why this fitness is so special, so unforgivingly precise and intricate, at every stage on the journey to us.
By turning to physics and cosmology — the study of the universe and its origins — Meyer brings evidence not just for a designer but for a personal God.
Many have asked what or whom proponents of intelligent design nominate as the source of the purpose and design that courses through life and the weave of the whole cosmos.
If others have been hailed as the “father of intelligent design” (Michael Behe) or the “godfather” (Phillip Johnson), then Jon Buell was the “matchmaker.”
At a couple of points in episode 1, Neil deGrasse Tyson employs the “Book of Nature” metaphor, but he never gives its proper historical context. It’s actually a Christian concept.
This sort of behavior is not new. In 2004, the University of Helsinki (Finland) cancelled some scheduled talks by Discovery Institute fellows Paul Nelson and Richard Sternberg.
How does life emerge from that which is not alive? This mystery exercises a peculiar fascination, with the power to elicit remarkable feats of imagination.
Meyer in these 5 minutes does a superbly lucid job of explaining why scientists who doubt the standard evolutionary story are “appropriately skeptical.”
There’s an inviting coziness about this time of year, perfect for shutting the computer down, putting the accursed iPhone away, and retreating to the beauty of printed pages.
Watched by a million people this week, Meyer in these 5 minutes does a superbly lucid job of explaining why scientists who doubt the standard evolutionary story are “appropriately skeptical.”
Professor Gelernter, who survived a terror attack by the Unabomber that cost him a hand and an eye, warns that Darwinists will “destroy you” for criticizing their theory.
It’s a great, great privilege to work with brilliant scientists who do such an amazing job of explaining the science that lies behind the deepest questions men and women can ask themselves.
It’s interesting to consider why some super-smart folks I can think of remain intellectually closed to considering any of this, despite what you’d assume are their good reasons for doing so.
I knew Shapiro was in intellectual exploration mode on ID last month when he talked about Meyer’s Signature in the Cell in a segment on The Ben Shapiro Show.
Shapiro accepts the idea of evolution, but he also appreciates that intelligent design is ultimately a way of understanding evolution, the mechanism that drives it.
Some books continue to be read long after the hype of their release has passed. These books contain compelling ideas and stories that speak to our humanity and inspire us to seek out the truth.
Meyer is well known as a leading proponent of ID, the scientific alternative to theories of unguided evolution. He talks here about his exciting and important next book.
Wallace was the co-discoverer with Charles Darwin of the theory of evolution by natural selection. He later broke with Darwin over the question of teleology.
The problem is, none of these people cite papers or other writing by researchers on intelligent design, like the work done by Douglas Axe on protein evolution probabilities.
Recently I had the opportunity to hear Discovery Institute’s Stephen Meyer provide an update on the progress and current state of the theory of intelligent design.
Writing with Arthur Herman, he proposes a cheap and technologically very attainable alternative to waiting passively to see what comes of North Korea’s growing ICBM collection.
Criticism suggested that Nobel laureate Jack Szostak and others were fast closing in on a solution to the origin-of-life problem with the “principle of RNA self-replication."
Recently, atheist Michael Shermer debated Catholic philosopher Edward Feser. The subject was Feser’s new book on five arguments for the existence of God.
Education functions best when we focus not on soliciting student agreement or buy-in to a rigid creed, but rather on stimulating the critical faculties.
The authors argue that RNA molecules appeared in warm little ponds more than 4.17 billion years ago, transported by “meteorites and interplanetary dust particles."
The only real motivation for holding to MN is to keep the bad guys at bay, as an all-purpose "Press Button in Case of Emergency" defeater for ideas like intelligent design.
In a "sneak preview," Meyer said his next book would be about the Cambrian explosion -- the geologically sudden appearance of most of the major animal forms and body designs.
Stephen Meyer discussed why we are still debating Darwin at a "Socrates in the City" event hosted by Eric Metaxas at the University Club in Washington, D.C.
At the Darwin-defending group blog Panda's Thumb, Nick Matzke and his friends are enjoying a discussion of the Coppedge trial even as they admit that they know hardly anything about the facts.
If the religious beliefs of ID proponents disqualify them from rational dialogue in the scientific arena, surely Saunders's atheism and anti-religious biases disqualify him.
In a Fox News interview this morning, David Coppedge and his attorney, William J. Becker Jr., explained the suspicious circumstances surrounding Coppedge’s firing from Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL) last year.
Much of current origin-of-life research suffers from a myopia where researchers hone in on solving a particular problem without contextualizing their solution.
Among Darwinist bloggers, Jack Scanlan holds the distinction of having registered the longest-standing series of empty threats to read/review/debunk Signature in the Cell.
