Ben Wattenberg moderates this matchup with Darwinist Michael Ruse, who was also featured in the movie Expelled. This debate gets into the philosophical implications of design and Darwinism and the distinctions between the scientific evidence and the implications for both theories.
Here’s a spot-on reply to UK geneticist Robert Saunders’s recent review of Dr. Meyer’s Signature in the Cell. Averick is particularly good at pointing out the faith, presuppositions and ideological blinders that constrain Saunders’s view, even if the scientist doesn’t seem to recognize it: [Saunders] is, in effect, admitting that Science has no explanation for the origin of life and the huge amounts of information necessary for life to exist, but asks us to have faith that Science will yet discover a purely naturalistic answer to the question. Here Saunders makes it clear that he has shut off his mind from even considering the possibility of Intelligent Design, which is, of course, a theory that is proposed to explain the Read More ›
In November 2011, Dr. Meyer addressed a distinguished group of leading British political, cultural, and intellectual leaders at the Royal Horseguards Hotel, No. 1 Whitehall, London, England. In attendance were several members of the House of Lords, university vice chancellors, and many journalists, politicians, philosophers and scientists. He was giving the inaugural annual lecture of the Centre for Intelligent Design (UK). The event was hosted by former Lord Chancellor Lord McKay of Clashfern. The complete video of Dr. Meyer’s talk, including an important Q&A discussion on what constitutes science, is now available on YouTube. Also available: coverage of the event here and here on Evolution News & Views and at the website for the Centre for Intelligent Design UK.
While my book presents intelligent design as an alternative to chemical evolutionary theory, Venema critiques it as if it had presented a critique of neo-Darwinism — i.e., biological evolutionary theory.
Read More ›
Playing God? A biologist in California has summoned headlines around the world, some distressed and some celebratory, by supposedly doing in reality what Dr. Frankenstein did in fiction: giving life to lifeless matter. The Vatican worries that, by swapping artificial DNA for the real thing in a simple bacterial cell, Dr. Craig Venter is “playing God.” But most voices from the media welcome his success. Bioethicist Arthur Caplan applauds the end of the myth that life is “sacred, special, ineffable.” According to Caplan, Venter has shown that life can be readily produced from its material parts, thus refuting “the argument that life requires a special force or power to exist.” Others have called Venter’s achievement “a complete victory for materialism,” predicting that many atheists Read More ›
Dr. Francisco Ayala, former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, reviewed (or merely commented on at length, without reading?) Signature in the Cell for The Biologos Foundation’s blog, “Science & the Sacred.” Below is Dr. Meyer’s response. No doubt it happens all the time. There must be many book reviews written by reviewers who have scarcely cracked the pages of the books they purport to review. But those who decide to write such blind reviews typically make at least some effort to acquire information about the book in question so they can describe its content accurately — if, for no other reason, than to avoid embarrassing themselves. Unfortunately, in his review of my book Signature in the Read More ›