Perhaps the most fundamental distinction between naturalism and intelligent design is where each metaphysical framework draws the line at irreducibility.
One can hardly appeal to natural selection to account for the origins of DNA replication without assuming the existence of the thing one seeks to explain.
The Center for Science and Culture is populating a community of dissenters in academia with the annual all-expenses-paid Summer Seminars on Intelligent Design.
Dr. Xavier rejects ID, but recommends an ID book to “everyone I can” because “it exposes a lot of the questions that people try to sweep under the carpet.”
Despite our many disagreements, I sincerely appreciate Lowder’s spirit and intellectual honesty. I hope the next generation of secular thinkers follow his lead.
Do note that some presentations will be livestreamed but others — including Dr. Meyer on “Intelligent Design as a Scientific Theory” — will be in-person only!
One sign of a robust scientific theory is the quality of its most prominent proponents. But serious advocates of Darwinism have become an endangered species.
For more than three hours, Rogan asked questions about the scientific argument for the reality of God, as well as Meyer’s reasons for believing the Bible.
Incidentally, a few days ago I received a message from my paleobiologist colleague Dr. Ken Towe, a retired senior scientist at the Smithsonian Institution.
Tracing the development of science over two millennia, the exhibition challenges a popular misconception about the relationship between the Bible and science.
You would have to be willfully blind, or just stay far away from our major city centers, to miss some of the more obvious signs of the spiritual crisis.
I saw on multiple occasions the impact the truth about design can make in individual lives. Recently at U.C. Berkeley, I spoke about the evidence for a Creator.
