Intelligent Design the Future

Bugs. Some of them we enjoy more than others! But there’s no denying they’re a part of life. And though they’re small, they’re examples of big engineering and design. Today, host Andrew McDiarmid welcomes Discovery Institute staffer Kate Kavanaugh to discuss ID Education Days, whole-day experiences hosted by the Center for Science and Culture and geared specifically for middle and high school students in home or private school settings. Lately, the theme of these events has focused on the creepy crawly complexity found within the world of insects and invertebrates. Far from being mere nuisances, these creatures function as tiny engineers that elegantly solve complex problems to sustain global ecosystems. Kavanaugh highlights insights from recent ID Education Day events and explains the importance of studying even tiny examples of intelligent design in nature. Source

Today’s ID the Future out of our archive spotlights the book The Toxic War on Masculinity, by author and scholar Nancy Pearcey, professor and scholar in residence at Houston Christian University. In her conversation with host Andrew McDiarmid, Pearcey argues against the current fashion of seeing masculinity as inherently toxic. She traces the tendency back to Darwinism and explains how the industrial revolution, working hand in glove with secularism, fueled toxic masculinity at the expense of virtuous masculinity. Source

Was the modern intelligent design (ID) movement "over after Dover," as many ID critics hoped it would be? Quite the opposite. In the last two decades ID has flourished as a scientific research program and continues to gain momentum in both academia and the public square. On today's ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid concludes his conversation with geologist, legal scholar, and Dover trial expert Dr. Casey Luskin. In this segment, marking the 20th anniversary of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial of 2005, the pair examine the outcome of the Dover trial, in which a judge ruled that intelligent design was a religious viewpoint, not science, and therefore unconstitutional to teach in public schools. Luskin explains why the Dover ruling was highly flawed and unreliable and how it misrepresented the definition of science and the arguments of ID proponents. Luskin also reveals how the ID movement has flourished in the twenty years since Dover. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Source

Over After Dover. That was the hopeful mantra of many critics of intelligent design (ID) after the Kitzmiller vs. Dover trial in 2005. They were hoping a federal judge could issue a decree from on high that would stop the ID movement cold in its tracks and neo-Darwinism could go back to being unquestioned, unchallenged orthodoxy. But was it over after Dover? Not even close. On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid marks the 20th anniversary of the Dover trial by beginning a two-part conversation with geologist, legal scholar, and Dover trial expert Dr. Casey Luskin. Luskin takes us back to 2005 to give us his unique perspective on the events that led to the Dover trial, his own personal experiences of the case, and the position the Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture held on the issues at stake. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Source

Are we responsible for our choices? What can the laws of nature teach us about morality? On this classic episode of ID The Future from the archive, host Andrew McDiarmid welcomes back Dr. Eric Hedin, Professor Emeritus of Physics and Astronomy at Ball State University, to conclude a discussion about his two recent articles on suffering, free will, and morality in a designed world. Some scientists continue to argue that human free will is an illusion and that we have no more control over our choices than the decision to breathe. But this idea, known as determinism, flies in the face of our human experience. Dr. Hedin explains that far from being slaves to external forces, humans have a great latitude of freedom in the universe. In other words, the ball is in our court. This is Part 2 of a two-part discussion. Source