Intelligent Design the Future

Curiosity can lead to unexpected adventures. For self-taught scientist Forrest Mims, it inspired a successful career in science and technology that continues to this day. On this classic ID The Future out of the vault, host Andrew McDiarmid reads an exclusive excerpt from Mims’s memoir Maverick Scientist: My Adventures as an Amateur Scientist.
Source

If a friend, family member, or colleague lodges an objection to the fine-tuning argument for intelligent design, are you ready to respond? On this installment of ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid concludes his two-part conversation with philosopher and intelligent design scholar Peter S. Williams. Williams reviews the most common objections to the fine-tuning arguments for intelligent design and explains why each proposal falls short scientifically, logically, and philosophically. Who knew there were over 20 objections to fine-tuning? Even host McDiarmid admits he didn't know about all of them! The more well-versed you are in responding to objections, the better you'll be able to stand your ground and offer substantive arguments when you hear them pop up.

In Part 1, Williams and McDiarmid reviewing two groups of objections: the "fine-tuning isn't real" set and the "fine-tuning is real but no big deal" group. Today, Williams unpacks several objections related to the multiverse and shows why each one fails to adequately explain the fine-tuning evidence.

This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation.
Source

By now, you may be familiar with the fine-tuning argument for intelligent design. Scientists have discovered a whole suite of parameters and initial conditions appear to be exquisitely tuned to allow for complex life to exist, and the argument is that intelligent design better explains that evidence than chance or necessity. But you may not know the most common objections to the fine-tuning argument, or how to respond to them. On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid welcomes philosopher and intelligent design scholar Peter S. Williams to the show to equip us to answer the most common objections to the fine-tuning argument. Objections to fine-tuning typically fall into three categories: the "fine-tuning isn't real" bunch, the "fine-tuning is no big deal" group, and objections that posit a type of multiverse proposal. Over two episodes, Peter teaches us how to respond to almost 20 objections! So buckle up!

This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation!
Source

Major General Bobby Hollingsworth had a distinguished 38-year career as a U.S. Marine fighter pilot and in leadership roles including commanding the Marine Corps Reserve Support Command and serving as vice commander of Marine forces in the Pacific. After retiring, he was appointed by President George W. Bush to lead the National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve.

In this full-length interview with Mind Matters News host Robert J. Marks, Hollingsworth shares his life journey from dairy farm to fighter pilot, his perspective on the current state of U.S. military preparedness and leadership, and his insight into the evolution of military technology throughout his career.
Source

Everywhere you turn, you’re likely to see evidence of error in thinking, and the realm of science is no exception. On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid concludes his conversation with J. Budziszewski, a professor of government, philosophy, and civic leadership at the University of Texas at Austin and author of the new book Pandemic of Lunacy: How to Think Clearly When Everyone Around You Seems Crazy. In his book, Budziszewski identifies thirty irrational ideas that are prevalent in modern society. He argues that many people have abandoned common sense and objectivity, leading to a cloud of confusion regarding human nature, science, and morality.

In Part 2, we jump into more lunacies relevant to the scientific debates around human beings, biological life, and design in nature.
Source