Diane Rehm on Evo/ID on NPR yesterday

[butswana]

I caught this yesterday afternoon. It was pretty good. That Baptist guy was truely living up to his name. He kept claiming that there were IDist scientists who didn't believe in god.
http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/05/08/04.php
(oops. might help if I put the link in there.)

[Dorje]

It was a good show, thanks for the link! :thumbs:

During the entire show, the baptist kept proselytizing for the DI. "Go to discovery.org...go to discovery.org..."

[Cross_]

Sat in my car in order to listen to that show for a while. The results were predictable with that Baptist guy not really knowing his stuff. However, my complaint is:
why have a debate about Intelligent Design in the first place ?

Any rational person can easily see that ID is a scam, and the rest of the population will hear & fall for "whatever the pastor says". It seems like the only people gaining from ID debates are creationists who get their mantra (or in this case website) out there.

[N.Wells]

I was disappointed. Mastzke only got to talk about recent ID advances in public education. Land (the ID guy) kept talking, without being properly challenged, about all the mathematicians and physicists supporting ID, including probability calculations by "SIR Fred Hoyle" (as if "sir" made him an infallible authority). The obvious response was that Hoyle knows so little biology that he answered the wrong question. Fine, so he showed that the first cell didn't come about by chance assembly - nobody ever claimed that it did. The assumption is that it came about according to laws of physics and chemistry. Moreover, he must have been staggeringly incompetent in probability in order to mistake one-shot independent combinations for stepwise selection and recombination. Hoyle is the poster child for why non-biologists shouldn't be relied on when they start to pontificate about biology.