On this ID the Future, Michael Behe responds to the attacks on … his mousetrap. Behe used the common mousetrap to illustrate the idea of irreducible complexity, showing how various mechanical contrivances need all of their main parts to function, and to show how irreducible complexity poses a major challenge to Darwinism’s idea of gradual, step-by-step evolution of some biological machines. Most of the attacks on Behe’s argument have focused on the irreducibly complex biological systems he spotlighted, such as the outboard motor known as the bacterial flagellum. But some of his critics fixated on the mousetrap itself, and argued that the mousetrap wasn’t actually irreducibly complex. Behe rebuts these counterarguments and explains why he’s convinced they fail. The discussion is just a brief sampling of the deeper dive Behe takes in his newest book, A Mousetrap for Darwin.
On this episode of ID The Future CSC's Robert Crowther examines whether intelligent design is an impediment to scientific progress, and says the answer...
On this episode of ID the Future, host David Boze interviews Casey Luskin about the controversy surrounding the passage of Tennessee's Senate Bill 893....
On this episode of ID the Future, Discovery Institute fellow Paul Nelson interviews Rabbi Moshe Averick on the new atheists' search for meaning in...