Is This the Discovery Institute’s Greatest Podcast?

This one at the Discovery Institute’s creationist blog is brief, but it’s also beyond description. Their title is Tour to Meyer: Make Your Best Case for the Theory of Intelligent Design, and it has no author’s by-line.

We’ll give you some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this] — but first we’ll remind you who “Tour” and “Meyer” are.

Tour is one of the courageous signers of the Discovery Institute’s Scientific Dissent From Darwinism, which we described here. This is his writeup at Wikipedia: James Tour.

A few years ago at the Jack Chick newsletter we found: World-Famous Chemist Says Peers Hide from Explaining Evolution! Yes, that’s right — the Jack Chick organization praised Tour. And that’s not all. Three years ago we wrote Discovery Institute Praises James Tour. Creationists love the guy, so it’s not surprising to find Tour featured in another Discoveroid blog post.

As for Meyer, here’s his write-up in Wikipedia: Stephen Meyer. His Discoveroid job description has changed over the years, but as their bio page indicates, he’s one of their senior fellows and currently the Program Director of their Center for Science and Culture — that’s their creationism shop. It should not be forgotten that Meyer was a central figure in the infamous Sternberg peer review controversy. According to the Discoveroids’ 2016 Tax Return, Meyer’s salary was $250K.

Okay, now that you’re oriented, let’s dive into the Discoveroids’ post.

On a new episode of ID the Future [Ooooooooooooh! A Discoveroid podcast!], Rice University chemist James Tour and Discovery Institute philosopher of science Stephen Meyer continue their conversation about the origin of life and intelligent design.

Try to imagine what a profound discussion that must be. Then try to grasp that stuff like that happens all the time at Discoveroid headquarters. It sounds heavenly! But let’s not get sidetracked. The Discoveroids then say:

They assess an exchange about the former [the origin of life] between physicists Brian Miller and Jeremy England, and Tour notes his hesitance about ID.

Who are Miller and England? Brian Miller’s name doesn’t come up very often around here. He isn’t a Discoveroid “fellow,” but their bio page for him says:

Dr. Brian Miller is Research Coordinator for the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute. He holds a B.S. in physics with a minor in engineering from MIT and a Ph.D. in physics from Duke University. He speaks internationally on the topics of intelligent design and the impact of worldviews on society.

We wrote about Jeremy England only once before. It was six years ago — see Dr Jeremy England: Life Is Inevitable. Also, here’s his Wikipedia writeup: Jeremy England and his page at MIT. He doesn’t seem to be a creationist.

Okay, let’s get back to the Discoveroids. Their post continues:

Professor Tour asks Dr. Meyer to make his best case for the theory of intelligent design. Download the podcast or listen to it here. [Link omitted.]

Wowie — Meyer’s “best case” for intelligent design! That ought to be a great podcast! The Discoveroid post ends with this:

The episode is excerpted from a longer interview Dr. Tour conducted with Dr. Meyer as part of his excellent new video series, The Science & Faith Podcast: Follow the Evidence. [Link omitted.]

Okay, dear reader. You’ve got a lot of videos to look at. Go ahead and look at them — if you’ve got nothing better to do. Then let us know what we’re missing.

Copyright © 2020. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

19 responses to “Is This the Discovery Institute’s Greatest Podcast?

  1. Michael Fugate

    In a parody on Star Trek – you know God was watching – we can imagine God interviewing Stephen Meyer as Meyer makes his best case for ID…

    I’m a god, not an engineer.
    I’m a god, not a mechanic.
    I’m a god, not a bricklayer.
    I’m not a magician, Meyer, just an old tribal god.

  2. Michael Fugate

    Guess who is behind Trump’s attack on diversity training and his denial of systemic racism – Christopher Rufo of the Discovery Institute. While the DI is busy calling Darwin a racist, its minions are quietly undermining any attempt of the US to account for its racist past and continued inequities based on race. Why am I not surprised.

  3. Is there a description of what Intelligent Design is?

  4. So, I took the bullet and “watched” Tour’s tour sans force. For DAYS after YouTube “suggested” Tour videos on my feed. OMG, he has so many! I’m still unfriending them. What a pest!

  5. “his best case for the theory of intelligent design”
    I must admit that this spartks my interest, but not nearly enough to listen for 16+ minutes to an IDiot podcast. Perhaps TomS has more stamina than me when looking for an answer to his question.
    I imagine that the competition must be tough – not because there are so many candidates, but because of their abysmal quality.

  6. @FrankB
    I am not up to the task.

  7. After going through a bunch of introductory material, the speaker said that he was not going to talk about God or intelligent designer. And introduced the topic of the origin of life. The living cell is so complicated.
    At that point, I saw no point in going on.

  8. Michael Fugate

    That’s a powerful argument
    X is complicated
    Complicated things are designed
    X is designed

  9. Meyer has pulled the same stunt several times before, nay, every time before. Of course, WE know why. There is no “theory” of intelligent design creationism. These videos are like the click bait sites that proclaim “The Real Reason Mary Ann Left Gilligan’s Island!” and 50 pages of ads later you’re no closer to an answer.

    I find it curious that the great and powerful self-proclaimed brilliant chemist, Tour, debases himself with this rubbish. Poor guy is befuddled by the theory of evolution, flummoxed by biochemistry and flim-flammed by the con artistry of ID creationism. Guy needs to get a life.

  10. Michael Fugate

    What do you expect when he believes Adam and Eve were real people created by a god in the Garden of Eden?

  11. If there is no way that life can arise by natural means, doesn’t that mean that
    there is no point to the fine-tuning of the fundamental parameters of physics?
    If there is no way that life can arise by natural means, what is the point of making life complicated?

  12. It is difficult for me to understand why so many clever people – and there are some obviously clever believers in Intrlligent Design – over all of those years that have been devoted to ID, that none of them have questioned what it is that they are promoting.

  13. Michael Fugate

    First off one must believe in an agent god – this is I think a fundamental division among humans. Next one must be an essentialist (variation as anomaly), a traditionalist (disdain novelty) , a deductivist (lack imagination), and an authoritarian.

    We can see all of these things in the movement’s core supporters plus the anarchists like Klinghoffer, Berlinski, and Fuller who just like to get a rise out of people.

  14. @TomS asks for the well known way: “doesn’t that mean that
    there is no point”
    Has there ever been a point to IDiocy, besides “evilution is wrong, somehow” and “goddidid”? Compare MichaelF’s “powerful argument” just above.

    @MichaelF: “plus the anarchists like”
    Now you insult me – if they are anarchists I’m a trumpist.

  15. Michael Fugate

    They want intellectual anarchy – so that anything counts as knowledge. It is the two model approach. Trump thrives on the chaos created by his lies; people get flustered that anyone could say such things, but it undermines any opposition. No one knows what he will say or do. The point is not to believe in anything.

  16. “so that anything counts as knowledge”
    That still is trumpism, not anarchism, which explicitly not means “anything counts”. Let me quote Noam Chomsky:

    “authority, unless justified, is inherently illegitimate and that the burden of proof is on those in authority. If this burden can’t be met, the authority in question should be dismantled.”
    Like the Discotute. Because IDiots never justify (their authority regarding) their claims, totally unlike scientists.
    In fact the human enterprise called science is completely anarchistic. Scientists always need to justify their conclusions.
    Also let me remind you that one of the most famous anarchists in history, Pjotr Kropotkin, was one of the most important contributors to evolution theory. I’d say his was the most important directly after Darwin’s and Mendel’s.

    Anarchism has even less to do with creacrap than Darwin with nazism.

  17. Michael Fugate

    as with all words meanings vary…

  18. @FrankB
    I once had a friend tell me that scientists think that nothing can go
    faster than light because Einstein said so.
    It didn’t occur to him that it’s the other way around: Einstein is famous because of the evidence for what he said.