Evolution and the Experts - Douglas Axe at Dallas Science Faith Conference 2020
Вставка
- Опубліковано 31 бер 2020
- The controversy about Darwinian evolution is often framed as a matter of credentials. We must listen to the “experts”! In a presentation at the 2020 Dallas Conference on Science & Faith, molecular biologist Douglas Axe explains that “expertise does not necessarily drive you in the right direction.” Sometimes it does the exact opposite. How could that be? Watch now and find out. Evolution and the “Experts”: Douglas Axe at 2020 Dallas Conference on Science & Faith
Watch all the 2020 Dallas Conference on Science & Faith videos here: • 2020 Dallas Conference...
Find more related videos below.
Douglas Axe is the Maxwell Professor of Molecular Biology at Biola University, the founding Director of Biologic Institute, the founding Editor of BIO-Complexity, and the author of Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life Is Designed. After completing his PhD at Caltech, he held postdoctoral and research scientist positions at the University of Cambridge and the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre. His research, which examines the functional and structural constraints on the evolution of proteins and protein systems, has been featured in many scientific journals, including the Journal of Molecular Biology, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, BIO-Complexity, and Nature, and in such books as Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt by Stephen Meyer and Life’s Solution by Simon Conway Morris.
The annual Dallas Conference on Science & Faith explores exciting scientific discoveries about the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the development of biological complexity, as well as critiquing the scientific and cultural impact of Darwinism. It also deals directly with the intersection of science and religion and the role that faith plays in scientific research and study.
Be sure to check out these related videos:
Douglas Axe: Why more scientists are going off-script from the Darwinian Story
• #117 -- Douglas Axe, m...
James Tour: The Origin of Life Has Not Been Explained
• James Tour: The Origi...
The Open Mind | Douglas Axe, Ph.D.
• Video
============================
The Discovery Science News Channel is the official UA-cam channel of Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture. The CSC is the institutional hub for scientists, educators, and inquiring minds who think that nature supplies compelling evidence of intelligent design. The CSC supports research, sponsors educational programs, defends free speech, and produce articles, books, and multimedia content. For more information visit www.discovery.org/id/
www.evolutionnews.org/
www.intelligentdesign.org/
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter:
Twitter: @discoverycsc
Facebook: / discoverycsc
Visit other UA-cam channels connected to the Center for Science & Culture
Discovery Institute: / discoveryinstitute
Dr. Stephen C. Meyer: / drstephenmeyer
The Magician's Twin - CS Lewis & Evolution: / cslewisweb
Darwin's Heretic - Alfred Russel Wallce: / alfredrwallaceid - Наука та технологія
Read his book 3 times through. One of those, "duh" moments, so enlightening and easy to share with others
I cannot remember the last time I enjoyed the topic so much. This presentation is so simple to understand. The Bible says creation speaks of God's wonders.
Very much enjoyed this talk by Dr. Axe. His book, 'Undeniable,' is an excellent read and indeed confirms our innately derived conclusion that living things are designed.
Neil English I picked up a pheasant feather today on my dog walk in the hills of Scotland.....wow, what amazing and immaculate design in those colours and intricacies. I could only praise the Lord
Profound!!! Lately I have been visiting some anti-creation, pro-darwinian, youtube channels to explore what others think about the origin of all life and existence in general. I discussed the "brain in a vat" thought experiment on one channel in particular. I was trying to help others to understand that the evidence they use to prove their world view could possibly be nullified, as ours could, if we are in fact being fed information from an external source outside of our perceived reality. I argued that those believing in Athieism could be tricked into thinking by something outside of our perceived reality, and the "truth" they believe in rests on their belief that thinking is a valid way to understand anything at all.
I reasoned that Athiests(Darwinian Evolutionists in particular) have to "believe" that the senses they use are real, rooted in reality. I further reasoned that no one can, in the strictest sense, be 100% positive that anything is really "real." I further reasoned that they, like intelligent design advocates, have to believe reality is real. We all have to have faith that we are real, science is real, thoughts are real, and so on.
The Athieists defend their position saying that God can't be real because we can't use any scientific tool to prove his existence. They always say that it's unscientific to believe in God. They argue that God is not "testable" by physical experiments and/or physical observation, and belief in God is only an unproven article of faith.
They overlook a potential flaw in their thinking. They have to have faith that reality is real and they cannot definitively prove it's real because we may exist in some sort of "matrix" that is making us think things are real.
So, I turned the tables on them and demanded they prove that they themselves are physically real, that thoughts are physically real, and facts are real and trustworthy in the absolute sense. I asked them to give tangeable proof that we aren't a "brain in a vat" and prove we aren't being fed information that makes us believe our reality is as real as it seems. They couldn't.
I then let them know that because of this, the Athiest has to choose to put faith in something without having any definitive "physical" evidence. They go on and on telling us we believe in God blindly and that their beliefs are superior because they are based on science, not on faith of any sort, all the while not realizing that they blindly believe this reality is real, and not just an illusion caused by information fed to our "brains in a vat."
Finally I showed them that we all come to a point where have to choose to believe in certain things that may or may not have direct "physical" proof. I showed them that it is reasonable and necessary at times to believe in things that are inferred to be true, despite lacking direct physical observation, if the totality of evidence we have from all sources warrants it. I then tried to help them see the narrow, close minded way they approach reality is flawed. I showed them that there are good reasons to believe in a creator despite the fact that we can't physically see or touch him, or "recreate" him somehow. I reasoned that not being able to physically see God's form in the physical world doesn't negate the fact they we can know he exists by using other evidences we find in life.
Personally I see that it is more reasonable to accept that a creator God exists, then to believe he doesn't exist, based on the totality of evidence, both physical or otherwise.
I want to say, THANK YOU!!!, right off the bat. I want to tell you about all the events that led up to my being convicted and brought to my knees by the Lord Jesus Christ, but I'm not very good at that. I will say that my hunger for the Holy Scriptures is joyful and insatiable, and I've never been so awed and grateful. I've recently stumbled onto Stephen Meyer, Mr. Tour, John Lennox and so many more and I've gained so much from watching and rewatching them as I do with Christian sermons. It has meant so much to faith to be able to understand what happens in our society and schools around the assertions of many scientists.
2 Corinthians 10:4-5 says:
For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God
to the pulling down of strongholds; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience to Messiah.
God bless you, sir, for helping me to better understand.
Thank you Dr Axe
It seem the evolutionists will have serious problems explaining the origins of information with living cells
Excellent work really clear
Something I've never heard anyone talk about: even if we accept the possibility of mutations causing an animal to change into another animal, how does the exact same mutation (series of mutations) happen to all the animals of a species?
Doug is an inspiration! Thanks for posting this
Another great lecture, even the small changes pictured with the stepping stones represents a purposeful arrangement of parts, with a pinpoint, laser like focus on a destination.
Information of the kind in DNA could only come from a conscious mind because foresight was necessary to create a livable environment for the living things now in existence.
That foresight and creative behaviour points to the intent of a conscious mind - the mind of our Creator.
That's the origin of life.
Now back up using the same principles to the origin of the universe.
The universe had a beginning - the past 100 years of scientific discoveries shows this again and again - hence the universe had a beginner.
That's the origin of the universe.
Now forward to the origin of consciousness - self awareness, free will, etc.
Our Creator intended for us to learn about our world, recognize that we were created and ultimately learn about our Creator.
All that intention at three singular points in our past.
I always have one question for the secular. Tell me how evolution could account for the life span of the Monarch Butterfly, and get back to me.
Excellent lecture! Thank you.
Excellent talk with so many great points that I lost track of them. As Professor Axe points out , the perception
and the reality of the qualifications and capabilities of many of these academics to critically evaluate the
evidence and draw honest and accurate conclusions is limited by extreme bias , peer pressure , monetary
gains , prominence and many other reasons including their impiety of a Designer or Creator. In fact it's
this lack of belief in a Creator that many belief gives their own lacking, vague and unscientific postulations
of Chemical Manifestations of Life merit since it's unfounded within all the tested empirical science , but yet
they claim that's irrelevant since there's life ? Keep up your common sense presentations .
Thanks for sharing this conference, greetings from Costa Rica
Amen, great approach. People love to defer to the fallacy that you dont know enough, and that if you did you would realize "this or that" thing you believe is false. No, we can indeed know, in a way which justifies confidence.
Nice presentation. I know there are many scientists in all disciplines who are theists, having studied all the evidence, and assessed the arguments, but they don't talk about it. They go along to get along, fearful of repercussions. It's time to put an end to religious persecution in science.
Faith is belief without evidence. “Religion is the daughter of hope and fear explaining to ignorance the nature of the unknowable.” Ambrose Bierce -
Great presentation!.
fantastic !!
It all seems like Common Sense knowledge probably because it is
Evolutionary theory is not science, and a few evolutionists admit it. In reality it is a metaphysical philosophy of materialism and naturalism.
I like this examples with paper and Origami, and "Pasta" in soup... simple to understand but HARD to accept that this is a way how evolution works with "magic words" TIME and coincidence
This guy is surprisingly smart!
It's laughable: an honest, intelligent man, taking his learning and proceeding with an examination of the evidence, sees what the supposed masters like Dawkins claim simply cannot be.
He just made me think of something, for the first time in 53 years of scientific education.
Take religion out of creation. Then you apply the scientific theory of evolution to any organism. What's to say with eons if time and the right conditions , that a creator, God like being , that we do not have the ability to understand, wasn't created through their views of evolution itself ? Simple in concept .
Problem with that however is that a created god would be subject to whatever forces created him, so he couldn't be God
If he was created, there was a time of his creation so he would also be subject to time, and not the creator of time.
By definition, God can be subject to nothing, but must be the origin of absolutly everything.
Thats why multiple gods are oxymoronic, there must be a single eternal creator of everything.
Marvelous!
It seems that (about the 8 min mark) you were suggesting that the “origins” problem of the first cell was much smaller than that of the origin of all life forms. But I would think it quite the opposite. The insurmountable problem for evolutionists, it seems to me, has always been, and will always be, that their theory flies in the face of the first principle of biology itself: life ALWAYS (and without exception) comes from LIFE. For them, an indissoluble conundrum. And apart from solving it, all their other lavish claims are moot. At least according to my draught of common sense.
Incidentally, I deeply appreciate your work, and solid Christian testimony!!
You must think to hope because hoping is a kind of thinking. So maybe Dr. Axe means reasoning when he says "hoping." But if I hope for something, that's because I don't have it, and I may have reasoned to discover that I don't have it.
I wonder how many people that believe in evolution can really explain why.
Any true religion must provide a complete and coherent understanding of the world we occupy. That means that you have to be able to explain the world around you without violating your theology or your theology is wrong. Coherence means that the explanation has to make sense and be consistent. Most debates on evolution are built on trying to explain the existence of life without God. It is a religious argument between theological positions even though one side religiously believes that it is not religious.
As a computer scientist, I know the people around me. They have been taught that belief in evolution in specific, atheos religion in general, makes them smart. They are holding onto it as a result of ego. To believe other wise is seen as stupid and they do not want to be thought of as stupid.
I enjoyed the presentation. But, as always, (and especially true of those who are CERTAIN!) ... How we carry our beliefs and how we behave and treat others, is actually more important ultimately than what we believe. ;-) Thanks for posting this.
ahh..now i can understand what c.s.lewis was saying..beautifully simplified..
A physicalist could tell Dr. Axe that though numbers aren't in our brains, our brains store things that we associate with the word "number." Brains could also represent numerals or groups of them. But numbers differ from instances of them. For example, a pair of shoes is an instance of the number two. But a pair of shoes isn't a number. The numeral "3" is an instance of the number one because "3" is one numeral. It's also an instance of the number three because it has a top part, a middle part, and a bottom one.
A physicalist can agree that there are instances of numbers, even if there aren't numbers in our brains. For example, he can point out the three folds of the human brain. But if he did that with a brain scanner, the three images of folds would be another instance of that number since a picture of something isn't that thing.
Psalm 14:1. And Romans 1:20. Sum it up perfectly
i dnt have any problem with videos being postponed over a month or so but its not the need f the time stay safe , and have patience
I remember college professors attacking faith. I have thought about this several times over the years. Why are government employees able to get away with this? They’re in a position of power and it’s wrong.
Doug Axe just went up in my estimation. A lot of thought and work went into the planning of this talk, making philosophy, science and probability accessible to all, and in an entertaining way.
Lots of in-depth arguments against Darwinian evolution here: www.lifewithoutevolution.uk
Their is something self defeating when trying to prove something with probabily. It is always possible that the most improbable event to happen on the very first try every time you try it so you could do it with one bowl of soup I'd the letters are all there. I have actually seen the word slope in my soup once very unusual so I never forgot that.
I'm Number 1...I'm Number !! This is just one more proof of just how Awesome & Really Great I Am. If I weren't so humble I'd continue on about how great I am.
...and it’s no coincidence that he has a ripped body-it just don’t come by sitting around and no training! Man looks good!
wow...thanks
I thought the first 18 minutes was a little tortuous and beaten to death. I actually enjoy Stephen Meyer's stuff on the DNA information.
Meh. I like hearing his prefatory remarks, and it’s refreshing to hear the tables turned on the fake intelligentsia.
:God is everywhere, especially within science.
it is fascinating that religionists are interested in science for only two reasons:
1) to explain why scientific observations and theories appear to contravene their religions, and discount the theories. although disproving one theory does not prove any other theory
2) somehow misuse science to "prove" some aspect of the supernatural that is not actually addressable by science because science is concerned with observable facts
in this case it is another rendition of the "god of the gaps" -- it seems unlikely to have occurred by itself, therefore I conclude there must be gods.
i want that laser pointer and use it to tease militant atheists !!!! lolz
I don't mean to nitpick. But "Gorgias" names a person and a dialogue Plato wrote. Say "Gorg," as in "Borg, "" eee iss," instead of "gorgeous."
Their is only one place where a frog turns into a prince and that is in a little kids fairytale story...Devolution is a fairytale for adults...long ago and far away the impossible happened
The fallacy of coincidental incoincidence: a disposition or state of perpetual denial; stubborn disbelief.
They prefer to believe magic
Isn't there some low-grade empirical confirmation of the objective validity of thought and deduction to be had from observation and assessment, viz. that the consequences of actions devised by thought are more productive than ones that are not, or ones that are random? It somewhat escapes the suspicion of delusion because of the consistency of valuable outcomes. Since I can recognize the sequential positive effects of planned activity, I have a degree of confidence that I am not probably deluded in my observational ability on one level, so why not on additional levels? This just occurred to me. I haven't thought it through so I haven't found the flaws in this idea yet. In an hour maybe I will realize that it's ludicrous.
Discovering that there MUST have been a Designer does not point one inevitably to the Bible. Once one acknowledges that there are things -- the mind of God, for example -- that cannot be understood by mortals, the secondary acknowledgement that a mortal cannot KNOW answers to metaphysical question. Going with what seems to make the most sense, makes sense. Certainty does not.
Slam dunk, random chance life is impossible. Everything's made of atoms. I challenge Richard Dawkins to take a hypothetical pair of atomic tweezers in his hand and with the periodic table of elements in front of him, pick and arrange all the necessary atoms to make one self replicating cell of life. Which would be a gazillion miracles of physics down the line of actually having atoms exist to work with in the first place.
I wonder what they would do to a biology teacher if he, she showed this video to the class?
Moderna (MRNA) is working on a Covid 19 vaccine using RNA technology.
Great speaker👍That is it "you need common sense and not a phd".Bible praises wisdom.All the fancy technicalities are there to hoodwink common people as always.This lecture is worth hearing again and again.The theory of evolution is turning out to be the most hideous and stupidest fallacy of human kind; this theory is the emperor with no clothes,self defeating scientific proposition , well said.
As the theoretical physicist and cosmologist Lawrence Krauss has said, having a PhD. simply means that you have a PhD. It means you have completed the necessary academic work required in order to be awarded a PhD. It doesn't mean you actually believe what the science says. If you go through the entire exercise as a believing Biblical creationist Like Jason Lisle or Kurt Wise, you come out as a Biblical creationist with a PhD. If you believe in 'Intelligent Design' (Biblical creation Lite), same thing.
Unfortunately, these people have never grasped one of the key elements of science. Science only deals with the observable, natural world. It deals in natural mechanisms that underlie natural processes. It builds scientific models (theories) that are overarching explanations of natural phenomena. These theories make predictions that can be tested. Any observation or experimental result that contradicts the theory means the theory has to be revised (or thrown out).
"Science is organized common sense where many a beautiful theory was killed by an ugly fact”.
- Thomas Huxley
Biblical creationism and intelligent design do not deal with natural processes. There are no natural mechanisms underlying either idea. They make no predictions and cannot be tested. Both rely 100% on the notion that, "This looks too complicated to be the result of natural process, therefore I declare a supernatural explanation." This isn't science. It's the old, "God of the gaps" argument and it isn't science.
And note; those intelligent design adherents who refuse to identify the 'intelligent designer' are merely playing games. That's sophistry, not science.
nonsense. It's mathematically rigorous distinction that identifies the limits of the explanatory power of chance and natural processes. Bad call invoking Larry Krauss as an authority. The man does not even know what "nothing means". He does a nice job of hoisting himself on his own petard in debates. But a deep thinker? No.
NO, SCIENCE DOES NOT JUST DEAL W THE OBSERVABLE NATURAL WORLD. EVOLUTION DOES NOT, GEOLOGY DOES NOT, MUCH OF PHYSICS (like gravity) DOES NOT, COSMOLOGY DOES NOT. THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO “DO SCIENCE”. Read or listen to UA-cam videos by Stephen Meyer & John Lennox AND LEARN MORE ABOUT THE FIELD OF SCIENCE.
wowza
Question: Well which God, there are plenty after all..?
Answer: _'The light that shines through a stained glass window comes from the same source , no matter which colour we choose to view it through.'_
A number is what philosophers call an "abstract object." But even nonphysicalist philosophers debate what numbers consist of. Nominalists say that they're only words. Nominalists know how to count, how to do do mathematics, and more. But they don't believe that a number is like, say, a disembodied soul, something that doesn't take up space. We know that there are instances of numbers. For example, the ten fingers on your left hand make an instance of the number 10. Your eyes forman instance of the number 2. Some people believe that numbers are real because they're in God's mind.
We do abstraction, too. For example, to what a table is in itself, you ignore the properties that a table might or might not have. Tables can be wooden, metal, plastic, golden, silver. . . The can have one or more legs. But being a table doesn't mean being, say, brown, wooden or three feet wide.
I only have five fingers on my left hand
... I'm a mutant ! ;)
At 12:00 he mentions multiverses. Ah yes, where there are -- where there MUST BE -- in one of them, fairies at the bottom of the garden.
Is the nothing exists guy bff with kraus?
I should have studied business management in real estate insurance. When I went to Queensborough Community College in 1990 ! i don`t have the brains in engineering or chemistry or biology !
The point, that Douglas Axe is not making in a sufficient way is that The Academics believe that they are above "ordinary" people and that they represent the "highest" development in the universe. The idea, that there exist something more intelligent and more powerful than them is repugnant to them. That is why they are against theology in general.
It also explains why many of them are against democracy and support totalitarian dictatorships. That was the case in the 1930-ies, when most academics supported Stalin in spite of promotion of pseudo-science, the suppression of freedom of speech, corrupt courts, indoctrination through mass media, terror in the streets, gulag concentration camps, attacks on political opponents and so on. The same is true in the beginning of the 21st Century, when many academics still support pseudo-science, CCP-china or Islamic fundamentalism.
In both cases the point is, that academics want to be almighty. They suffer from raving greatness madness. They are sick in their head.
my fellow theists PLS STAY SAFE and dnt congregate . may ALLAH bless u all ,
physicalism destroys science
Slam dunk
Interesting lecture- but Axe's appeal to common sense is flawed. There are many aspects of the universe which can't be explained or understood using common sense. e.g. Quantum physics is real but nonsensical when common or ordinary concepts are used to explain it.
Evolution has been pretty convincingly demonstrated from particular starting points but admittedly the origins of life have not been explained and is extremely improbable to have come about by chance based on our current understanding of the universe. That however doesn't mean that we won't continue to learn and one day be able to overcome the improbability argument to a large extent. But we will never be able to explain the origin of the universe itself.
I do like Axe's perspective though because he highlights the gaps (many gaps) in human knowledge and understanding and underscores the need to be sensibly sceptical of medicine and science.
You say, " That however doesn't mean that we won't continue to learn and one day be able to overcome the improbability argument to a large extent. But we will never be able to explain the origin of the universe itself." In Doug's book he says there are two options: You either have an explanation that beats the odds or you bypass them.
40 people are not happy😁
See testimony for a supernatural God revealed in the life of one of His children a nobody, Me❤️
See Steve's Miracles 1&2 on UA-cam!
Science is good!!!
Experience in the real world we all live in is powerful beyond words or logic!!!
God is
So are we
Bow before His saving grace!❤️😉😊👌👏👏👏👍
But the mind requires the brain in order for it to operate.
How ? Please explain the mechanism
The comments here are a pile of ignorance and confirmation bias
Why is common sense so hard for these people? Exactly because they refuse to acknowledge a transcendent God to whom they must give an account. It's as simple as that... "For they are willfully ignorant..."
'Willfully ignorant' translates to 'stupid'!
See my gut feeling is there is no god and when we die that’s that. But that’s not what I want to believe I hate that thought. I want there to be a god and a personal one at that. I just can’t seem to rationalize it to myself even though I want to desperately.
Watch John Lennox You Tube videos. Watch Hugh Ross You Tube videos. Watch videos by James Tour. All (and there are many more.) became Christians from their studies in Science. As well, of course, as Douglas Axe in this video.
Islamic scholars like Hussain makke and Azhar nasser are good. There are a plethora of resources. Look up philosophical proofs as well, such as necessary existence and argument by design and fine-tuning. The way religion has been presented to us has been wrong and pushing people away. Make your intention pure and seek the truth
Reach out to God & ask Him to reveal Himself to you. He will, & will bring people into your life to encourage you & help you grow in your relationship w Him.
Very cogent presentation. It would be nice if Mr. Douglas could lose the plastic water bottle in favour of something more sustainable for his water.
A bit off topic, but...should you all even be gathered there right now?
Thanks for the questions! This was videotaped at a conference held in January 2020, so it is not from a live gathering held during the stay-at-home orders.
Discovery Science Do any of you at Discovery know Bob Kaita?
Yes!
Discovery Science Oh that's wonderful! He is a family friend from decades ago, I was a child still, and last week he emailed to ask about my mother (90). We are in Scotland. Thank you all for this ministry and the talks and lectures and conferences....it's such a blessing to sit in my wee cottage in the highlands of Scotland, looking at the mountains, and hearing these godly and Christ-following disciples describe the genius and awesomeness of our God and how he made everything. Hallelujah! and these scientists are worshiping God in their work and by teaching us from their own knowledge, they help us little people who have little scientific background, worship and praise and give thanks with more honour and humility. What a privilege and blessing
Ive turned iff auticorrrction a loknh timmr agi and my texyd arr way eashrr ti read nie
Tyx fir tje lrctire!!!
Just because synapses are forcing you to think something's real, that does not mean that thing isn't real...?
Just because a blind person cannot see anything, doesn't mean color doesn't exist.
Either-or fallacy, it's literally one of the most basic fallacies in all of logic.
When science left its mind, in search of truth using Mere brain It probably is dead.
I don't believe in a God like in the Bible. The God like being that started life made it self maintained and propitious for the future. If humans do not mate, humans will become exsticnt. That is why he made mating so wonderful. He realized he was not going to be around to keep things going.
People say to me science this science that. evolution is established fact with absolute confidence nothing can shake their fath.
Two dimensions that evolution must call upon, but is fallacious to do so: 1. infinity of any finite resource, and/or 2. teleology toward any goal. Time/space/matter/energy can neither reach infinity nor do they care anything about goals.
Everyone should be a Muslim otherwise there will be a hell
😂 Sad that Allah is more immoral than some people who want good for everyone 😏