Podcasts about science department

******Support the channel******Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenterPayPal: paypal.me/thedissenterPayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuyPayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9lPayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpzPayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9mPayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on******Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoBFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Lauren N. Ross is an Associate Professor in the Logic and Philosophy of Science Department at the University of California, Irvine. Her research concerns explanation and causation in biology, neuroscience, and medicine. This work involves interrelated projects that address: the nature of explanation in these sciences, different causal structures and explanation types, and the rationale that guides particular forms of causal reasoning in these domains. In this episode, we talk about causation and explanation in science. We start with causation, its different meanings, and different types of causation. We then talk about scientific explanation, the link between causation and explanation, and causal complexity in psychiatry. Finally, we discuss how to communicate about causality to the general public.--A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, DAN DEMETRIOU, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, EDWARD HALL, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, IGOR N, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, NIKLAS CARLSSON, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, PER KRAULIS, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, MASOUD ALIMOHAMMADI, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, ERIK ENGMAN, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, STARRY, MAURO JÚNIOR, 航 豊川, TONY BARRETT, BENJAMIN GELBART, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, AND STEVEN GANGESTAD!A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, AL NICK ORTIZ, NICK GOLDEN, AND CHRISTINE GLASS!AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, BOGDAN KANIVETS, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

An all-Wales Avian Influenza Prevention Zone is introduced in Wales, requiring all keepers of poultry and other captive birds to practice good biosecurity and vigilance to protect their flocks. As the disease spreads among birds, a human case of the H5N1 virus has occured but the UK Health Security Agency says the risk to the public remains very low. We talk to the Head of the Science Department at the World Organisation for Animal Health about disease outbreaks and what we can do to control them. The National Trust "ramps up" its efforts to protect and enhance Nature. In a new 10 year strategy the Trust plans to create 25,000 hectares of of nature-rich landscapes. They're also asking people to pitch in by adopting a plot of land at “nature super sites” - including one in Eryri (Snowdonia).Greyhounds - our reporter Mariclare get exclusive access to the only greyhound race track in Wales that started running licensed races at the end of last year, as campaigners lobby the Welsh Government to ban it. and what? no Romans?! We hear about an archaeological mystery at Pendinas hillfort at Penparcau, near Aberystwyth, in Ceredigion.

Historians of medicine often express the desire for their work to reach broader audiences; however, popular platforms—be they television, radio, podcasts, corporate or social media—can reach many but touch few. History of Medicine Week is dedicated to exploring the risks, benefits, experiences, and best practices for historians of medicine to make meaningful connections beyond familiar scholarly communities. This episode: Scottie Buehler Moderator Sam Houston State University Rana Hogarth Innate project, Science History Institute & History and Sociology of Science Department, University of Pennsylvania Sarah Handley-Cousins Executive Editor, Nursing Clio & Department of History, University of Buffalo Jeremy Greene Director of the Institute of the History of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University For more information on this and other topics, please see https://www.chstm.org/video/200

The Hamilton Today Podcast with Scott Thompson: Randy Travis's new song, created with the help of AI. Boeing's new Starliner capsule set for first crewed flight to space station. A developing story… Hamas has reportedly accepted the ceasefire proposal put forward by Egypt and Qatar. We look at Canada's ongoing and growing tensions with India. The recent survey by Abacus Data asked 1,500 respondents about their impressions of seven “possible Liberal leadership candidates” to one day succeed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Spam texts are becoming a bigger nuisance, and pose security threats of their own. It is all coming up on the Hamilton Today Podcast! Guests: Eric Alper, Publicist and music commentator. Paul Delaney. Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University. Dr. Jack Cunningham, Ph.D., Program Coordinator at the Bill Graham Centre for Contemporary International History, in Trinity College and the Munk School. Specializing in British Foreign Policy, Canadian Foreign Policy and politics, International History, U.S. Foreign Policy and relations with Russia. Elissa Freeman, PR and Pop Culture Expert. Charles Burton, Senior Fellow with Sinopsis. Tim Powers, Chairman of Summa Strategies and Managing Director of Abacus Data. Phil Gurski, President of Borealis Threat and Risk Consulting, former CSIS analyst. David Shipley, Cyber security expert and CEO of Beauceron Security. Scott Radley, host of the Scott Radley show and columnist with the Hamilton Spectator. Host – Scott Thompson Content Producer – William Erskine Technical/Podcast Producer – Tom McKay Podcast Co-Producer – Ben Straughan News Anchor – Lisa Polewski Want to keep up with what happened in Hamilton Today? Subscribe to the podcast! https://megaphone.link/CORU8835115919 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Hamilton Today Podcast with Scott Thompson: Tasha Kheiriddin's new piece for The National Post: “Anti-Israel hate marches holding the rest of us hostage while Trudeau shrugs.” What does the fast-moving ban on TikTok mean, and what are the concerns about the app? On June 14, 2024 – sixty years to the day since its arrival – the Lancaster is set to make a celebratory return visit to Goderich Regional Airport. NASA hears from Voyager 1, the most distant spacecraft from Earth, after months of quiet. The hunt for the origins of COVID-19 has gone dark in China, the victim of political infighting after a series of stalled and thwarted attempts to find the source of the virus that killed millions and paralyzed the world for months. Is Canada in a productivity crisis, and if so, how did we get here and can be done about it? New Leger polling reveal how Canadians feel about the new federal budget. The province is planning on upping the speed limit on certain 400-series highways across Ontario. Guests: Tasha Kheriddin, journalist, writer with National Post, GZERO media, and her Substack page ‘In My Opinion'; Author of ‘The Right Path.' David Shipley, Cyber security expert and CEO of Beauceron Security Al Mickeloff, Marketing Manager with the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum Paul Delaney. Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University Charles Burton, Senior Fellow with Sinopsis Dr. Ian Lee, Associate Professor with the Sprott School of Business at Carleton University Andrew Enns, Executive Vice-President, Central Canada, for Leger Brian J. Patterson, President of the Ontario Safety League Scott Radley, Host of The Scott Radley Show and Columnist with The Hamilton Spectator Host – Scott Thompson Content Producer – William Erskine Technical/Podcast Producer – Tom McKay Podcast Co-Producer – Ben Straughan News Anchor – Dave Woodard & Jen McQueen Want to keep up with what happened in Hamilton Today? Subscribe to the podcast! https://megaphone.link/CORU8835115919

The Hamilton Today Podcast with Scott Thompson: Are the Tesla layoffs a sign of rough times for the EV industry – or is it something else? We look at the federal dental care plan, and the Ontario Dental Association's thoughts about it, in light of the hesitancy some Alberta dentists are expressing toward signing up. NASA confirmed Monday that a mystery object that crashed through the roof of a Florida home last month was a chunk of space junk from equipment discarded at the International Space Station. StatsCan released its March Inflation report today. Rising gas prices played a part in what we have seen. Tim Hortons has now made the jump to... pizza. It's part of a move to "stretch the brand" into the afternoon and nighttime. How will the budget play out, politically? Highway 413 is moving forward, with a memorandum of understanding being signed by the federal and provincial governments. What changed? We get The Canadian Taxpayers Federation's reaction to today's unveiling of the federal budget. Checking in with Scott on the latest stories from today and what's coming up on The Scott Radley Show 6-8pm! Guests: Marvin Ryder, Professor, DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University Dr. Brock Nicolucci, President of the Ontario Dental Association Paul Delaney. Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University Dan McTeague, President of Canadians for Affordable Energy, Former Liberal MP Bruce Winder, Retail Analyst & Author, ‘Retail Before, During & After COVID-19' Tim Powers, Chairman of Summa Strategies and Managing Director of Abacus Data Peter Graefe, Professor of Political Science with McMaster University Franco Franco Terrazzano, Canadian Taxpayers Federation, Federal Director Scott Radley, Host of The Scott Radley Show and Columnist with the Hamilton Spectator Host – Scott Thompson Content Producer – William Erskine Technical/Podcast Producer – Tom McKay Podcast Co-Producer – Ben Straughan News Anchor – Dave Woodard & Jen McQueen Want to keep up with what happened in Hamilton Today? Subscribe to the podcast! https://megaphone.link/CORU8835115919

We are in the Path of Totality! Join Scott as we sneak onto the roof and enjoy a prime viewing spot of today's total solar eclipse over Hamilton. Get the scoop on what it was like to be at Tim Horton's Field, with CHML Reporter Lisa Polewski. Take a jaunt over to Ft. Erie, where the eclipse lasted longest, with CHML Reporter Ken Mann. Then hop back inside as we discuss the eclipse further with professors, astronomers, and Mayor Andrea Horwath. We also look at the Jays home opener tonight, the reinstatement of paper bags at the LCBO, and the Final Four in March Madness! Also, Scott Radley shows us pictures of a donut, for some reason. It is all coming up on the Hamilton Today Podcast! Guests: Lisa Polewski, reporter with 900 CHML. Ken Mann, reporter with 900 CHML. Paul Delaney. Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University.  Guest: Victor Abraham, Vice President of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, Hamilton Branch.  Mike Wilner, Baseball columnist with the Toronto Star, Host of the Deep LF Podcast.  Bruce Winder, Retail Analyst & Author, ‘Retail Before, During & After COVID-19'.  Andrea Horwath, Mayor, City of Hamilton.  Dr. Robert Cockroft, Assistant Professor / Director, William J. McCallion Planetarium / Secretary, Canadian Astronomical Society (CASCA) Department of Physics and Astronomy.  Ron Foxcroft, Canadian businessman, Fox40World, creator of the FOX40 whistle, author of 40 Ways of the Fox, CEO of Fluke Transport… former Honorary Colonel with the Argyll Regiment, Chairman of the Argyll Commemorative Fundraising Campaign. Scott Radley, host of the Scott Radley show and columnist with the Hamilton Spectator.  Host – Scott Thompson Content Producer – William Erskine Technical/Podcast Producer – Tom Craig Podcast Co-Producers – Tom McKay & Ben Straughan News Anchor – Dave Woodard & Jen McQueen Want to keep up with what happened in Hamilton Today? Subscribe to the podcast! https://megaphone.link/CORU8835115919

CBT interventions are often favoured for being empirically supported; however, it is not always clear how efficacy of these interventions maps to the actual functioning of the brain.  Esteemed neuropsychologist and psychoanalyst, Dr. Mark Solms, joins us for an in-depth discussion of the clinical implications of his research into the biological underpinnings of consciousness as discussed in in his wonderful book, The Hidden Spring: A Journey to the Source of Consciousness.   In this discussion we cover : why Dr. Solms gravitated towards a psychoanalytic framework to explore the underlying neuroscience of brain functionthe definition of consciousness that Dr. Solms employs when considering matters related to consciousnessthe brain's "workflow" with respect to constructing conscious experiencehow the brain weighs the importance of various competing needs the unexpected role of the brain stem and cortex in consciousness levering critical implications of this model of information processing to enhance standard CBT interventions consideration of therapeutic potential of the therapeutic alliance through the lens of Dr. Solm's system of consciousnesswhat his model can teach us about the origins of psychopathology and challenges with personalityleveraging the content of our dreams knowing their biological basis (Dr. Solms elucidated the specific neurobiological origins of dreaming, beyond REM sleep)Comments or feedback?  Email us at: oicbtpodcast@gmail.comMark Solms, PhD, is Director of Neuropsychology at the University of Cape Town. He is Director of Training of the South African Psychoanalytical Association, Member of the British Psychoanalytical Society and Honorary Member of the New York Psychoanalytic Society. He is Director of the Science Department of the American Psychoanalytic Association and Co-Chair of the International Neuropsychoanalysis Society. He was Research Chair of the International Psychoanalytical Association.  He was awarded the Sigourney Prize in 2012. He has published more than 350 papers in both neuroscientific and psychoanalytic journals, and six books, including The Brain and the Inner World (2002), which was a bestseller translated into 12 languages and his latest book The Hidden Spring. His selected writings were published as The Feeling Brain (2015). He is the editor of the Revised Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud (24 volumes) and the Complete Neuroscientific Works of Sigmund Freud (four volumes). 

The Hamilton Today Podcast with Scott Thompson: Elon Musk's SpaceX company has conducted a third test flight of the most powerful rocket ever built. The Sound of Music Festival is teaming up with the Burlington Performing Arts Centre for 2024. Ontario's education minister, Stephen Lecce, says the province is prepared to force the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board to sell the vacant Sir John A. Macdonald Secondary School site if they continue "hoarding" it. What is Measles, how has it been managed before and what will work nowadays? Should municipalities be converting parking lots into housing spaces? We look at China's reaction to the talk of the TikTok ban in the U.S., and Canada's considerations. It is all coming up on the Hamilton Today Podcast! Guests: Paul Delaney. Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University. Steve Cussons, Sound of Music Festival Board Chair & Acting Executive Director. Dan McTeague, President of Canadians for Affordable Energy, Former Liberal MP. Cornelis van Kooten, Fraser Institute senior fellow. Author of the new study on electric vehicles. Todd White, Hamilton Wentworth District School Board Trustee for Wards 5 & 10. Dr. Timothy Sly, Epidemiologist and Professor Emeritus in the School of Population and Public Health with Toronto Metropolitan University. Jesse Helmer, author of the report, Senior Research Associate at Smart Prosperity Institute, focused on climate-friendly housing policy and the real costs of urban sprawl; former councillor with the City of London, Ontario. Gordon Houlden, Director Emeritus of the China Institute and Professor of Political Science with the University of Alberta. Host – Scott Thompson Content Producer – William Erskine Technical/Podcast Producer – Tom McKay Podcast Co-Producer – Ben Straughan News Anchor – Dave Woodard Want to keep up with what happened in Hamilton Today? Subscribe to the podcast! https://megaphone.link/CORU8835115919

Calgarians will NOT vote in a plebiscite regarding blanket rezoning in Calgary, but you can still have your voice heard in upcoming public hearings next month. We discuss the issue with Mayor Jyoti Gondek. The US plans to ban TikTok and remove it from US app stores. What is the rationale behind the decision? We get details from Jackson Proskow, Global News Washington Bureau Chief.   Finally, could ‘psychedelic therapy' reverse some of the damage caused by chronic stress? We discuss the latest research on the topic with Argel Aguilar-Valles, Professor Faculty of Science Department of Neuroscience at Carleton University.

PRT Science Departmen

Audit ATX speaks with Investigator Tope Eletu-Odibo about an investigation into fraud and misuse of City resources by an employee in the Forensic Science Department.

The Hamilton Today Podcast with Scott Thompson: It's almost the first weekend of 2024. Have you held onto that New Year's Day optimism? We look at the historic Russia-Ukraine prisoner swap, as well as the situation Canada now finds itself in, being asked to push allies to pick up pace of support. David Soul of Starsky & Hutch has died. Vulcan rocket aims to be first private mission to the Moon. Lea Wittig, a school crossing guard in Tavistock, Ontario, is looking for an explanation after she says she was moved from her usual post. Is the job market slowing down, was December a temporary lull, are we actually looking at something positive? McMaster University and its student union are facing a $77-million class action lawsuit over alleged incidents of antisemitism on campus. Trudeau's Jamaica Vacation: have we become pessimistic about the Prime Minister's holidays, after more than a couple of bungles? Guests: Dr. Steve Joordens, Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto Dr. Elliot Tepper, Emeritus Professor of Political Science with Carleton University Bill Brioux, television critic and author Dr. Paul Delaney. Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University Lea Wittig, Crossing Guard in Tavistock, Ontario Marvin Ryder, Professor with the DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University Sandra Zisckind​, Managing Partner, Diamond and Diamond Duff Conacher, Co-Founder of Democracy Watch Scott Radley, Host of The Scott Radley Show and columnist with the Hamilton Spectator Host – Scott Thompson Content Producer – William Erskine Technical/Podcast Producer – Ben Straughan News Anchor – Dave Woodard & Jen McQueen Want to keep up with what happened in Hamilton Today? Subscribe to the podcast! https://megaphone.link/CORU8835115919

Shownotes and Transcript Intelligent Design may not be an idea you are familiar with but it has interested me since I was a child.  I find it impossible to accept that the world we live in and the complexity of human beings is all based on luck and chance. There has to be an intelligent designer.  Stephen C Meyer is one of the most renowned experts on this very topic and his recent appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience has made many people question the theory of a universe without God.  At what point did intellectuals decide that scientific knowledge conflicts with traditional theistic beliefs? Is it even statistically possible for such complexity to just appear? What about the question of who is this intelligent designer?  Stephen Meyer will help you view the world around you with a brand new perspective. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge in the philosophy of science. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. In 2004, Meyer ignited a firestorm of media and scientific controversy when a biology journal at the Smithsonian Institution published his peer-reviewed scientific article advancing intelligent design. Meyer has been featured on national television and radio programs, including The Joe Rogan Experience, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, CBS's Sunday Morning, NBC's Nightly News, ABC's World News, Good Morning America, Nightline, FOX News Live, and the Tavis Smiley show on PBS. He has also been featured in two New York Times front-page stories and has garnered attention in other top-national media. Dr. Meyer is author of the New York Times bestseller Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design and Signature in the Cell, a Times Literary Supplement Book of the Year. He is also a co-author of Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism and Theistic Evolution: A Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Critique. Connect with Stephen... WEBSITE           https://stephencmeyer.org/                            https://www.discovery.org/                            https://returnofthegodhypothesis.com/ X                         https://x.com/StephenCMeyer?s=20 BOOKS               https://www.amazon.co.uk/stores/author/B001K90CQC Interview recorded 13.12.23 Connect with Hearts of Oak... WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/ PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/ SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/ TRANSCRIPTS   https://heartsofoak.substack.com/ Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts....  SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/ *Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast. Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20  Transcript (Hearts of Oak) Dr. Stephen Meyer. It's wonderful to have you with us. Thank you so much for your time today. (Stephen C Meyer) Thanks for inviting me, Peter.  No, it's great to have you. And people can find you on Twitter @StephenCMayer. It's on the screen there. And also discovery.org, the Discovery Institute. And you obviously received your PhD in philosophy of sciences from England, from University of Cambridge, your a former geophysicist, college professor, and you now are the director of Discovery Institute, author of many books. The latest is Return of the God Hypothesis, Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe, and the links for those books will be in the description. But, Dr. Meyer, if I can maybe, I think I remember as a child, church loyalty, being at church and getting a stamp for attending. I remember asking for a book on creationism then, and we may touch on different creationism, intelligent design. I mean, it was 10 or 11. And I remember being fascinated by this whole topic of how God can be seen in the world around us. Maybe I can ask you about your journey. What has been your journey to being one of the, I guess, main proponents on intelligent design? Well, I've always been interested in questions at the intersection between science and philosophy or science and  larger worldview questions or science and religion the questions that are addressed about, you know, how do we get here and what is, is there a particular significance to human life, what is the meaning of life, in the early part of my scientific career I was working as a geophysicist as you mentioned the introduction and in the city where I was working, a conference came to town that was investigating that intersection of science and philosophy, science and belief, and it was addressing three big questions, and they were the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the origin and nature of human consciousness. And the conference was unique in that it had invited leading scientists and philosophers representing both theism, broadly speaking, belief in God, and scientists and philosophers who rejected theism and who affirmed the more common view among leading scientists at that time, which was materialism or sometimes called naturalism. We have the New Atheist Movement with their scientific atheists and people of more of that persuasion. So it was, let's look at the origin of the universe from the standpoint. What do the data say, what do you theists say about it, what do you non-theist materialists say about it, and it was a fascinating conference and I was particularly taken by the panels on the origin of the universe and the origin of life because surprisingly to me it seemed that the theists had the intellectual initiative that the the evidence in those about the origin of the universe, and then about the complexity of the cell and therefore the challenges it posed to standard chemical evolutionary theories of the origin of life that in both these two areas, both these two subjects, it seemed that there were powerful, theistic friendly arguments being developed, in one case about the, what you might call, a reviving of the ancient cosmological argument because of the evidence that scientists had discovered about the universe having a beginning. And in the other case, what we now call the theory of intelligent design, that there was evidence of design in the cell, in particular, in the digital code that is stored in the DNA molecule, the information and information processing system of the cell. And was it that time? And still to this day is something that undirected theories of chemical evolution have not been able to explain. And instead, what we know from our experience is that information is a mind product, which is a point that some of these scientists made at this panel, that when we see digital code or alphabetic text or computer code, and many people have likened the information and DNA to a computer code, we always find a mind behind that. So this was the first time I was exposed to that way of thinking. I got fascinated with that. A year later, after the conference, I ended up meeting one of the scientists on the Origin of Life panel, a man named Charles Thackston, who had just written a book with two other co-authors called The Mystery of Life's Origin. He was detailing in that book, he and his colleagues were detailing sort of chapter and verse the problems with trying to explain the origin of the first cell from simpler chemicals in some alleged or presupposed prebiotic soup. And the three authors showed that this was implausible in the extreme, given what we know scientifically about how chemistry works versus how cells work. And over the ensuing year, he kind of mentored me and I got fascinated with the subject and ended up getting a fellowship. A Rotary Fellowship to study at Cambridge for a year and then ended up extending on. I did my master's thesis and then my PhD thesis both on origin of life biology within the History and Philosophy of Science Department at Cambridge. And while I was there, I started to meet other scientists and scholars who were having doubts about standard Darwinian and chemical evolutionary theories of life's origin. And by the early 90s, a number of us had met each other and connected and had some private conferences. And out of that was born a formal program investigating the evidence for intelligent design in biology, in physics, in cosmology, and in 96, we started a program at Discovery Institute. You were very kind to me to call me the director of the whole institute. I direct a program within the institute called the Center for Science and Culture, which is the institutional home. A network of scientists who are investigating whether or not there is, empirical scientific evidence for a designing mind behind life in the cosmos and and the program just continues to grow, the network especially continues to grow, we've got fantastic scientists from all around the world now who are sympathetic to that position and I would mention too that it's a position that's kind of reviving an ancient view going back to certainly the time of the scientific revolution. In particular, we've discovered back to the scientific revolution in Cambridge where I had been fortunate enough to study. There's a, in the college that I was part of, St. Catherine's, there was back in the 17th century, one of the founders of modern botany, who was also one of the first authors of what's called British National Theology. His name was John Ray. Ray was the tutor of Isaac Barrow, a mathematician who in turn tutored Newton and so this whole tradition of seeing the fingerprints of a creator in the natural world is something that was launched in Britain, particularly in Cambridge there were other figures like Robert Boyle who were in other places but the Cambridge tradition of natural theology was very strong from that time period in the 17th century, late 17th century, right up to figures like James Clerk Maxwell, the great physicist in the late 19th century who was critical, sceptical of Darwinism and articulated the idea of design. And I think that's now being revived within contemporary science. There's a growing minority of scientists who see evidence of design in nature.  Now, the understanding of intelligent designer, that's a new thinking, but through the millennia, that's been the norm. Individuals have viewed the world through the lens that there is a God, and that has helped them understand and see the world. But there must have been a point, I guess, when intellectuals decided that scientific knowledge conflicts with that that traditional belief, that traditional theistic belief. Yeah, that's a great way of framing the discussion, Peter. There's a historian of science in Britain named Steve Fuller, who's at Warwick. And he's argued that the idea of intelligent design has been the framework out of which science has been done since the period of the scientific revolution at least and that the the post Darwinian deviation from that, denying that there's actual design and only instead as the Darwinian biologists say the appearance or illusion of design, you may remember from Richard Dawkins's famous book the blind watchmaker, page one he says biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose. And of course, for Dawkins and his followers, and for Darwinians from the late 19th century forward, the appearance of design is an illusion. And it was thought to be an illusion because Darwin had formulated an undirected, or had identified an undirected, unguided process, which he called natural selection that could mimic the powers of a designing intelligence, or so he argued, without itself being designed or guided in any way. And that's kind of where we've engaged the argument. Is that appearance of design that nearly all biologists recognize merely an appearance, or is it the product of an actual guiding intelligence? And that's why we call our theory intelligent design. We're not challenging the idea that there has been change over time, one of the other meanings of evolution we're not challenging even the idea of universal common descent though some of us myself included are quite sceptical of that, the main thing we're challenging with the theory of intelligent design is that is that the appearance of design is essentially an illusion because an unguided undirected mechanism has the capability of generating that appearance without itself being guided or directed in any way and that's, to us the key issue. Is the design real or merely apparent? You may remember that Francis Crick also once said that biologists must constantly keep in mind, that what they see was not designed, but instead evolved. So there's this, the recurrence of that strong intuition among people who have studied biological systems. And I would say, going back all the way to Aristotle, you know, this has been, the Western tradition in biology has been suffused with this recognition. That organisms look designed, they look like they're designed for purpose, they exhibit purpose of behaviour. And now in the age following Watson and Crick, following the molecular biological revolution of the late 50s and 1960s and 70s, we have extraordinarily strong appearances of design. We've got digital code. We have a replication system. We have a translation system as part of this whole information processing system. Scientists can't help but use teleological wording to describe what's going on. We see the purpose of nature, of all of the biological systems and subsystems. And so what we've argued is that, at least at the point of the origin of life, there is no unguided, undirected, or there is no theory that invokes, that has identified an unguided, undirected mechanism that can explain away that appearance of design. Many people don't realize that Darwin did not attempt to explain the origin of the first life. He presupposed the existence of one or a few very simple forms. And so he started it effectively with assuming a simple cell and then said, well, what would have come from that? We now know, however, that the simple cell was not simple at all and displays this many very striking appearances of design that have not been explained by undirected chemical evolutionary processes. Dawkins himself has said that the machine code of the genes is strikingly computer-like. And so you have this striking appearance of design at the very foundation of life that has not in any way been explained by undirected processes. Well, I want to pick up on a number of that, the new discoveries, how things have changed, the complexity. But I can go back, you're challenging, I guess, hundreds of years of new thinking that the complexity of the universe simply points to luck and chance. And I guess there's a statistical side of that, whether that's even possible. We look around and we see things just working perfectly. And I wonder whether it's even possible for a chance element to make all those things come together and make the world as it is. Well, in my book, Signature in the Cell, which was the first of the three books that I've written on these big topics, I look at the argument for the chance origin of life and even more fundamentally, the chance origin of, say, DNA and the protein products that the DNA codes for. And one of the first things to take note of in addressing the chance hypothesis is that no serious origin of life researcher, no origin of life biochemist or biologist today reposes much hope in the chance hypothesis, it's it's really been set aside and the reason for that, I explained the reason for that in in signature in the cell and then do some calculations to kind of back up the thinking that most origin of life biologists have adopted and that is that the cell is simply far too complicated to have arisen by chance. And you can, and the large biomacromolecules, DNA and proteins, are molecules that depend on a property known as sequence specificity, or sometimes called specified complexity. That is to say, they contain informational instructions in essentially a digital or typographic form. So you have in the DNA you have the four character chemical subunits that biologists actually represent with the letters A, T, G, and C. And if you want to build a protein, you have to arrange the A's, C's, G's, and T's or the evolutionary process or somehow the A's, C's, G's, and T's must have been sequenced in the proper way so that when that genetic message is sent to the ribosome, which is the the translation apparatus in the cell, then what comes out of that is a properly sequenced protein molecules. Proteins also are made of subunits called amino acids. There are 20 or so, maybe as many as 22 now, protein-forming amino acids. And to get the protein chain that is built from the DNA instructions to fold into a proper functional conformation or three-dimensional shape, those amino acids have to be arranged in very specific ways. If they're not arranged properly, the long peptide chain, as it's called, will not fold into a stable protein. And so in both cases, you have this property of sequence specificity that the function of the whole, the whole gene in the case of DNA or the whole protein in the case of the the amino acids, the function of the whole depends upon the precise sequencing of the constituent parts. And that's the difficulty, getting those things to line up properly. Turns out there's all kinds of difficulties in trying to form those subunits, those chemical parts, out of any kind of prebiotic chemical environment that we've been able to think of. But the most fundamental problem is the sequencing. And so you can actually run, because there's, if you think of the protein chain, you have 1 in 20 roughly chances of getting the right amino acid at each site. Sometimes it's more or less because in some cases you can have any one of, there is some variability allowed at each site, but you can run numbers on all this and get very precise numbers on the probability of generating even a single functional protein in the known history of the universe. And it turns out that what are called the combinatorials or the probabilities associated with combinatorials, the probabilities are so small that they are small even in relation to the total number of possible events that might have occurred from the Big Bang till now. In other words, here's an example I often use to use to illustrate, if you have a thief trying to crack a bike lock. If the thief has enough time, even though the combination is hidden among all the possibilities, and then the probability of getting the combination in one trial is very small, if the thief has enough time and can try and try and try again, he may crack it by sheer chance. But if the lock is, we have a standard four-dial bike lock, but if the thief encounters a 10-dial bike lock, and I've had one rendered by my graphic designer to get the point across, then in a human lifetime, there's not enough opportunities to sample that number of possible combinations. If you've got 10 dials, you've got 10 to the 10 possibilities, or 10, that's 10 billion. And if the thief spins the dial once every 10 seconds for 100 years and does nothing else in his entire life, he'll only sample 3% of those total combinations, which means it's much more likely that the thief will fail than it is that he will succeed by chance alone. And that's the kind of, that's the, so the point is that there are, there are degrees of complexity or improbability that dwarf what we call probabilistic resources, the opportunities. And that's the situation we have when we're talking about the origin of the first biomacromolecules by reference to chance alone. Only it's not just that you would with those events, you know, all the events that have occurred from the beginning of the universe until now could only sample about one, I think I've calculated about one ten trillion trillionth of the total possibilities that correspond to a modest length protein. So it's like the bike thief trying to sample that 10-dial lock, only much, much worse. You know, it turns out that 14 billion years isn't enough time to have a reasonable chance to find informational biomolecules by chance alone. I mean, is the whole scientific argument that removes God, is it just an attempt by science to play God, because whenever we are told that scientific principles break down and no longer exist at the very beginning, for instance, and it doesn't make sense, but we're told that that's just how it happened and you have to accept that. And it seems to be people jumping over themselves with a desperation to try and remove the idea that there is an intelligent designer. Well, I tend to think that the questions of motivation in these debates are kind of a wash. I think as theists, we have to, I'm a theist, okay, I believe in God. In my first two books, I argued for designing intelligence of some kind as being, of some unspecified kind as being the best explanation for the information, for example, in the cell or the information needed to build fundamentally new body plans in the history of life on earth. So, but in my last book, I extend that argument, I bring in evidence from cosmology and physics and suggest that the best explanation for that, the ensemble of evidence that we have about biological and physical and cosmological origins is actually a designing intelligence that has attributes that, for example, Jews and Christians have always described to God, transcendence, as well as intelligence. For example, no being within the cosmos, no space alien, and some scientists have proposed even Crick, Francis Crick in 1981 in a little book called Life Itself floated the idea that yes we do see evidence of design in life. The origin of life is a very hard problem, we can't see how it could possibly have happened on Earth so maybe there was an intelligent life form from space who seeded life here. He was subsequently ridiculed a bit and said, I think he was embarrassed that he'd floated this and said he would not, he foreswore any further speculation on the origin of life problem. It was too difficult, he said. But in any case, back to your question, I think the whole question is. Oh, I was finishing a thought, and that is that the evidence of design that we have from the very beginning of the universe and what's called the fine-tuning of the laws and constants of physics and the initial conditions of the universe, the basic parameters of physics, which were said at the beginning, are exquisitely finely tuned against all odds. And no space alien, no intelligence within the cosmos could be responsible for the evidence of design that we have from the very beginning of the universe because any alleged space alien would itself have had to evolve by some sort of naturalistic processes further down the timeline, once you have stable galaxies and planets and that sort of thing and so no being within the cosmos could be responsible for the conditions that made its future evolution possible nor could a space alien to be responsible for the origin of the universe itself. So when you bring in the cosmological and the physical evidence, I think the only type of designing intelligence that can explain the whole range of evidence we have is one that is transcendent, that is beyond the cosmos, but also active in the creation, because we see evidence of information arising later, and information, as I've mentioned, is a mind product based on our uniform and repeated experience.  But as to the motivation issue, I kind of think it's a wash. I think theists have to acknowledge that all people, including those of us who are theists, have a motivation, maybe a hope that there is a purposeful intelligence behind the cosmos. I think there's a kind of growing angst in young people. Harvard study recently showing that over 50% of young people have doubts about there being any purpose to their existence. And this is contributing to the mental health crisis. And so I think all of us would like, to be possible, for there to be life after death, for there to be an enduring purpose to our lives that does not extinguish when we die or when eventually there's a heat death of the universe. I think theism, belief in God, gives people a sense of purpose in relation, the possibility of a relationship to our creator. That's a positive thing. I think there's also a common human motivation to not want to be accountable to that creator and to have moral, complete moral freedom to decide what we want to do at any given time. And so oftentimes theists or God-believers, religious people will say, well, you just like these materialistic theories of origins because you don't want to be accountable to a higher power. That might be true, But it's equally true that the atheist will often say, well, but you guys just need a cosmic crutch. You need comfort from the idea of a divine being, a loving creator, father, whatever, you know, the divine father figure. And Freud famously critiqued or criticized religious belief in those terms. So I think that those two kind of motivation, arguments about motivation are something of a wash and that what I've tried to do in Return of the God Hypothesis is set all of that aside, look at the evidence that we have, and then evaluate it using some standard methods of scientific reasoning and standard methods of evaluating hypotheses, such as a Bayesian analysis, for example, that come out of logic and philosophy. And set the motivation questions aside. And my conclusion is that the evidence for an intelligent designer of some unspecified kind is extremely strong from biology, and that when you bring in the cosmological and physical evidence, the evidence of fine-tuning and the evidence we have that the material cosmos itself had a beginning, I think materialism fails as an explanation, and you need to invoke an intelligence that is both transcendent and active in the creation to explain the whole range of evidence. Well, let me pick you up on that change, because initially there is a change from someone who believes the evolutionary model, big bang, there is no external force. That step from there to there is an external force, there is intelligent design feeding into the universe we have. And then it's another step to take that to there is an intelligent designer, now there is a personal God. And that step certainly, I assume, is frowned upon in the scientific community. Tell us about you making that step, because it would have been much safer to stay, I guess, in the ID side and not to make the step into who that individual is. Tell us about kind of what prompted you to actually make the step into answering that who question.  Right. Well, I've been thinking about this question for 35, 36, I don't know, since the mid-80s when I was a very young scientist. And it was at the conference that inspired it, because at the conference, there were people already thinking about the God question, especially the cosmologists. At that conference, Alan Sandage announced his conversion from scientific agnosticism he was a scientific materialist to theism and indeed I think he became Christian, and he talked about how the evidence for the singularity at the beginning of the universe, the evidence that the material cosmos itself had a beginning was one of the things that moved him off of that materialistic perspective, that it was clear to him that as he described it, that the evidence we had for a beginning was evidence for what he called a super, with a space in between, natural events, nothing within the cosmos could explain the origin of the cosmos itself, if matter, space, time and energy have a beginning and as best we can tell they do and there are multiple lines of evidence and theoretical considerations that lead to that conclusion and I developed that in return of the god hypothesis, it is the evidence from observational astronomy and also developments in theoretical physics converge on that conclusion. And if that's the case, if matter and energy themselves have a beginning, and indeed if space and time themselves have a beginning, then we can't invoke any materialistic explanation to explain that. Because before there was matter, before the beginning of matter, there was no matter to do the causing. And that's the problem. There must be something. For there to be a causal explanation for the universe, it requires a transcendent something. And when you also consider that we have evidence for design from the very beginning in the fine-tuning of the initial physical parameters of the universe, the initial conditions of the universe, the initial establishment and fine-tuning of the physical laws, then you have evidence for that transcendent something being a transcendent intelligent something. And if something is intelligent, capable of making choices between one outcome or another, that's really what we mean by personhood. I mean, this is very close to a, the idea of a personal gun, now that entity may not want to have anything to do with us, but we're talking about a conscious agent when we talk about evidence for intelligent design, and then we have further evidence I think in biology with the presence of the information and information processing system inside cells. And so when you bring all that together, I think you can start to address the who question. So after I wrote Signature in the Cell and Darwin's Doubt, a lot of my readers were asking, OK, that's great. We have evidence of a designing intelligence, but who would that intelligence have been? Is it a space alien, something imminent within the cosmos, like Crick and others have proposed? Or is it a transcendent intelligence? And what can science tell us about that question? So I thought it's a natural question that flows from my first two books. I would stipulate that the theory of intelligent design, formally as a theory, is a theory of design detection. And it allows us to detect the action of an agent as opposed to undirected material processes. We have this example that we often use. If you look at the faces on the mountains at Mount Rushmore, you right away know that a designing intelligence of some kind was responsible for sculpting those faces. And those faces exhibit two properties which, when found together, invariably and reliably indicate a designing intelligence. And we've described those properties as high probability and what's called a specification, a pattern match. And we have evidence of small probability specifications in life. If something is an informational sequence, it's another way of revealing design, so that we can get into all of that. The point is, we've got evidence of design in life, but, the cosmology and fine-tuning allow us to adjudicate between two different design hypotheses, the imminent intelligence and the transcendent one. And I thought, well, let's take this on. It's a natural, it goes beyond the theory of intelligent design, formally speaking, and it addresses one of the possible implications of the evidence of design that we have in biology, that maybe we're looking at a theistic designer, not a space alien.  I just want to pick one or two things from different books. Signature in the Cells, you have it there behind you. And when you simply begin to look at the complexity of cells. You realize that they are like little mini cities, that actually everything, so much happens within. And I guess we are learning more and more about everything in life. And you talk to doctors and they tell you that they are learning more and more about how the body functions. And there's a lot of the unknown. But when you look at that just complexity of, we call it the simple cell, which isn't really very simple, that new research and that new understanding, surely that should move people to a position that, this is impossible, that this level of complexity simply just happens. So tell us about that, just the cell, which is not simple.  Yeah, that's the sort of ground zero for me in my research and interest in the question was this origin of life problem. That's what I did my PhD on. And I think it's really interesting. We could have debates about the adequacy of Darwinian evolutionary theory. I'm sceptical about what's called macroevolutionary theory. But set that all aside. Darwin presupposed one or a few simple forms. And in the immediate wake of the Darwinian Revolution, people like Huxley and Heckel started to develop theories of the origin of those first simple cells. And they regarded the cell in the late 19th century as a very simple, as Huxley put it, a simple homogenous globule or homogeneous globule of undifferentiated protoplasm. And they viewed the essence of the cell as a simple chemical, it's coming from a simple chemical substance they called protoplasm. And so it kind of, and they viewed it as a kind of jello or goo, which could be produced by a few simple chemical reactions. That viewpoint started to fall by the wayside very, very quickly. By the 1890s, early part of the 20th century, we were learning a lot more about the complexity of metabolism. When you get to the molecular biological revolution in the late 1950s and 1960s, nobody any longer thinks the cell is simple because the most important biomacromolecules are large information-bearing molecules that are part of a larger information processing system. And so this is where I think, and in confronting that. And so any origin of life theory has to explain where that came from. My supervisor used to say that the nature of life and the origin of life topics are connected. We need to know what life is in order to formulate a plausible theory of how it came to be. And now that we know that life is much more complex and that we have an integrated informational complexity that characterizes life, those 19th century theories and the first origin of life theories associated with figures like Alexander Oparin, for example, from the 1920s and 30s. These are not adequate to explain what we see. But what's happened, and this is what I documented in Signature in the Cell, is that none of the subsequent chemical evolutionary theories, whether they're based on chance or based on self-organizational laws or somehow based on somehow combining the two, none of those theories have proven adequate either. This problem of sequence specificity or functional information has defied explanation by reference to theories that start from lower level chemistry. It's proven very, very difficult, implausible in the extreme. Here's the problem. Getting from the chemistry to the code is the problem. And undirected chemical processes do not, when observed, move in a life-friendly, information-generative direction. And this has been the problem. So the impasse in origin of life research, which really began in the late 70s, was documented by this book I mentioned, the mystery of life's origin and books, another book, for example, by Robert Shapiro called, Origins, A Sceptic's Guide. That impasse from the 1980s has continued right to the present. Dawkins was interviewed in a film in 2009 by Ben Stein, the American economist and comic. And very quickly, Stein got Dawkins to acknowledge that nobody knows how we got from from the prebiotic chemistry to the first cell. Well, that's kind of a news headline. We get the impression from textbooks that the evolutionary biologists have this all sewed up. They don't by any means. This is a longstanding conundrum. And it is the integrated complexity and informational properties of the cell that have, I think, most fundamentally defied explanation by these chemical evolutionary theories. And I think that's very significant when you think of the whole kind of evolutionary story. Darwin thought that if you could start with something simple then the mutation selection, oh, he didn't have mutations, but the mutation, sorry, the natural selection variation mechanism, could generate all the complexity of life. You'd go from simple to complex very gradually. Well, if the simplest thing is immensely complex and manifest a kind of complexity that defies any undirected process that we can think of, well, then you don't have a seamless evolutionary story from goo to you. Because I guess when you're Darwin's doubt, the next book you wrote, I guess when Charles Darwin wrote Origin of the Species, he assumed it was settled. But science is never settled. There are always developments. And yet it seems, oh, that's sacrosanct, and that cannot be touched and must be accepted. Yeah, and what I did in the second book was show or argue that the information problem is not something that only resides at the lowest level in the biological hierarchy, at the point of the origin of the first cell, but it also emerges later when we have major innovations in the history of life as documented by the fossil record, events such as the Cambrian explosion or the origin of the mammalian radiation or the angiosperm revolution. There are many events in the history of life where you get this sudden or abrupt appearance in the fossil record of completely new form and structure. And we now know in our information age, as it's come to biology, that if you want to build a new cell, you've got to have new proteins. So you have to to have information to build the first cell. But the same thing turns out to be true at the higher level. If you want to build a completely new body plan, you need new organs and tissues. You need to arrange those organs and tissues in very specific ways. And you need new proteins to service the new cell types that make the organs and tissues possible. So anytime we see the abrupt appearance of new biological form, that implies the origin of a vast amount of new biological information.  And so in Darwin's doubt, I simply asked, well, is there, can the standard mutation natural selection mechanism explain the origin of the kind of information that arises and the amount of information arises? And I argue there that no, it doesn't. That we have, there are many, many kinds of biological phenomena that Darwin's mechanism explains beautifully, the small scale variation adaptation, that sort of thing. So 2016, a major conference at the Royal Society in London. First talk there was by the evolutionary biologist Gerd Müller. The conference was convened by a group of evolutionary biologists who think we need a new theory of evolution. Whereas Darwinism does a nice job of explaining small-scale variation, it does a poor job or a completely inadequate job of explaining large-scale morphological innovation, large-scale changes in form. And Mueller, in his first talk at this 2016 event, outlined what he called the explanatory deficits of Neo-Darwinism, and he made that point very clearly. And so it's, I think it's a new day in evolutionary biology, the word of this is not percolating so well perhaps but that was part of the reasons I wrote Darwin's doubt is that within the biological peer-reviewed biological literature it's well known that the problem of the origin of large-scale form, the origin of new body plans is not well explained by the mutation selection mechanism. At this 16 conference, the conveners included many scientists who were trying to come up with new mechanisms that might explain the problem of morphological innovation. Afterwards, one of the conveners said the conference was characterized by a lack of momentousness. Effectively, the evolutionary biologists proposing new theories of evolution and new evolutionary mechanisms had done a good job characterizing the problems, but had not really come up with anything that solves the fundamental problems that we encounter in biology when we see these large jumps in form and structure arising. And in Darwin's Doubt, I didn't just critique standard neo-Darwinian theories of evolution, but many of these newer theories as well, showing that invariably the problem of the origin of biological information and the form that arises from it is the key unsolved problem in contemporary evolutionary theory.  Mueller and Newman wrote a book with MIT Press called On the Origins of Organismal Form, which was a kind of play on the origin of species. Darwinism does a nice job of explaining speciation, small-scale changes within the limits of the pre-existing genomic endowments of an organism, but it doesn't do a good job of explaining new form that requires new genetic information. And these authors, Newman and Mueller, listed in a table of unsolved problems in evolutionary theory, the problem of the origin of biological form. That's what we thought Darwin explained back in 1859, and instead we realized that the mechanisms that he first envisioned have much more limited creative power and much more limited explanatory scope. So that's what my second book was about, and also I think it's still, this is still very much right at the cutting edge of the discussion in evolutionary biology. We can explain the small scale stuff, but not the big scale stuff. Let's just finish off with actually disseminating the information, because all of this is about taking issues which are complex and actually making it understandable to the wider public. And I guess part of that is, I mean, obviously being on the most popular podcast in the world, Joe Rogan, I was like, oh, there's Steve Meyer and Joe Rogan. And taking that information and that turbocharges that. So maybe just to finish off on the ability to disseminate this, because I think in the US, the ID movement is more understood, where I think maybe in Europe, it's certainly it's more misunderstood and not as accepted where there is an acceptance in the States. But tell us about that and how being on something like podcasts like that turbocharge the message. Yeah, well, I can tell you, you know, now that I'm getting introduced at conferences and things after The Joe Rogan Experience, it's as if I never did anything else in my life. No, that's the only thing people care to mention. I mean, he's got a monster reach. He's extremely, his questions on the interview were very probative. Of course, slightly to moderately sceptical, maybe more, but I thought they were fair. I thought it was a great discussion and it was a lot of fun. And, you know, we've had not only, I think he gets something like 11 million downloads on average for his podcast. We couldn't even believe these numbers when we were told them. But there have been over 25 million derivative videos that social media influencers and podcasters have made about the Rogan interview, analysing different sections of our conversation. So, yeah, that was a huge boost to the dissemination of our message. But one thing I realized in our conversation that there's a simple way to understand the information argument. And that's one of our tools in getting some of these ideas out is distilling some of these things that we've been talking about at a fairly deep level to a more understandable level. So let me just run that argument, that argument sketch or the distillation of the argument by your audience. And then they would talk about some of the things we're doing to get the word out. Our local hero in the Seattle area here is Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft. And he has said, like Dawkins, that the digital code in the DNA, that the DNA is like a software program, but much more complex than any we've ever created. Dawkins, as I mentioned before, says it's like a machine code. It contains machine code. Well, if you think about that, those are very suggestive quotations because what we know from our uniform and repeated experience, which is the basis of all scientific reasoning, is that information always arises from an intelligence source. If you have a section of software, there was a programmer involved. If you have a hieroglyphic inscription, there was an ancient scribe involved. If you have a paragraph in a book, there was a writer involved. As we're effectively broadcasting, we're transmitting information, that information ultimately issues from our mind. So whenever we look at information, an informational text or sequence, and we trace it back to its ultimate source, we always come to a mind rather than a material process. All attempts to explain the origin of life based on undirected material processes have failed because they couldn't explain the information present in DNA, RNA proteins. So the presence of that information at the foundation of life, based on our uniform and repeated experience about what it takes to generate information is therefore best explained by the activity of a designing intelligence. It takes a programmer to make a program, to make a software program. And what we have in life is, from many different standpoints, identical to computer code. It is a section of functional digital information. So that's a kind of more user-friendly sketch of the argument but the point is some of these some of these key ideas that are that make intelligent design so, I think so persuasive at a high scientific level if you actually look at the evidence, can be also explained fairly simply and so we're generating a lot of not just Joe Rogan podcast interviews but coming on many many podcasts and that sort of thing but also we're generating a lot of YouTube video short documentaries that get some of these ideas across and for your viewers, one that I might recommend which is on of any it was out on the internet it's called science uprising and it's a series of 10 short documentary videos, another one that we've done called the information enigma which I think would would help people get into these ideas fairly quickly, the information enigmas I think it's a 20 minute short documentary it's up online and we've had hundreds of thousands of views so we're doing a lot to sort of translate the most rigorous science into accessible ideas and disseminate that in user-friendly ways. The best website for finding a lot of this compiled is actually the website for my most recent book, Return of the God Hypothesis. So the website there is returntothegodhypothesis.com. Okay, well, we will have the link for that in the description.  Dr. Stephen Meyer, I really appreciate you coming along. Thank you so much for coming and sharing your experience and understandings of writing and making that understandable, I think, to the viewers, many of them who may not have come across this before.  So thank you for your time today. I really appreciate you having me on, Peter.

For our final main episode of 2023, we're dipping back into the Wills well to discuss Garry's under-appreciated 2010 book, Bomb Power: The Modern Presidency and the National Security State.  Joining us is our great friend Erik Baker, lecturer in the History of Science Department at Harvard University and an editor at The Drift magazine. In Bomb Power, Garry Wills elegantly demonstrates how the imperatives of secretly conceiving, building, and deploying the nuclear bomb fundamentally changed American democracy — massively empowering the presidency, disempowering Congress, and setting the nation on a permanent war footing. At the same time, secrecy and deception metastasized through the American system, enabling the rise of extra-judicial assassinations, coup plotting, domestic surveillance, torture, and clandestine war.  "Secrecy emanated from the Manhattan Project like a giant radiation emission..." writes Wills, "Because the government was the keeper of the great secret, it began specializing in secret keeping.” Also discussed: Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer  (2023), Henry Kissinger (RIP), Bush and Obama, Snowden, Ellsberg, and the ways in which Bomb Power is a profoundly Catholic book. Enjoy!Sources:Garry Wills, Bomb Power: The Modern Presidency and the National Security State (2010)Daniel Ellsberg, The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear Planner (2017)Barton Gellman, Dark Mirror: Edward Snowden and the American Surveillance State (2021)Archbishop John Wester, "Living in the Light of Christ's Peace: A Conversation Toward Nuclear Disarmament," Jan 11, 2022Erik Baker, "Daniel in the Lion's Den: On the Moral Courage of Daniel Ellsberg," The Baffler, June 17, 2023John Schwenkler and Mark Souva, "False Choices: The Unjustifiable Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki," Commonweal, Oct 14, 2020...and don't forget to subscribe to Know Your Enemy on Patreon for access to all of our bonus episodes!

The Hamilton Today Podcast with Scott Thompson: Today is 3 Cent-a-Litre at participating Pioneer gas stations, benefiting the Children's Fund. With your support, over the last 33 years, Pioneer has donated over $520,000 to the Children's Fund, and today is the day to make that number even bigger! United Nations climate negotiators on Wednesday declared the world must transition away from oil, gas and coal. The Geminid Meteor Shower peaks overnight tonight! New polling from Abacus shows a decrease in the lead the Federal Conservatives have held over Trudeau's Liberal government. The feds are taking inspiration from War-Time housing plans, to address the modern housing crisis. From December 14 - 17, Cirque du Soleil's new show, Crystal, is taking the acrobatics and artistry that the company is known for, and reimagining it on ice! Leading the production is Hjordis Lee of Welland, Ontario. Was the Conservative leadership race a focus of foreign interference? The United Nations General Assembly has voted, by large majority, for immediate humanitarian ceasefire, as reactions to the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza from around the world continue to evolve. Guests: Olivia MacKay, President of the Children's Fund Dr. Kerry Bowman, Professor with the School of the Environment with the University of Toronto Paul Delaney. Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University Tim Powers, Chairman of Summa Strategies and Managing Director of Abacus Data Mike Moffatt, Senior Director of Policy and Innovation at the Smart Prosperity Institute and an Assistant Professor in the Business, Economics and Public Policy group at Ivey Business School, Western University Hjordis Lee, lead performer in Crystal, the new show from Cirque du Soleil Sam Cooper, Founder of The Bureau (http://thebureau.news), Bestselling Author, Award-winning investigative journalist Aurel Braun, Professor of International Relations and a Senior Member of the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto Scott Radley, Host of The Scott Radley Show and Columnist with the Hamilton Spectator

The Hamilton Today Podcast with Scott Thompson: The Brott Music Festival is closing its 2023 season with The Musical Magic of Christmas, this Saturday at 3:00 p.m., at the Ancaster Memorial Arts Centre, 357 Wilson St. This performance features Alex Brott, daughter of Boris, making a special appearance to read ‘Twas The Night Before Christmas, 40 years after making her debut on the stage at age 6 while her dad was conducting. An asteroid eclipsing a star is not something you see every day, but early next week, star gazers will have a chance to witness that happen to the brightest star in the night sky, Betelgeuse. The historic Chedoke Estate has reopened, under the management of Cardus. Putin is aiming for another term in office, which he will likely get. What does this mean for Russia, Europe and the world? Cindy Woodhouse has been elected the New National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations. It is all coming up on the Hamilton Today Podcast! Guests: Sean Sparling, retired Deputy Chief of Sault St. Marie Police, currently President of Investigative Solutions Network. Alex Brott. Paul Delaney, Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Science - Department of Physics & Astronomy at York University. Michael Van Pelt, CEO of Cardus. Phil Gurski, President of Borealis Threat and Risk Consulting, former CSIS analyst. Aurel Braun, Professor of International Relations and a Senior Member of the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto. Liam Midzain-Gobin, Settler Scholar and Assistant Professor of Political Science, Brock University. C. J. Hélie, President of Beer Canada. Scott Radley, host of the Scott Radley show and columnist with the Hamilton Spectator. Host – Scott Thompson Content Producer – William Erskine Technical/Podcast Producer – Tom McKay Podcast Co-Producer – Ben Straughan News Anchor – Dave Woodard & Jen McQueen Want to keep up with what happened in Hamilton Today? Subscribe to the podcast! https://megaphone.link/CORU8835115919

Your host Aaron Keshwala is joined by Sport Scientist Ross Bennett to discuss the art (and Science) around building a successful sport science department. The delve into: - The foundations of a successful sport science department - How to build the winning formula.  - Technology and tools to interpret data. - Athlete buy-in to create a positive culture. - Constant evaluation and adaptation of these programmes.  ------------------------------------------------------------- The Locker Room Podcast is brought to you by the people at www.DeelySportScience.com Join today to get exclusive access to our upcoming coaching & sport science webinars, weekly videos of Gaelic football, Hurling, and S&C practices and activities, along with blogs, vlogs, member-led discussions. Sign up to Deely Sport Science elite coaching membership today for great rates: - €45 for 3 months - €80 for 6 months - €160 for 12 months

Welcome to HMSC Connects! where we go behind the scenes of four Harvard museums to explore the connections between us, our big, beautiful world, and even what lies beyond. For this week's episode host Jennifer Berglund is speaking with Hannah Marcus, a professor in Harvard's History of Science Department, and the new Faculty Director of the Collection of Historical Scientific Instruments.

-- Finches Diversify in Decades, Opals Form in Months,  Man's Genetic Diversity in 200 Generations, C-14 Everywhere: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams present their classic program that led to the audience-favorites rsr.org/list-shows! See below and hear on today's radio program our list of Not So Old and Not So Slow Things! From opals forming in months to man's genetic diversity in 200 generations, and with carbon 14 everywhere it's not supposed to be (including in diamonds and dinosaur bones!), scientific observations fill the guys' most traditional list challenging those who claim that the earth is billions of years old. Many of these scientific finds demand a re-evaluation of supposed million and billion-year ages. * Finches Adapt in 17 Years, Not 2.3 Million: Charles Darwin's finches are claimed to have taken 2,300,000 years to diversify from an initial species blown onto the Galapagos Islands. Yet individuals from a single finch species on a U.S. Bird Reservation in the Pacific were introduced to a group of small islands 300 miles away and in at most 17 years, like Darwin's finches, they had diversified their beaks, related muscles, and behavior to fill various ecological niches. Hear about this also at rsr.org/spetner. * Opals Can Form in "A Few Months" And Don't Need 100,000 Years: A leading authority on opals, Allan W. Eckert, observed that, "scientific papers and textbooks have told that the process of opal formation requires tens of thousands of years, perhaps hundreds of thousands... Not true." A 2011 peer-reviewed paper in a geology journal from Australia, where almost all the world's opal is found, reported on the: "new timetable for opal formation involving weeks to a few months and not the hundreds of thousands of years envisaged by the conventional weathering model." (And apparently, per a 2019 report from Entomology Today, opals can even form around insects!) More knowledgeable scientists resist the uncritical, group-think insistence on false super-slow formation rates (as also for manganese nodules, gold veins, stone, petroleum, canyons and gullies, and even guts, all below). Regarding opals, Darwinian bias led geologists to long ignore possible quick action, as from microbes, as a possible explanation for these mineraloids. For both in nature and in the lab, opals form rapidly, not even in 10,000 years, but in weeks. See this also from creationists by a geologist, a paleobiochemist, and a nuclear chemist. * Finches Speciate in Two Generations vs Two Million Years for Darwin's Birds?  Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands are said to have diversified into 14 species over a period of two million years. But in 2017 the journal Science reported a newcomer to the Island which within two generations spawned a reproductively isolated new species. In another instance as documented by Lee Spetner, a hundred birds of the same finch species introduced to an island cluster a 1,000 kilometers from Galapagos diversified into species with the typical variations in beak sizes, etc. "If this diversification occurred in less than seventeen years," Dr. Spetner asks, "why did Darwin's Galapagos finches [as claimed by evolutionists] have to take two million years?" * Blue Eyes Originated Not So Long Ago: Not a million years ago, nor a hundred thousand years ago, but based on a peer-reviewed paper in Human Genetics, a press release at Science Daily reports that, "research shows that people with blue eyes have a single, common ancestor. A team at the University of Copenhagen have tracked down a genetic mutation which took place 6-10,000 years ago and is the cause of the eye colour of all blue-eyed humans alive on the planet today." * Adding the Entire Universe to our List of Not So Old Things? Based on March 2019 findings from Hubble, Nobel laureate Adam Riess of the Space Telescope Science Institute and his co-authors in the Astrophysical Journal estimate that the universe is about a billion years younger than previously thought! Then in September 2019 in the journal Science, the age dropped precipitiously to as low as 11.4 billion years! Of course, these measurements also further squeeze the canonical story of the big bang chronology with its many already existing problems including the insufficient time to "evolve" distant mature galaxies, galaxy clusters, superclusters, enormous black holes, filaments, bubbles, walls, and other superstructures. So, even though the latest estimates are still absurdly too old (Google: big bang predictions, and click on the #1 ranked article, or just go on over there to rsr.org/bb), regardless, we thought we'd plop the whole universe down on our List of Not So Old Things!   * After the Soft Tissue Discoveries, NOW Dino DNA: When a North Carolina State University paleontologist took the Tyrannosaurus Rex photos to the right of original biological material, that led to the 2016 discovery of dinosaur DNA, So far researchers have also recovered dinosaur blood vessels, collagen, osteocytes, hemoglobin, red blood cells, and various proteins. As of May 2018, twenty-six scientific journals, including Nature, Science, PNAS, PLoS One, Bone, and Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, have confirmed the discovery of biomaterial fossils from many dinosaurs! Organisms including T. Rex, hadrosaur, titanosaur, triceratops, Lufengosaur, mosasaur, and Archaeopteryx, and many others dated, allegedly, even hundreds of millions of years old, have yielded their endogenous, still-soft biological material. See the web's most complete listing of 100+ journal papers (screenshot, left) announcing these discoveries at bflist.rsr.org and see it in layman's terms at rsr.org/soft. * Rapid Stalactites, Stalagmites, Etc.: A construction worker in 1954 left a lemonade bottle in one of Australia's famous Jenolan Caves. By 2011 it had been naturally transformed into a stalagmite (below, right). Increasing scientific knowledge is arguing for rapid cave formation (see below, Nat'l Park Service shrinks Carlsbad Caverns formation estimates from 260M years, to 10M, to 2M, to it "depends"). Likewise, examples are growing of rapid formations with typical chemical make-up (see bottle, left) of classic stalactites and stalagmites including:- in Nat'l Geo the Carlsbad Caverns stalagmite that rapidly covered a bat - the tunnel stalagmites at Tennessee's Raccoon Mountain - hundreds of stalactites beneath the Lincoln Memorial - those near Gladfelter Hall at Philadelphia's Temple University (send photos to Bob@rsr.org) - hundreds of stalactites at Australia's zinc mine at Mt. Isa.   - and those beneath Melbourne's Shrine of Remembrance. * Most Human Mutations Arose in 200 Generations: From Adam until Real Science Radio, in only 200 generations! The journal Nature reports The Recent Origin of Most Human Protein-coding Variants. As summarized by geneticist co-author Joshua Akey, "Most of the mutations that we found arose in the last 200 generations or so" (the same number previously published by biblical creationists). Another 2012 paper, in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology (Eugenie Scott's own field) on High mitochondrial mutation rates, shows that one mitochondrial DNA mutation occurs every other generation, which, as creationists point out, indicates that mtEve would have lived about 200 generations ago. That's not so old! * National Geographic's Not-So-Old Hard-Rock Canyon at Mount St. Helens: As our List of Not So Old Things (this web page) reveals, by a kneejerk reaction evolutionary scientists assign ages of tens or hundreds of thousands of years (or at least just long enough to contradict Moses' chronology in Genesis.) However, with closer study, routinely, more and more old ages get revised downward to fit the world's growing scientific knowledge. So the trend is not that more information lengthens ages, but rather, as data replaces guesswork, ages tend to shrink until they are consistent with the young-earth biblical timeframe. Consistent with this observation, the May 2000 issue of National Geographic quotes the U.S. Forest Service's scientist at Mount St. Helens, Peter Frenzen, describing the canyon on the north side of the volcano. "You'd expect a hard-rock canyon to be thousands, even hundreds of thousands of years old. But this was cut in less than a decade." And as for the volcano itself, while again, the kneejerk reaction of old-earthers would be to claim that most geologic features are hundreds of thousands or millions of years old, the atheistic National Geographic magazine acknowledges from the evidence that Mount St. Helens, the volcanic mount, is only about 4,000 years old! See below and more at rsr.org/mount-st-helens. * Mount St. Helens Dome Ten Years Old not 1.7 Million: Geochron Laboratories of Cambridge, Mass., using potassium-argon and other radiometric techniques claims the rock sample they dated, from the volcano's dome, solidified somewhere between 340,000 and 2.8 million years ago. However photographic evidence and historical reports document the dome's formation during the 1980s, just ten years prior to the samples being collected. With the age of this rock known, radiometric dating therefore gets the age 99.99999% wrong. * Devils Hole Pupfish Isolated Not for 13,000 Years But for 100: Secular scientists default to knee-jerk, older-than-Bible-age dates. However, a tiny Mojave desert fish is having none of it. Rather than having been genetically isolated from other fish for 13,000 years (which would make this small school of fish older than the Earth itself), according to a paper in the journal Nature, actual measurements of mutation rates indicate that the genetic diversity of these Pupfish could have been generated in about 100 years, give or take a few. * Polystrates like Spines and Rare Schools of Fossilized Jellyfish: Previously, seven sedimentary layers in Wisconsin had been described as taking a million years to form. And because jellyfish have no skeleton, as Charles Darwin pointed out, it is rare to find them among fossils. But now, reported in the journal Geology, a school of jellyfish fossils have been found throughout those same seven layers. So, polystrate fossils that condense the time of strata deposition from eons to hours or months, include: - Jellyfish in central Wisconsin were not deposited and fossilized over a million years but during a single event quick enough to trap a whole school. (This fossil school, therefore, taken as a unit forms a polystrate fossil.) Examples are everywhere that falsify the claims of strata deposition over millions of years. - Countless trilobites buried in astounding three dimensionality around the world are meticulously recovered from limestone, much of which is claimed to have been deposited very slowly. Contrariwise, because these specimens were buried rapidly in quickly laid down sediments, they show no evidence of greater erosion on their upper parts as compared to their lower parts.- The delicacy of radiating spine polystrates, like tadpole and jellyfish fossils, especially clearly demonstrate the rapidity of such strata deposition. - A second school of jellyfish, even though they rarely fossilized, exists in another locale with jellyfish fossils in multiple layers, in Australia's Brockman Iron Formation, constraining there too the rate of strata deposition. By the way, jellyfish are an example of evolution's big squeeze. Like galaxies evolving too quickly, galaxy clusters, and even human feet (which, like Mummy DNA, challenge the Out of Africa paradigm), jellyfish have gotten into the act squeezing evolution's timeline, here by 200 million years when they were found in strata allegedly a half-a-billion years old. Other examples, ironically referred to as Medusoid Problematica, are even found in pre-Cambrian strata. - 171 tadpoles of the same species buried in diatoms. - Leaves buried vertically through single-celled diatoms powerfully refute the claimed super-slow deposition of diatomaceous rock. - Many fossils, including a Mesosaur, have been buried in multiple "varve" layers, which are claimed to be annual depositions, yet they show no erosional patterns that would indicate gradual burial (as they claim, absurdly, over even thousands of years). - A single whale skeleton preserved in California in dozens of layers of diatom deposits thus forming a polystrate fossil. - 40 whales buried in the desert in Chile. "What's really interesting is that this didn't just happen once," said Smithsonian evolutionist Dr. Nick Pyenson. It happened four times." Why's that? Because "the fossil site has at least four layers", to which Real Science Radio's Bob Enyart replies: "Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha", with RSR co-host Fred Williams thoughtfully adding, "Ha ha!" * Polystrate Trees: Examples abound around the world of polystrate trees:  - Yellowstone's petrified polystrate forest (with the NPS exhibit sign removed; see below) with successive layers of rootless trees demonstrating the rapid deposition of fifty layers of strata. - A similarly formed polystrate fossil forest in France demonstrating the rapid deposition of a dozen strata. - In a thousand locations including famously the Fossil Cliffs of Joggins, Nova Scotia, polystrate fossils such as trees span many strata. - These trees lack erosion: Not only should such fossils, generally speaking, not even exist, but polystrates including trees typically show no evidence of erosion increasing with height. All of this powerfully disproves the claim that the layers were deposited slowly over thousands or millions of years. In the experience of your RSR radio hosts, evolutionists commonly respond to this hard evidence with mocking. See CRSQ June 2006, ICR Impact #316, and RSR 8-11-06 at KGOV.com. * Yellowstone Petrified Trees Sign Removed: The National Park Service removed their incorrect sign (see left and more). The NPS had claimed that in dozens of different strata over a 40-square mile area, many petrified trees were still standing where they had grown. The NPS eventually removed the sign partly because those petrified trees had no root systems, which they would have had if they had grown there. Instead, the trees of this "fossil forest" have roots that are abruptly broken off two or three feet from their trunks. If these mature trees actually had been remnants of sequential forests that had grown up in strata layer on top of strata layer, 27 times on Specimen Ridge (and 50 times at Specimen Creek), such a natural history implies passage of more time than permitted by biblical chronology. So, don't trust the National Park Service on historical science because they're wrong on the age of the Earth. * Wood Petrifies Quickly: Not surprisingly, by the common evolutionary knee-jerk claim of deep time, "several researchers believe that several millions of years are necessary for the complete formation of silicified wood". Our List of Not So Old and Not So Slow Things includes the work of five Japanese scientists who proved creationist research and published their results in the peer-reviewed journal Sedimentary Geology showing that wood can and does petrify rapidly. Modern wood significantly petrified in 36 years these researchers concluded that wood buried in strata could have been petrified in "a fairly short period of time, in the order of several tens to hundreds of years." * The Scablands: The primary surface features of the Scablands, which cover thousands of square miles of eastern Washington, were long believed to have formed gradually. Yet, against the determined claims of uniformitarian geologists, there is now overwhelming evidence as presented even in a NOVA TV program that the primary features of the Scablands formed rapidly from a catastrophic breach of Lake Missoula causing a massive regional flood. Of course evolutionary geologists still argue that the landscape was formed over tens of thousands of years, now by claiming there must have been a hundred Missoula floods. However, the evidence that there was Only One Lake Missoula Flood has been powerfully reinforced by a University of Colorado Ph.D. thesis. So the Scablands itself is no longer available to old-earthers as de facto evidence for the passage of millions of years. * The Heart Mountain Detachment: in Wyoming just east of Yellowstone, this mountain did not break apart slowly by uniformitarian processes but in only about half-an-hour as widely reported including in the evolutionist LiveScience.com, "Land Speed Record: Mountain Moves 62 Miles in 30 Minutes." The evidence indicates that this mountain of rock covering 425 square miles rapidly broke into 50 pieces and slid apart over an area of more than 1,300 square miles in a biblical, not a "geological," timeframe.  * "150 Million" year-old Squid Ink Not Decomposed: This still-writable ink had dehydrated but had not decomposed! The British Geological Survey's Dr. Phil Wilby, who excavated the fossil, said, "It is difficult to imagine how you can have something as soft and sloppy as an ink sac fossilised in three dimensions, still black, and inside a rock that is 150 million years old." And the Daily Mail states that, "the black ink was of exactly the same structure as that of today's version", just desiccated. And Wilby added, "Normally you would find only the hard parts like the shell and bones fossilised but... these creatures... can be dissected as if they are living animals, you can see the muscle fibres and cells. It is difficult to imagine... The structure is similar to ink from a modern squid so we can write with it..." Why is this difficult for evolutionists to imagine? Because as Dr. Carl Wieland writes, "Chemical structures 'fall apart' all by themselves over time due to the randomizing effects of molecular motion."Decades ago Bob Enyart broadcast a geology program about Mount St. Helens' catastrophic destruction of forests and the hydraulic transportation and upright deposition of trees. Later, Bob met the chief ranger from Haleakala National Park on Hawaii's island of Maui, Mark Tanaka-Sanders. The ranger agreed to correspond with his colleague at Yellowstone to urge him to have the sign removed. Thankfully, it was then removed. (See also AIG, CMI, and all the original Yellowstone exhibit photos.) Groundbreaking research conducted by creation geologist Dr. Steve Austin in Spirit Lake after Mount St. Helens eruption provided a modern-day analog to the formation of Yellowstone fossil forest. A steam blast from that volcano blew over tens of thousands of trees leaving them without attached roots. Many thousands of those trees were floating upright in Spirit Lake, and began sinking at varying rates into rapidly and sporadically deposited sediments. Once Yellowstone's successive forest interpretation was falsified (though like with junk DNA, it's too big to fail, so many atheists and others still cling to it), the erroneous sign was removed. * Asiatic vs. European Honeybees: These two populations of bees have been separated supposedly for seven million years. A researcher decided to put the two together to see what would happen. What we should have here is a failure to communicate that would have resulted after their "language" evolved over millions of years. However, European and Asiatic honeybees are still able to communicate, putting into doubt the evolutionary claim that they were separated over "geologic periods." For more, see the Public Library of Science, Asiatic Honeybees Can Understand Dance Language of European Honeybees. (Oh yeah, and why don't fossils of poorly-formed honeycombs exist, from the millions of years before the bees and natural selection finally got the design right? Ha! Because they don't exist! :) Nautiloid proves rapid limestone formation. * Remember the Nautiloids: In the Grand Canyon there is a limestone layer averaging seven feet thick that runs the 277 miles of the canyon (and beyond) that covers hundreds of square miles and contains an average of one nautiloid fossil per square meter. Along with many other dead creatures in this one particular layer, 15% of these nautiloids were killed and then fossilized standing on their heads. Yes, vertically. They were caught in such an intense and rapid catastrophic flow that gravity was not able to cause all of their dead carcasses to fall over on their sides. Famed Mount St. Helens geologist Steve Austin is also the world's leading expert on nautiloid fossils and has worked in the canyon and presented his findings to the park's rangers at the invitation of National Park Service officials. Austin points out, as is true of many of the world's mass fossil graveyards, that this enormous nautiloid deposition provides indisputable proof of the extremely rapid formation of a significant layer of limestone near the bottom of the canyon, a layer like the others we've been told about, that allegedly formed at the bottom of a calm and placid sea with slow and gradual sedimentation. But a million nautiloids, standing on their heads, literally, would beg to differ. At our sister stie, RSR provides the relevant Geologic Society of America abstract, links, and video. *  Now It's Allegedly Two Million Year-Old Leaves: "When we started pulling leaves out of the soil, that was surreal, to know that it's millions of years old..." sur-re-al: adjective: a bizarre mix of fact and fantasy. In this case, the leaves are the facts. Earth scientists from Ohio State and the University of Minnesota say that wood and leaves they found in the Canadian Arctic are at least two million years old, and perhaps more than ten million years old, even though the leaves are just dry and crumbly and the wood still burns! * Gold Precipitates in Veins in Less than a Second: After geologists submitted for decades to the assumption that each layer of gold would deposit at the alleged super slow rates of geologic process, the journal Nature Geoscience reports that each layer of deposition can occur within a few tenths of a second. Meanwhile, at the Lihir gold deposit in Papua New Guinea, evolutionists assumed the more than 20 million ounces of gold in the Lihir reserve took millions of years to deposit, but as reported in the journal Science, geologists can now demonstrate that the deposit could have formed in thousands of years, or far more quickly! Iceland's not-so-old Surtsey Island looks ancient. * Surtsey Island, Iceland: Of the volcanic island that formed in 1963, New Scientist reported in 2007 about Surtsey that "geographers... marvel that canyons, gullies and other land features that typically take tens of thousands or millions of years to form were created in less than a decade." Yes. And Sigurdur Thorarinsson, Iceland's chief  geologist, wrote in the months after Surtsey formed, "that the time scale," he had been trained "to attach to geological developments is misleading." [For what is said to] take thousands of years... the same development may take a few weeks or even days here [including to form] a landscape... so varied and mature that it was almost beyond belief... wide sandy beaches and precipitous crags... gravel banks and lagoons, impressive cliffs… hollows, glens and soft undulating land... fractures and faultscarps, channels and screes… confounded by what met your eye... boulders worn by the surf, some of which were almost round... -Iceland's chief geologist * The Palouse River Gorge: In the southeast of Washington State, the Palouse River Gorge is one of many features formed rapidly by 500 cubic miles of water catastrophically released with the breaching of a natural dam in the Lake Missoula Flood (which gouged out the Scablands as described above). So, hard rock can be breached and eroded rapidly. * Leaf Shapes Identical for 190 Million Years?  From Berkley.edu, "Ginkgo biloba... dates back to... about 190 million years ago... fossilized leaf material from the Tertiary species Ginkgo adiantoides is considered similar or even identical to that produced by modern Ginkgo biloba trees... virtually indistinguishable..." The literature describes leaf shapes as "spectacularly diverse" sometimes within a species but especially across the plant kingdom. Because all kinds of plants survive with all kinds of different leaf shapes, the conservation of a species retaining a single shape over alleged deep time is a telling issue. Darwin's theory is undermined by the unchanging shape over millions of years of a species' leaf shape. This lack of change, stasis in what should be an easily morphable plant trait, supports the broader conclusion that chimp-like creatures did not become human beings and all the other ambitious evolutionary creation of new kinds are simply imagined. (Ginkgo adiantoides and biloba are actually the same species. Wikipedia states, "It is doubtful whether the Northern Hemisphere fossil species of Ginkgo can be reliably distinguished." For oftentimes, as documented by Dr. Carl Werner in his Evolution: The Grand Experiment series, paleontogists falsely speciate identical specimens, giving different species names, even different genus names, to the fossil and living animals that appear identical.) * Box Canyon, Idaho: Geologists now think Box Canyon in Idaho, USA, was carved by a catastrophic flood and not slowly over millions of years with 1) huge plunge pools formed by waterfalls; 2) the almost complete removal of large basalt boulders from the canyon; 3) an eroded notch on the plateau at the top of the canyon; and 4) water scour marks on the basalt plateau leading to the canyon. Scientists calculate that the flood was so large that it could have eroded the whole canyon in as little as 35 days. See the journal Science, Formation of Box Canyon, Idaho, by Megaflood, and the Journal of Creation, and Creation Magazine. * Manganese Nodules Rapid Formation: Allegedly, as claimed at the Wikipedia entry from 2005 through 2021: "Nodule growth is one of the slowest of all geological phenomena – in the order of a centimeter over several million years." Wow, that would be slow! And a Texas A&M Marine Sciences technical slide presentation says, “They grow very slowly (mm/million years) and can be tens of millions of years old", with RWU's oceanography textbook also putting it at "0.001 mm per thousand years." But according to a World Almanac documentary they have formed "around beer cans," said marine geologist Dr. John Yates in the 1997 video Universe Beneath the Sea: The Next Frontier. There are also reports of manganese nodules forming around ships sunk in the First World War. See more at at youngearth.com, at TOL, in the print edition of the Journal of Creation, and in this typical forum discussion with atheists (at the Chicago Cubs forum no less :). * "6,000 year-old" Mitochondrial Eve: As the Bible calls "Eve... the mother of all living" (Gen. 3:20), genetic researchers have named the one woman from whom all humans have descended "Mitochondrial Eve." But in a scientific attempt to date her existence, they openly admit that they included chimpanzee DNA in their analysis in order to get what they viewed as a reasonably old date of 200,000 years ago (which is still surprisingly recent from their perspective, but old enough not to strain Darwinian theory too much). But then as widely reported including by Science magazine, when they dropped the chimp data and used only actual human mutation rates, that process determined that Eve lived only six thousand years ago! In Ann Gibbon's Science article, "Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock," rather than again using circular reasoning by assuming their conclusion (that humans evolved from ape-like creatures), they performed their calculations using actual measured mutation rates. This peer-reviewed journal then reported that if these rates have been constant, "mitochondrial Eve… would be a mere 6000 years old." See also the journal Nature and creation.com's "A shrinking date for Eve," and Walt Brown's assessment. Expectedly though, evolutionists have found a way to reject their own unbiased finding (the conclusion contrary to their self-interest) by returning to their original method of using circular reasoning, as reported in the American Journal of Human Genetics, "calibrating against recent evidence for the divergence time of humans and chimpanzees,"  to reset their mitochondrial clock back to 200,000 years. * Even Younger Y-Chromosomal Adam: (Although he should be called, "Y-Chromosomal Noah.") While we inherit our mtDNA only from our mothers, only men have a Y chromosome (which incidentally genetically disproves the claim that the fetus is "part of the woman's body," since the little boy's y chromosome could never be part of mom's body). Based on documented mutation rates on and the extraordinary lack of mutational differences in this specifically male DNA, the Y-chromosomal Adam would have lived only a few thousand years ago! (He's significantly younger than mtEve because of the genetic bottleneck of the global flood.) Yet while the Darwinian camp wrongly claimed for decades that humans were 98% genetically similar to chimps, secular scientists today, using the same type of calculation only more accurately, have unintentionally documented that chimps are about as far genetically from what makes a human being a male, as mankind itself is from sponges! Geneticists have found now that sponges are 70% the same as humans genetically, and separately, that human and chimp Y chromosomes are  "horrendously" 30%

Diane Davis, Charles Dyer Norton Professor of Regional Planning and Urbanism recently co-organized a two-day conference on water with Gabriela Soto Laveaga, Professor of the History of Science and Antonio Madero Professor for the Study of Mexico in Harvard's History of Science Department. The two—co-chairs of the Faculty Committee on Mexico at the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies—brought together an unusual group of experts—from historians to hydrologists to border analysts and architects—to think about think about the challenges for water in Mexico and beyond in the context of climate change.

This week on the Pacey Performance Podcast, Rob is speaking to Teofe Ziemnicki who is Head of Sports Science at TeamBuildr. Coaches and sports scientists who have transitioned from being employed by one organisation to working with tech companies and visiting organisations as part of their roles have incredible insights into what is going on in the industry. That's why we were so pumped to get Teofe on the podcast. In this first half of this episode we get an insight into where sports science is at in the US. Teofe gives us his view on where he sees the gaps that could be easily plugged in smaller organisations. These smaller organisations are often "one-man bands" and he gives this thoughts on how the staff in these positions can get easy wins and start collecting good data to inform practice and educate coaches. In the second half of the episode, Teofe flips the first hald discussion on its head and gives us his thoughts on sports science practice in larger organisations. Where are the easy wins? Where are the gaps? Teofe speaks to and gets unique insights into what is going on across the country so there is no better person to discuss this. If you want to hear this unique insight, listen to this episode with Teofe. Main talking points - What is sports science at smaller organisations? Setting up a sports science department What skills are needed from staff? "Sports science is more than just buying and running tech" Gaps in smaller programmes that could be easily plugged How this differs in larger organisations Common concerns around implementing sports sports science principles at larger organisation The future of sports science at the higher end organisations

* Boulder, Colorado's Planetarium Show on Christ's Birth: For Christmas, we're enjoying this classic Real Science Radio broadcast about the University of Colorado's Fiske Planetarium presentation of a live program, The Astronomical Star of Bethlehem, by amateur astronomer Gil Buller. From the planetarium's website, "This exciting program examines the sky at the time of the birth of Christ to see which astronomical phenomenon may have been the Star of Bethlehem." * Orbital Mechanics Help Identify the Star of Bethlehem: Using computer-generated images of the night sky in ancient Israel, this planetarium program does in great style what Bob Enyart's DVD does using more modest computer simulation software. Click to get Bob's classic DVD, The Planets, Stars, and The Bible. * The Materialist's Star Problem: You may enjoy the bulleted list at our rsr.org/list-of-star-formation-problems broadcast show page. And whereas unbelievers say that young-earth creationists have a "starlight and time" problem, remember, materialists have: 1) a star problem 2) a light problem 3) a time problem, and 4) an everything problem.     Today's Resource: We invite you to browse through our Science Department in our online store?

* Boulder, Colorado's Planetarium Show on Christ's Birth: For Christmas, we're enjoying this classic Real Science Radio broadcast about the University of Colorado's Fiske Planetarium presentation of a live program, The Astronomical Star of Bethlehem, by amateur astronomer Gil Buller. From the planetarium's website, "This exciting program examines the sky at the time of the birth of Christ to see which astronomical phenomenon may have been the Star of Bethlehem." * Orbital Mechanics Help Identify the Star of Bethlehem: Using computer-generated images of the night sky in ancient Israel, this planetarium program does in great style what Bob Enyart's DVD does using more modest computer simulation software. Click to get Bob's classic DVD, The Planets, Stars, and The Bible. * The Materialist's Star Problem: You may enjoy the bulleted list at our rsr.org/list-of-star-formation-problems broadcast show page. And whereas unbelievers say that young-earth creationists have a "starlight and time" problem, remember, materialists have: 1) a star problem 2) a light problem 3) a time problem, and 4) an everything problem.     Today's Resource: We invite you to browse through our Science Department in our online store?

Evidence for the Big Bang: NASA, Lawrence Krauss, et al., say it's the theory's predictions. [Updated Jan 10, 2021] The Big Bang's Failed Predictions and Failures to Predict: As documented below (from 2014), the repudiation of the predictive ability of the big bang includes its many failures: - the theory's failed prediction of an entire universe worth of antimatter - the failure to predict thgravie universe worth of dark matter needed if the BB is correct- the 2.7K CMB background radiation and the missing shadow of the CMB - 2014 claim, later retracted, of the discovery of inflation's gravity waves - failed to predict inflation, another BB rescue device of questionable predictive value  - the claimed predictions of initial abundances of the elements, hydrogen, helium, etc. - the failure of big bang nucleosynthesis to account for most of the universe, dark matter, etc.  - failures with magnetic monopoles, more on lithium, and the transparency problem - expansion by post-dating expansion discovery and pre-dating the BB the theory could predict expansion - the many observations undermining the big bang theory's foundational predictions of homogeneity and isotropy  - and dozens of other major failed predictions of the big bang.* See our full written report: over at rsr.org/big-bang-predictions.* Get a Real Astronomy Resource: Get the Spike Psarris DVD What You Aren't Being Told About Astronomy and Vol. II, Our Created Stars and Galaxies! These are hands down the best astronomy videos ever made! You'll agree, or your money back! Also, purchasing them from us here at RSR will help us keep our radio show on the air reaching more and more people! And have you browsed through our Science Department in our KGOV Store? (That's what we call it.) Check out also Bob Enyart's Age of the Earth Debate against a well-known geophysicist and a University of Colorado mathematician who are members of the Denver chapter of Reasons to Believe. And we asks you to consider getting a Bob Enyart Live monthly subscription, in audio or video, of one of our really fun and educational resources! Finally, you might enjoy Part 2 of our Big Bang Predictions program and you may like to contrast the big bang theory's rather poor performance (see above) with Real Science Radio's fun and astonishingly successful rsr.org/creationist-predictions record!

Today (which is the one-year mark since losing the late, great, pastor Bob Enyart- more on that tomorrow) we're going back to Bob's debate with atheist Hemant Mehta, author of "I Sold My Soul on eBay". * Atheist Author of I Sold My Soul on eBay: Hemant Mehta talks to Bob Enyart. Part I of II. And in case you're interested in further discussion with atheists, Bob has also talked to: - ABC's Reginald Finley, called The Infidel Guy, from ABC's Wife Swap program; 3-26-07; - TheologyOnLine's psychologist Zakath in a moderated written online debate, also in soft cover; - John Henderson who wrote the book God.com 6-15-2006; - Carlos Morales, Fox News, Huffington Post, etc. reports on U of Texas atheists Bible-turn in program, president of Atheist Agenda 7-14-10 - Freedom from Religion Foundation founder Dan Barker (put the atheist sign near the Nativity at the capitol in Seattle) who was involved with the ministry of Kathryn Kuhlman, one of a group of so-called faith healers. (See a BEL listener who initially compared Bob to Benny Hinn until...) The BEL show was on 12-11-08; - Eugenie Scott, leading anti-evolutionist Ph.D. with the Nat'l Center for Science Education, exhumed 5-6-05; - Michael Shermer, an editor with Scientific American and the Skeptic Society who in this famous 73-second excerpt on BEL denied that the sun is a light, illustrating that it's tough debating atheists when they're hesitant to admit to even the most obvious common ground. 8-28-03 * Special Editions of BEL's Real Science Radio programs: - BEL's famous List of Not-So-Old Things - Bob's debate with Christian Darwinist British author James Hannam - PZ Myers blogs against Real Science Radio so Bob hits back with the Trochlea Challenge - Waiting for Darwin's Other Shoe: Evolution mag's cover story Darwin Was Wrong on the Tree of Life - Microbiologist in Studio: Bob talks with the Creation Research Society Quarterly editor about new genetic findings - Caterpillar Kills Atheism: describe how a bug could evolve to liquefy itself and then build itself into a flying creature - And see the RSR Offer of $2,000 to get 16 letters of the alphabet in their correct places; $500 paid in 1998; $1,500 in 2010... Today's Resource: Give a science Christmas Gift and get free shipping! Have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? Check out especially Walt Brown's In the Beginning! And you can order the Darwin's Dilemma DVD by calling BEL at 1-800-8Enyart.

In 1930, Sigmund Freud wrote Civilization and its Discontents and laid out his theory of civilization: civilization's a problem, and it makes us unhappy. Freud felt humans were aggressive creatures by nature, that we delight in exercising our aggression and hurting one another. He claimed that civilization, with its laws and mores, prevents us from gratifying that aggressiveness. Elizabeth Lunbeck is a professor in the History of Science Department and Director of Graduate Studies at Harvard University, specializing in the history of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, and psychology. Her written works include The Psychiatric Persuasion: Knowledge, Gender, and Power in Modern America and The Americanization of Narcissism. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychoanalysis

In 1930, Sigmund Freud wrote Civilization and its Discontents and laid out his theory of civilization: civilization's a problem, and it makes us unhappy. Freud felt humans were aggressive creatures by nature, that we delight in exercising our aggression and hurting one another. He claimed that civilization, with its laws and mores, prevents us from gratifying that aggressiveness. Elizabeth Lunbeck is a professor in the History of Science Department and Director of Graduate Studies at Harvard University, specializing in the history of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, and psychology. Her written works include The Psychiatric Persuasion: Knowledge, Gender, and Power in Modern America and The Americanization of Narcissism. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In 1930, Sigmund Freud wrote Civilization and its Discontents and laid out his theory of civilization: civilization's a problem, and it makes us unhappy. Freud felt humans were aggressive creatures by nature, that we delight in exercising our aggression and hurting one another. He claimed that civilization, with its laws and mores, prevents us from gratifying that aggressiveness. Elizabeth Lunbeck is a professor in the History of Science Department and Director of Graduate Studies at Harvard University, specializing in the history of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, and psychology. Her written works include The Psychiatric Persuasion: Knowledge, Gender, and Power in Modern America and The Americanization of Narcissism. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

In 1930, Sigmund Freud wrote Civilization and its Discontents and laid out his theory of civilization: civilization's a problem, and it makes us unhappy. Freud felt humans were aggressive creatures by nature, that we delight in exercising our aggression and hurting one another. He claimed that civilization, with its laws and mores, prevents us from gratifying that aggressiveness. Elizabeth Lunbeck is a professor in the History of Science Department and Director of Graduate Studies at Harvard University, specializing in the history of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, and psychology. Her written works include The Psychiatric Persuasion: Knowledge, Gender, and Power in Modern America and The Americanization of Narcissism. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

In 1930, Sigmund Freud wrote Civilization and its Discontents and laid out his theory of civilization: civilization's a problem, and it makes us unhappy. Freud felt humans were aggressive creatures by nature, that we delight in exercising our aggression and hurting one another. He claimed that civilization, with its laws and mores, prevents us from gratifying that aggressiveness. Elizabeth Lunbeck is a professor in the History of Science Department and Director of Graduate Studies at Harvard University, specializing in the history of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, and psychology. Her written works include The Psychiatric Persuasion: Knowledge, Gender, and Power in Modern America and The Americanization of Narcissism. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

Welcome to Episode 110 of The Spokesman Speaks podcast. In this episode, you'll meet Dr. Jason Ross – the new chair of Iowa State University's Department of Animal Science (part of ISU's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences). You'll also hear about the games and prizes that await you at Farm Bureau Park during this year's Iowa State Fair. Resource mentioned in this episode: Fairgoer attractions at Farm Bureau Park, during the 2022 Iowa State Fair

What counts as a robot? This hour, we look at what robots are and learn about the latest in robot technology. We'll also go back in time to discover how robots were used and thought about in medieval times and ancient Greece. Plus, we'll talk about the role of robots in science fiction, and how the genre has shaped our attitudes towards robotics. GUESTS:  Elly Truitt: Professor in the History and Sociology of Science Department at the University of Pennsylvania, author of Medieval Robots: Mechanism, Magic, Nature, and Art Adrienne Mayor: Research Scholar in the Classics and History and Philosophy of Science Department at Stanford University, author of Gods and Robots: Myths, Machines and Ancient Dreams of Technology, among other books Chris Atkeson: Professor at the Robotics Institute and the Human-Computer Interaction Institute at Carnegie Mellon University Daniel H. Wilson: Author of books including Robopocalypse, Robogenesis, and How To Survive a Robot Uprising, his latest novel is The Andromeda Evolution, an authorized sequel to Michael Crichton's The Andromeda Strain Support the show: http://www.wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ready to learn the history, philosophy, and practice of an experienced professional in the test prep industry? MEET OUR GUEST John Henrikson, founder of Monmouth Test Prep, lives in Fair Haven, NJ with his wife and three children. John holds a BS in Biology and MS in Evolutionary Biology. He is the Chair of the Science Department at Seton Hall Preparatory School in northern NJ where he has been teaching AP Biology and AP Environmental Science for twenty four years. John has been working in the test prep industry for more than 25 years. First employed by two of the leading test prep companies in the nation, John struck out on his own more than twenty years ago to develop a broad array of strategies for the PSAT, SAT, and ACT exams. He founded Monmouth Test Prep in 2011 and moved them to their current location in Fair Haven in 2018.   Find John at https://monmouthtestprep.com. ABOUT THIS PODCAST Tests and the Rest is THE college admissions industry podcast. Explore all of our episodes on the show page. ABOUT YOUR HOSTS Mike Bergin is the president of Chariot Learning and founder of TestBright. Amy Seeley is the president of Seeley Test Pros. If you're interested in working with Mike and/or Amy for test preparation, training, or consulting, feel free to get in touch through our contact page.  

Dr. Robert Borzone shares a remarkable story of a woman injured in an automobile accident in 2003, that left her with shaking of her leg.  He explains the case and his treatment outcome using Cox Technic. Dr. Robert Borzone, DC, LAc, DACBN Dr. Robert Borzone, DC, LAc, DACBN is a Chiropractor, Licensed Acupuncturist, Diplomate of the American Clinical Board of Nutrition and Certified AMMA Therapist. He received his bachelor's degree in Biology and Chemistry from Rider College and his Doctorate degree from New York Chiropractic College. Dr. Borzone is the former Dean of the School of Massage Therapy and Chair of the Science Department of the New York College for Health Professions where he also received his training in acupuncture. He is an adjunct faculty member at Stony Brook University teaching courses on Complementary Medicine and Ancestral Medicine for the School of Social Welfare. Dr. Borzone is an adjunct faculty member at Nassau Community College teaching courses on Nutrition and Biology and has lectured at Hofstra University on Nutrition and Wellness. He is a Diplomate in Acupuncture and Oriental Bodywork through the NCCAOM, a Certified Asian Bodywork Therapy Instructor with the AOBTA and a Certified COX practitioner. Dr. Borzone is a Category A Provider of NCBTMB.  Dr. Borzone has dedicated over 30 years to the health professions through education, consulting and professional development. He has lectured extensively in the fields of Oriental Medicine, Nutrition, Back Care and Wellness and has published works in professional journals as well as contributed to books on wellness. Resources: North Shore Wellness Group Find a Back Doctor Cox Technic on YouTube The Cox 8 Table by Haven Medical

Anthony Kiekow, former Director of Communications for the Hazelwood District shares how he went from high school drop out to living a "memoir-able" life! Student Spotlight Aliyah Griddine: "Youth", "Ask Me" Andrea Vepley: "This or That" , "You Lie", "Me", "Refresh Button" Copy of all original works may be obtained from your English Teacher! Special thanks to: Ms. Huckabay and the Wild Scats Group for the "applause" and other sound bytes. The Science Department for the "awesome" jokes! Ms. Ramotowski for her hours of work regarding student performances. Mrs. Ebert and Ms. Smith (and the Advanced Apparel and Textiles Class) for their work on the Writers Week T shirt sales. Mrs. Baker, Mrs. Kessler, Mrs. Reitz, Mrs. Tate, Mrs. Yehlen, and Mr. Noble for the work regarding episode introductions and sign offs. This work was produced, directed, and edited by Dina Patterson as a labor of love for the students at Hazelwood West High School in the hopes that the original spirit of Writers Week would be kept alive during the COVID Pandemic. Writers Week is typically a week long, whole school, production that is currently being funded by grants and fundraising done by the ELA Department outside of contract hours ( i.e. volunteered time). If you would like to see Writers Week continue for future Hazelwood West students, please consider supporting this program through listener support or mailing in a donation. Donations can be mailed to : Hazelwood West High School ( Attn: Dina Patterson- Writers Week) #1 Wildcat Lane Hazelwood, MO 63042 --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/dina-patterson/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/dina-patterson/support

Mrs. Patterson interviews Paul Kaufman, a director who has been awarded 2 Emmys and an NAACP award. We will be talking about his latest project, the movie "Butter" http://buttersfinalmeal.com/directors-statement/ http://buttersfinalmeal.com/Production-Notes/ http://buttersfinalmeal.com/synopsis/ Student Performances: Amya Wren Essay: "Peace with Pain", Poem: "So Anxious" Jamari Ell Poem: Roses are Red, Violets are Blue Erin Cutkomp Short Story: "An Incident at the Pasadena In and Out Burger" Copy of all original works may be obtained from your English Teacher! Special thanks to: Ms. Huckabay and the Wild Scats Group for the "applause" and other sound bytes. The Science Department for the "awesome" jokes! Ms. Ramotowski for her hours of work regarding student performances. Mrs. Ebert and Ms. Smith (and the Advanced Apparel and Textiles Class) for their work on the Writers Week T shirt sales. Mrs. Baker, Mrs. Kessler, Mrs. Reitz, Mrs. Tate, Mrs. Yehlen, and Mr. Noble for the work regarding episode introductions and sign offs. This work was produced, directed, and edited by Dina Patterson as a labor of love for the students at Hazelwood West High School in the hopes that the original spirit of Writers Week would be kept alive during the COVID Pandemic. Writers Week is typically a week long, whole school, production that is currently being funded by grants and fundraising done by the ELA Department outside of contract hours ( i.e. volunteered time). If you would like to see Writers Week continue for future Hazelwood West students, please consider supporting this program through listener support or mailing in a donation. Donations can be mailed to : Hazelwood West High School ( Attn: Dina Patterson- Writers Week) #1 Wildcat Lane Hazelwood, MO 63042 --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/dina-patterson/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/dina-patterson/support

Darlyshia Menzie : a 3x self-published author and has also published 4 journals. She loves writing about building your personal value vault by investigating what's holding you back from your potential and investing in what's going to help you become the person you want to be. She focuses on non-fiction spiritual and personal growth writing, helping women and girls walk wholly in their worth. www.darlyshiamenzie.com Student Spotlight: Jules Andreotta: "Pomegranates" Aurora Ziegler: "Puzzle Pieces" Makiah Young: "Power" Hazelwood West Symphonic orchestra playing the Ukrainian National Anthem in support of Ukraine Copy of all original works may be obtained from your English Teacher! Special thanks to: Ms. Huckabay and the Wild Scats Group for the "applause" and other sound bytes. The Science Department for the "awesome" jokes! Ms. Ramotowski for her hours of work regarding student performances. Mrs. Ebert and Ms. Smith (and the Advanced Apparel and Textiles Class) for their work on the Writers Week T shirt sales. Mrs. Baker, Mrs. Kessler, Mrs. Reitz, Mrs. Tate, Mrs. Yehlen, and Mr. Noble for the work regarding episode introductions and sign offs. Shrek the Musical will April 27-30 @ 7pm: $8 on line, $10 at the door. This work was produced, directed, and edited by Dina Patterson as a labor of love for the students at Hazelwood West High School in the hopes that the original spirit of Writers Week would be kept alive during the COVID Pandemic. Writers Week is typically a week long, whole school, production that is currently being funded by grants and fundraising done by the ELA Department outside of contract hours ( i.e. volunteered time). If you would like to see Writers Week continue for future Hazelwood West students, please consider supporting this program through listener support or mailing in a donation. Donations can be mailed to : Hazelwood West High School ( Attn: Dina Patterson- Writers Week) #1 Wildcat Lane Hazelwood, MO 63042 --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/dina-patterson/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/dina-patterson/support

* Nature Paper Confirms RSR Rejection of 'Junk' DNA: A landmark study by 440 researchers working in 32 laboratories aro und the world has so far been able to identify function for 80 percent of the human genome! Real Science Radio co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams also present six minutes of audio from 1998 when leading evolutionist Eugenie Scott tells Bob that genetic scientists were "over the hump" and affirmatively knew that the pseudogenes had no function and that such junk DNA was therefore evidence against the existence of a Designer. Hear the fundamentalist Bible teacher disagree with the degreed scientist, and guess who science has vindicated? * Notice the Nucleotides in the Trash Bags: :) -->* Hear Eugenie Scott & Bob Spar on Junk DNA: At the beginning of this radio program, hear audio from 1998 from Bob and leading anti-creationist Eugenie Scott debating the merits of the Junk DNA argument! (And see more below). Hear also physicist Lawrence Krauss acknowledge to Bob Enyart that his friend Eugenie was wrong. * ENCODE Project Takes Out the Trash: The project leader for ENCODE (the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) is predicting that eventually, we will learn that "100%" of the genome is functional. (ENCODE Consortium, Dunham, et al., Nature, 2012, pp. 57-74). When the scientist finally reaches the summit, he finds the theologian already there. * Famed Molecular Evolutionist in a Tough Spot: Please pray for Dan Graur. To a young-earth creationist who has been vindicated by ENCODE (and now through 2019 with mountains of consistent data continuously rising up), Dan Graur's angst is our celebration. In 2017 he published, desperately, that based on evolutionary assumptions the human genome cannot be more than at the very most 25% functional. Oh boy. Then in 2019 he acknowledged even more bluntly: If the human genome is indeed devoid of junk DNA as implied by the ENCODE project, then a long, undirected evolutionary process cannot explain the human genome. If, on the other hand, organisms are designed, then all DNA, or as much as possible, is expected to exhibit function. If ENCODE is right, then Evolution is wrong.  * 2019 Worm Update: Worm "junk DNA" turns out to control their ability to regenerate, says Harvard's Evolutionary Biology department. So, even with the worms Dr. Graur, it wasn't junk after all.   For this show, RSR recommends Dr. Don Johnson's Programming of Life DVD! * Junky Real Science Radio Shows - "Nature" Confirms Creationist Rejection of Junk DNA (this webpage) - Bob Debates an Evolutionist 1998 DVD (from our archives) - RSR: Enyart Exhumes Eugenie Scott (2005 radio program: show summary copied here...) * RSR: Bob Debates Ph.D. Evolutionist Eugenie Scott: One of the world's leading anti-creationists vs. Bob Enyart. The debate is decided in the first round, by TKO. That's after Bob asked the well-known scientist for any evidence that any high-level function had ever evolved, like eyesight, or hearing, or flight, or mobility in general? Through the hour-long debate, this evolutionist refused to offer any such evidence but finally settled on a claim of evidence against design, which was: junk DNA! * JUNK DNA: Eugenie Flubs Genetics Prediction, Creationist Hits the Bull's-eye. The negative evidence that Eugenie did offer was Junk DNA. This scientist, from her Darwinist worldview, therefore didn't offer scientific evidence but made this philosophical argument about what a Creator would or would not do; namely, that He wouldn't fill our genome with so much non-protein-coding DNA. While some simple worms have 20,000 genes, it is typically a small portion of DNA that actually codes for proteins. A human has only 20,500 genes, which fills only 2% of our genome. Yet the widespread evolutionary claim for decades (including through the last two decades, and for many, still held today) was that the rest of the genome was left-over evolutionary garbage. Debating this physical anthropologist, Bob Enyart was just a Christian fundamentalist talk show host who spoke from his biblical worldview. Bob argued that our knowledge of genetics was in its infancy, and that it was too early to make the determination that all those non-coding segments of DNA had no function. After this 1998 debate, the next decade of explosive genetic discoveries overwhelmingly validated this creationist perspective, so much so that aside from coding for 20,500 proteins, it is estimated that the remainder of the genome has approximately four million other functional regulatory segments of DNA. So much for junk. Fulfilled predictions, as the world saw with Einstein's 1919 eclipse prediction, go toward scientific credibility. However, Dr. Scott strongly rejected this creationist prediction making an extraordinary claim, which Bob immediately offered her to retract, that scientists currently knew everything they would ever need to know about genetics to conclusively state that all those regions were useless junk. Bob would love a rematch. But Eugenie Scott, (Ph.D. in Physical Anthropology, leading anti-creationist, and director of the National Center for Science Education), who had just debated evolution on a nationwide PBS television program, ended this one-hour program with Bob stating, "Well, I don't debate." * The Diet Pop Junk DNA Syndrome: Junk DNA = Junk Science. Junk DNA was a science stopper. The many Darwinists who strongly pushed (and many still do) the Junk DNA claim predicted that nearly 100% of the entire human genome, the portion that was non-coding, was mostly just left-over junk DNA. It's like a diet cola having NO sugar, NO calories, NO cholesterol, NO fiber, NO protein, NO carbs, NO sodium, NO fat. One wonders what in the world gives it its taste. So from the 1970s it's not surprising, assuming as they did that nearly 95% or so of the DNA was junk anyway, that evolutionists could make such sloppy claims about DNA reinforcing the Darwinian tree. However, now, with the List of Genomes that Just Don't Fit, evolutionary geneticists have falsified the claim that DNA confirms Darwinian predictions. And all that progress aside, the canard that there's nearly a 99% similarity between humans and chimps should have been falsified merely by a careful look at differences in brain and overall anatomy. * Tossing the Wright Brothers Materials and Tools: Consider the significance of the four million regulatory regions of the human genome as compared to the relatively tiny portion that codes for proteins. The creationist Wright Brothers' design, that is, their regulatory input, so-to-speak, dwarfed the importance of the particular kinds of materials and tools that built their airplane. Other tools and materials could suffice. But all the tools and materials in the world assembled for workers who had no design to begin with would not produce an airplane. Thus the regulatory portion of the genome, including that in epigenetics, very possibly may be the more significant part. And similarly, the design concept of a nucleus itself is far more important than what specific chemistry will implement it. * Another Bit of (Famous) Junk DNA Reclassified: (2013 Update.) First consider this analogy from astronomy. Cosmologists cannot show that a big bang could create the contents of the universe because it's impossible to formulate an explanation for the origin of something if you don't know what that something is! And 96% of what's supposedly in a "big bang universe", all that dark matter and dark energy, is of unknown composition. Thus it's no wonder that even the latest textbooks on big bang nucleosynthesis don't even mention, for example, the production of dark matter! Likewise, because geneticists have difficulty even to defining what a "gene" is (see Moran on Dawkins, for example), evolutionists have oversold their case in calling portions of a genome a "pseudogene". As it turns out, a piece of DNA spectacularly referred to as a functionless piece of junk by famed evolutionist Kenneth Miller apparently has important function, according to a 2013 paper in the journal Genome Biology and Evolution. There's a layman's explanation of this issue written by Casey Luskin. Leading evolutionists misunderstood and thus misused the beta-globin "pseudogene" to make what amounts to a religious argument about what a Designer may or may not be inclined to do. As Luskin explains, Darwinists claimed that "matching mistakes" in various species in this "pseudogene" disproved the claim of a designer. But as it turns out, those "matching mistakes" are actually conserved genetic functionality, so that like Darwinist arguments generally, this evolution claim was based on ignorance and it evaporated as science learned more. Additionally, however, (and this gets to the related question of how much marijuana is smoked by leading evolutionists) the theory of neo-Darwinism itself refutes this popular beta-globin pseudogene claim. For if this segment of DNA had no function (i.e., if it were junk) it would NOT have been conserved by natural selection! Mutations over millions of years would have altered any "mistaken" nucleotides. Thus, by the theory itself, we do not expect to see non-functioning segments of DNA with conserved sequences of junk that arose from mutations over millions of years. Thus, the fact that these segments were conserved pointed directly to their being conserved, and functional (and, by the way, to their being designed). * Can Evolution Proceed One Small Step at a Time? If it is true that there are no "small steps," logically or physically, between monochromatic and dichromatic vision, then at least for this wildly complex vision-system upgrade, Richard Dawkins' Mt. Improbable must be scaled in one huge step. And scaling such a complexity cliff in one step, he himself admits, would be very difficult to advocate. There are no Darwin-friendly small steps between eukaryote (nucleus) and prokaryote (no nucleus), nor between invertebrate and vertebrate, nor between monochromatic and dichromatic vision. Whether you are an extinct fossil or a living species, you either have a backbone or you don't; you either have a nucleus or you don't, you might have monochromatic or dichromatic vision, or not, but you don't have something in between. Post-show Note: Illustrating this nicely the Wikipedia article on transposons states, ironically that transposition elements, "are often considered 'junk DNA'. In Oxytricha... they play a critical role..." And from Scientific American, "The term 'junk DNA' repelled mainstream researchers from studying noncoding genetic material for many years." Today's Resource: Get the greatest cell biology video ever made! Getting this on DVD: - helps you to share it with others - helps keep Real Science Radio on the air, and - gets you Dr. Don Johnson's book as a bonus! Information is encoded in every cell in our DNA and in all living things. Learn how the common worldview of life's origin, chemical evolution, conflicts with our knowledge of Information Science. Finally, information Science is changing the way millions of people think about all living systems! Also, have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? You just might LOVE IT! We offer a 30-day money back guarantee on all purchases.

OUR Great Plastic Challenge ResultsNathan Windel and Donnie Lee team up to talk about science and education. They discuss topics related to The Next Generation Science Standards. The NGSS are national standards for K-12 science education adopted or adapted by 44 states. They were established by Achieve and are based on research and input from the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Transcript:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H0n5zczBUQH_GgJgFjiWl2hDOTQHyblm/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104750952408493783016&rtpof=true&sd=trueO.U.R. Science Department:http://www.oursc.k12.ar.us/?DivisionID=7415&DepartmentID=7330Produced by Donnie LeeMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comMore information: https://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/Offices/communications/dese-podcasts

OUR Great Plastic ChallengeNathan Windel and Donnie Lee team up to talk about science and education. They discuss topics related to The Next Generation Science Standards. The NGSS are national standards for K-12 science education adopted or adapted by 44 states. They were established by Achieve and are based on research and input from the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Transcript:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jlJkRY6tBcQp2ykkLtYOxz5p_DmNJ84i/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104750952408493783016&rtpof=true&sd=trueO.U.R. Science Department:http://www.oursc.k12.ar.us/?DivisionID=7415&DepartmentID=7330Produced by Donnie LeeMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comMore information: https://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/Offices/communications/dese-podcasts

OUR Look at UFO's and Alien LifeNathan Windel and Donnie Lee team up to talk about science and education. They discuss topics related to The Next Generation Science Standards. The NGSS are national standards for K-12 science education adopted or adapted by 44 states. They were established by Achieve and are based on research and input from the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Transcript:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yUw3VQxKDdCzezycMiJ2luD5qeG3L3fn/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104750952408493783016&rtpof=true&sd=trueO.U.R. Science Department:http://www.oursc.k12.ar.us/?DivisionID=7415&DepartmentID=7330Produced by Donnie LeeMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comMore information: https://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/Offices/communications/dese-podcasts

Shaping OUR Thought ProcessNathan Windel and Donnie Lee team up to talk about science and education. They discuss topics related to The Next Generation Science Standards. The NGSS are national standards for K-12 science education adopted or adapted by 44 states. They were established by Achieve and are based on research and input from the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Transcript:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QbBrcqD0M9UegBfWovjxh4NOiZdb85HD/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104750952408493783016&rtpof=true&sd=trueO.U.R. Science Department:http://www.oursc.k12.ar.us/?DivisionID=7415&DepartmentID=7330Produced by Donnie LeeMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comMore information: https://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/Offices/communications/dese-podcasts

Joy in OUR ClassroomsNathan Windel and Donnie Lee team up to talk about science and education. They discuss topics related to The Next Generation Science Standards. The NGSS are national standards for K-12 science education adopted or adapted by 44 states. They were established by Achieve and are based on research and input from the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Transcript:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zWsWwUeFDmmrs963Lj7ZI6bMp0d86fJG/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104750952408493783016&rtpof=true&sd=trueO.U.R. Science Department:http://www.oursc.k12.ar.us/?DivisionID=7415&DepartmentID=7330Produced by Donnie LeeMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comMore information: https://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/Offices/communications/dese-podcasts

Oh How We Love OUR Bugs!In this special episode, Nathan and Donnie try to convince Arkansas A.W.A.R.E. podcast hosts Nicole Fairchild and Stacy Moore to try a delicious and nutritious new snack. Will they be able to talk them into trying something new?.....or, will Stacy and Nicole "bug out"? Join us for an entertaining look into the science behind insects as a food source and the impact our culture has had on our behavior towards snacking on bugs. You can also watch the full video version of this podcast by using this handy link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Shn-qttEbrGKNq5ktYwU_blMy2Aqt_ut/view?usp=sharingNathan Windel and Donnie Lee team up to talk about science and education. They discuss topics related to The Next Generation Science Standards. The NGSS are national standards for K-12 science education adopted or adapted by 44 states. They were established by Achieve and are based on research and input from the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Transcript:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qb6ytIOyZ6Opq4edp1ufi7spv9DJ46dA/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=104750952408493783016&rtpof=true&sd=trueO.U.R. Science Department:http://www.oursc.k12.ar.us/?DivisionID=7415&DepartmentID=7330Produced by Donnie LeeMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comMore information: https://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/Offices/communications/dese-podcasts

OUR Stability and ChangeNathan Windel and Donnie Lee team up to talk about science and education. They discuss topics related to The Next Generation Science Standards. The NGSS are national standards for K-12 science education adopted or adapted by 44 states. They were established by Achieve and are based on research and input from the National Research Council, the National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Transcript:https://docs.google.com/document/d/11LYIRVpR-NLTSWPOJuE7vfsNKVvF1FiO/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=102414495116396977572&rtpof=true&sd=trueO.U.R. Science Department:http://www.oursc.k12.ar.us/?DivisionID=7415&DepartmentID=7330Produced by Donnie LeeMusic: https://www.purple-planet.comMore information: https://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/Offices/communications/dese-podcasts

Alison Baum describes her inspiring journey from science filmmaker to charity CEO. Following her own challenges as a new mother, she founded the charity Best Beginnings in 2006 to support parents of all backgrounds to give their babies the best start in life. She spent almost 10 years as a Producer/Director in the Science Department at the BBC, then chose to use her skills and experience as a teacher, scientist and filmmaker to help drive positive social change in the UK. She was awarded an OBE in 2017 for her services to tackling child health inequalities in the New Year honours list.

Climate and energy debates rest on predictions. How many years left to save the planet? How cheap will solar power get? We dive into the dirty world of making such projections. What's the difference between climate models and energy system models? What do past forecasts tell us about the accuracy of these models? Hint: there's no shortage of overconfidence.  On Episode 16 of Energy vs Climate, David, Ed, Sara, and special guest Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University debate the use and abuse of models in energy decisions, and share behind-the-scenes insight into how David and Ken helped Bill Gates learn these topics.Tune into the Youtube version of the episode. Get on the email list at www.energyvsclimate.com

As the number of students returning to campus increases, we want to examine what we can do to make sure we're making that return genuinely worthwhile. Today we speak with three staff members - Matt Marks, Monika Aubin, and Kalli Dalton - and we close by listening to students themselves about how to enhance their in-person learning experience. Matthew Marks teaches in the Business Education Department. Monika Aubin teaches in the Science Department.Kalli Dalton teaches in the Special Education Department. 

In a Tedx Talk by Kira Willey, she said, "Imagine if every classroom in America started with a one minute mindful moment." Well Ryan Shelton is a Physics teacher at Padua Academy, and he does it! His students shared that it improves their focus and concentration.  Ryan Shelton leads the Science Department at Padua Academy in Wilmington, Delaware. He's hiked over 1700 miles, traveled to 5 continents, managed a bakery, started a meditation center, rafted the Grand Canyon and scuba dived on the Great Barrier Reef!  Today, Ryan shares with us how he starts his all-girls high school science class with a 3 minute meditation and their testimony is shared on a blog that he started called “Loving Lives Delaware”. You can read more at https://lovinglivesde.com/author/ryanshelton7/ This simple act has improved the lives of not only Mr. Shelton's students, but staff as well.