Philosopher of Science Stephen C. Meyer Explores The Exciting Theory of Intelligent Design

What Is Intelligent Design? Is Intelligent Design a Scientific Theory?
Subscribe to Dr. Meyer's Channel here: / drstephenmeyer
Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system’s components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago.
The theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the “apparent design” in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism typically starts with a religious text and tries to see how the findings of science can be reconciled to it. Intelligent design starts with the empirical evidence of nature and seeks to ascertain what inferences can be drawn from that evidence. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design does not claim that modern biology can identify whether the intelligent cause detected through science is supernatural.
The scientific method is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.
Check out these other great videos:
Information Enigma: Where does information come from?
• Information Enigma: Wh...
David Berlinski-Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions
• David Berlinski-Atheis...
Great Minds with Michael Medved: Stephen Meyer Discusses What Is Life?
• Great Minds: Michael M...
And be sure to explore this playlist of intelligent design related videos.
Darwin's Doubt & Darwin's Dilemma Videos
• Stephen Meyer & Eric M...
======================================================
This is the official KZbin page of Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture. Meyer is the author of The New York Times best selling book Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the case for Intelligent Design (HarperOne, 2013). For more information on the book and to order your copy visit www.darwinsdoub...
For more information visit
-- www.discovery....
-- www.evolutionne...
-- www.intelligent...
Follow the CSC on Facebook and Twitter:
Twitter: @discoverycsc
Facebook: / discoverycsc

[@SolSystemDiplomat]

Favorite KO’s of all time. 1. Holly holm head kicking Ronda rousy 2. Ngannou uppercutting overeem’s head into orbit. 3. Dr. Meyer dismantling Dr. peter Ward.

[@benjiedrollinger990]

You forgot the rope a dope. Ali KOs Foreman 😂🎉😂

[@malvokaquila6768]

Fantastic as always Dr. Meyer.

[@skyman1770]

Oh yes! Ive been waiting for soo long for another talk from you. You sir have opened my eyes.

[@k_alex]

And thank you Dr Meyer for sharing this important presentation with us.

[@christophersurnname9967]

This guy is a cutting edge dude

[@yearight1205]

Keep doing what you're doing, I believe in your work.

[@vdoniel]

So good to hear from you. Dr. Meyer. Thank you for sharing.

[@pughums]

Stephen, I love listening to your talks. You have been blessed with an wonderful (non-evolved) mind.

[@joshuafeist4862]

Excellent!

[@jamesbarresse8272]

This was awesome. Thank you. I've been listening to you for almost 10 years now. I appreciate you.

[@timwrightfamily740]

Awesome. I've been waiting for some new Meyer! Meyer reminds me that I just can't muster enough faith and imagination to believe in random, spontaneous, biological and astronomical fine tuning needed for this amazing world of life.

[@CandidDate]

When I first heard of I.D., I thought it was like a band-aid to bridge the gap between newly discovered facts about biology and theism. A sort of "meeting halfway" between science and religion. If I didn't believe in the importance of what a belief system means to me, I wouldn't be concerned enough to find the TRUTH. It appears that macro evolution and descent with modification make me feel like something is missing in the story of how this Universe was created to beget humans. Thank you for this talk. I am currently in a state where I want there to be peace in my world and in the world around me. Christians tend to say that this world is ruled by evil forces, and I am faithful to the TRUTH, hoping beyond hope that things will work out. There is definitely a spiritual battle going on in many guises on this planet at the moment. I will do my best to reconcile TRUTH with FAITH.

[@benrest308]

Thank you, Dr. Meyer for the talks you have posted here on KZbin.

[@GabrielbenGabriel]

Big fan of Stephen Meyer!

[@kaamraanroshan68]

This man deserves to win a Nobel Prize... Why hasn't anyone discovered him? Is there something wrong with him?

[@Mustafa.alhijjawi]

Keep going you're on the right bath May God Almighty be with you and guide you along your path! Big fan.

[@Mindhumble]

wow i just found out about stephen and his theories, and he suddenly uploads his first 2 videos in 2 years, nice! i really believe that darwinists are a type of cult from my research. for someone who has studies the patterns of religions they rely on the classic micromanaging information that people have access to, but it is on a much larger scale, so more similar to a totalitarian state. this is why i am not just questioning the argument of materialism, but now i have serious doubts about the reliability of the fossil record, and a young earth may indeed be consistent with real science.

[@letsbesane]

Glad to see you back in action!!!

[@HamraKalkotkandy]

i really salute this person.....HIGH RESPECT.....all praise be to GOD the most high the most Merciful

[@johnellison3030]

This was a very good talk. Although I was expecting more information based more on the whole spectrum of the sciences, and not just the one presented here on Darwin's Theory pf natural selection.

[@radhi8063]

Get the pleasure to meet Dr. Meyer in the JRE but joe keep trying to discredited his work and his faith, it was so frustrating, glad the I find this here... Thank you doctor.

[@zionism48]

I have begun to have serious doubts about the existence of extra-terrestrial life. I think our purpose as humans is to be the ones who explore the universe & to colonize other worlds. Hundreds or thousands of years from now, we may even be able to terraform planets. By that time, maybe Darwinists will have figured out they were wrong.

[@sanjosemike3137]

Most Neo-Darwinists don't realize that Darwin himself was very conflicted by the fossil record of the explosion of new body structures, that seemingly occurred precipitously without any precursors. Darwin just "assumed" that the fossil evidence would eventually be discovered. Well, THAT did not happen, and that "conflict" just continues to get worse. Stephen Jay Gould, a committed Darwinist just "renamed" the problem: "Punctuated equilibrium." It was just a rename. He STILL had no fossil evidence. Neo-Darwinism is under attack by committed evolutionists. However, you and I do not HEAR this, because of their "fear" of Intelligent Design entering the lexicon. Sanjosemike (no longer in CA)

[@saifurrahmansajal9088]

love & respect from Bangladesh

[@emmanueljohnson5934]

23:51 Fine tuning of the universe

[@lorenh763]

Actually, via machine learning and AI, critics will refute you by stating that unintelligent machines and programs CAN code and even "learn." However, intelligence created those unintelligent systems. Thought it was worth pointing this out

[@Boris82]

Like you point out yourself already (as the machine was created by intelligence) there will be no refuting on that point.

[@habeebijaz5907]

AI do not learn patterns from the data in a magical way. You have to define a cost function. Adjusting the form of cost function is actually fine tuning the machine; there exist no single cost function that can solve the problem before hand. Even in machine learning there is a lot of human effort involved. The machine is just doing calculus, minimizing the error. Picking the best cost function that minimizes the training error doesn't guarantee that it performs well on the test set. You have to revise your model many times. This is nothing but training the machine. It can not learn on its own.

[@Kramartie4491]

Self refutation Loren.

[@kjustkses]

Please add consciousness in to the explanations.

[@annettegenis2781]

Wow! Thank you!

[@duncansunrise]

This guy knows what he's talking about. He doesn't have to descend to the mud-throwing level of most of the dogmatic scientists in the modern era. The hi-jacking of science by the new atheists is symptomatic of a much wider societal problem.

[@josecasper8717]

Brilliant mind, convincing theory.

[@michaelgonzalez9058]

Walter Bryant

[@JewandGreek]

This looks like an old video. Say, 2014?

[@CriticalThinker02]

For some reason I can’t view the 19 comments here.

[@ZombieXee]

Discovery Institute has spent decades trying to come up with a way to detect design. The problem is that you cannot prove design because, in essence, they are trying to prove god. The intelligent designer is god. Therefore ID is and will always be religion. God is not falsifiable.

[@samsummerington2152]

Mr. Meyer seems like a perfectly pleasant fellow, but his approach to biology strikes me as highly problematic. From the sense of biological science itself, there are a range of issues with some of the analogies that he draws, in addition to other arguments. From the sense of biology as a community of researchers, the notion of some contentious debate racking the halls of academia strikes me as a bit exotic

[@fellowshipofthemystery6154]

5-year-old material? Where's the new stuff?

[@patrickhannon4188]

A lot of beating around the bush to prove intelligent design. Why not just read the scripture verse that says Christ created all things viable and invisible. Colossians 1:16 "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:" King James Bible

[@coachmarc2002]

What would that do for people who don't believe the bible?

[@jayc222]

Because many of us want to know the nuts and bolts of creation. We’re not satisfied with, “Let there be light” and then there was light. Some of us are curious about the entire process. It leads to improved understanding of the world around us and technological advancement that lengthens and enhances the human existence.

[@looks4stuff121]

I love your work and support ID in fact I taught it in my biology class. However, I wish you would look into Cavendish experiment. Try and determine what is his cause and effect is. You will realize that it does not adhere to scientific method and is pseudoscience. Also explain how the earth can have an atmosphere with pressure next to the vacuum of space? I know your not arguing this line of science. but you use the absurd argument that the laws and constants of physics make life possible. I would argue its the dome.

[@jl1267]

All theories require some amount of faith to get from A to B, including Darwinism. (In reply to the statement he makes @54:10)

[@sally4388]

It all depends on the defenition of information. Barren moons that have never been seen or visited have a lot of information, no man or mind created that, just processes of the impacts.

[@jamgrl38]

Huh? Information only has one definition and it can only be formulated by a mind.

[@cecildison6788]

You didn’t listen to the video did you. How about listening before you comment

[@thetruthchannel349]

Sikor - That is completely non-sequitor and non-analogous to the kind of information being discussed here. You are stretching the definition of information in order to create a chaotic ambiguous application. Thats dishonest.

[@MrAndrew535]

Ordered design does not, (or does not necessarily) equate to "intelligent design". Out of infinite possible outcomes, chaos will inevitably produce any and indeed all, coherent design to which intelligence can be either inferred or attributed.

[@coachmarc2002]

That's simply an unsubstantiated assertion. Obvious design requires a designer. That's what we know from experience. What is your evidence that the opposite is true?

[@morellecummins7419]

Andew Tarjanyi There is no existing infinite from which chaos can create all possible outcomes. Indeed, there is only a singular outcome.