The Michael Medved show is a national radio show broadcast out of Seattle, Washington. According to Talkers magazine, he has the fifth largest radio audience. He has a regular weekly segment on science and culture featuring scholars from the Discovery Institute.
Here is the fourth segment from this past week, courtesy of the Intelligent Design: The Future podcast.
On this episode of ID the Future, Stephen Meyer and Oxford professor John Lennox discuss human exceptionalism and the deeper significance of the Gosnell verdict on the Michael Medved Show’s Science and Culture Update.
Each week, leading fellows from Discovery Institute will join Michael Medved to talk about the intersection of science and culture. Listen in live online or on your local Medved station, or stay tuned at ID the Future for the weekly podcast.
The topics this time are Kermit Gosnell, human exceptionalism and Darwinism.
Now might be a good time to subscribe to the ID: The Future podcast.
Let’s calculate the odds of building a protein composed of a functional chain of 100 amino acids, by chance. (Think of a meaningful English sentence built with 100 scrabble letters, held together with glue)
Sub-problems:
BONDING: You need 99 peptide bonds between the 100 amino acids. The odds of getting a peptide bond is 50%. The probability of building a chain of one hundred amino acids in which all linkages involve peptide bonds is roughly (1/2)^99 or 1 chance in 10^30.
CHIRALITY: You need 100 left-handed amino acids. The odds of getting a left-handed amino acid is 50%. The probability of attaining at random only L–amino acids in a hypothetical peptide chain one hundred amino acids long is (1/2)^100 or again roughly 1 chance in 10^30.
SEQUENCE: You need to choose the correct amino acid for each of the 100 links. The odds of getting the right one are 1 in 20. Even if you allow for some variation, the odds of getting a functional sequence is (1/20)^100 or 1 in 10^65.
The final probability of getting a functional protein composed of 100 amino acids is 1 in 10^125. Even if you fill the universe with pre-biotic soup, and react amino acids at Planck time (very fast!) for 14 billion years, you are probably not going to get even 1 such protein. And you need at least 100 of them for minimal life functions, plus DNA and RNA.
Research performed by Doug Axe at Cambridge University, and published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Molecular Biology, has shown that the number of functional amino acid sequences is tiny:
Doug Axe’s research likewise studies genes that it turns out show great evidence of design. Axe studied the sensitivities of protein function to mutations. In these “mutational sensitivity” tests, Dr. Axe mutated certain amino acids in various proteins, or studied the differences between similar proteins, to see how mutations or changes affected their ability to function properly. He found that protein function was highly sensitive to mutation, and that proteins are not very tolerant to changes in their amino acid sequences. In other words, when you mutate, tweak, or change these proteins slightly, they stopped working. In one of his papers, he thus concludes that “functional folds require highly extraordinary sequences,” and that functional protein folds “may be as low as 1 in 10^77.”
The problem of forming DNA by sequencing nucleotides faces similar difficulties. And remember, mutation and selection cannot explain the origin of the first sequence, because mutation and selection require replication, which does not exist until that first living cell is already in place.
But you can’t show that to your friends, you need to send them a video. And I have a video!
A video of Doug Axe explaining the calculation
Here’s a clip from Illustra Media’s new ID DVD “Darwin’s Dilemma”, which features Doug Axe and Stephen Meyer (both with Ph.Ds from Cambridge University).
Illustra also made two other great DVDs on intelligent design. The first two DVDs “Unlocking the Mystery of Life” and “The Privileged Planet” are must-buys, but you can watch them on youtube if you want, for free.
The Michael Medved show is a national radio show broadcast out of Seattle, Washington. According to Talkers magazine, he has the fifth largest radio audience. He has a regular weekly segment on science and culture featuring scholars from the Discovery Institute.
Here is the third segment from this past week, courtesy of the Intelligent Design: The Future podcast.
On this episode of ID the Future, Dr. John West appears on the Medved Show to discuss the trial of Dr. Gosnell and how it relates to our culture’s valuation of human life.
Each week, leading fellows from Discovery Institute will join Mr. Medved to talk about the intersection of science and culture. Listen in live online or on your local Medved station, or stay tuned for at ID the Future for the weekly podcast.
The topics this time are Kermit Gosnell, Peter Singer, infanticide, environmentalism, eugenics, animal rights, overpopulation.
Now might be a good time to subscribe to the ID: The Future podcast.
The Michael Medved show is a national radio show broadcast out of Seattle, Washington. According to Talkers magazine, he has the fifth largest radio audience. In the last week of April, Mr. Medved accounced a new segment on origins, evolution and intelligent design that will be heard each week.
Here is the original announcement:
Does science conflict with religious faith? Does nature offer scientific evidence of design? Should public-school students learn about all sides of contentious scientific issues? Or should teachers spoon-feed them with only the politically approved views? Should scientists be free to pursue the truth, wherever the search takes them? What if it leads to conclusions that are disturbing to a rigidly secular point of view?
Starting this Thursday, April 25, the Michael Medved Show will shine a bright light on these and other fascinating questions that are vital to the future of our nation and our culture.
[...]From Darwinian evolution to climate change, science has become a major flashpoint in the culture war. In using science as a political and cultural weapon, aggressive, evangelizing materialists count on our not knowing enough to argue back. That’s why, to follow and participate in the greatest debates of our day, you need to know about the science behind the controversies.
Each week, leading fellows from Discovery will join Mr. Medved to talk about the intersection of science and culture, how bad science and biased science are corroding the best American values. They’ll talk about the assault on human dignity and uniqueness, about attempts to silence dissenting scientists and suppress academic freedom. They will discuss the danger posed by revived Social Darwinism and the new eugenics. And yes, they’ll explore the debate over scientific materialism versus intelligent design.
The Michael Medved Show is one of the top ten most listened to radio talk shows in the United States. Syndicated to some 200 radio stations, it reaches an estimated weekly audience of 3-4 million people.
Here is the second segment from this past week, courtesy of the Intelligent Design: The Future podcast.
The MP3 file is available for download at the link above.
The description is:
On this episode of ID the Future, Dr. Stephen Meyer continues his conversation with Michael Medved on the Medved Show’s “Science and Culture Update.” Listen in as Meyer and Medved discuss a recent prominent criticism of Richard Dawkins and take questions from callers about intelligent design.
Each week, leading fellows from Discovery Institute will join Mr. Medved to talk about the intersection of science and culture. Listen in live online or on your local Medved station, or stay tuned for at ID the Future for the weekly podcast.
In addition to talking about Dawkins, he also discusses the Cambrian explosion and takes calls from angry Darwinists.
Now might be a good time to subscribe to the ID: The Future podcast.
The Environmental Protection Agency has dramatically lowered its estimate of how much of a potent heat-trapping gas leaks during natural gas production, in a shift with major implications for a debate that has divided environmentalists: Does the recent boom in fracking help or hurt the fight against climate change?
Oil and gas drilling companies had pushed for the change, but there have been differing scientific estimates of the amount of methane that leaks from wells, pipelines and other facilities during production and delivery. Methane is the main component of natural gas.
The new EPA data is “kind of an earthquake” in the debate over drilling, said Michael Shellenberger, the president of the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental group based in Oakland, Calif. “This is great news for anybody concerned about the climate and strong proof that existing technologies can be deployed to reduce methane leaks.”
The scope of the EPA’s revision was vast. In a mid-April report on greenhouse emissions, the agency now says that tighter pollution controls instituted by the industry resulted in an average annual decrease of 41.6 million metric tons of methane emissions from 1990 through 2010, or more than 850 million metric tons overall. That’s about a 20 percent reduction from previous estimates. The agency converts the methane emissions into their equivalent in carbon dioxide, following standard scientific practice.
The EPA revisions came even though natural gas production has grown by nearly 40 percent since 1990. The industry has boomed in recent years, thanks to a stunning expansion of drilling in previously untapped areas because of the use of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which injects sand, water and chemicals to break apart rock and free the gas inside.
Wow, when you have the EPA on board with responsible energy development, then you know it’s solid.
RT @newsbusters: MSNBC's Ratings Fall to Seven Year Lows - As NewsBusters has been reporting, Americans are tiring of MSNBC. Dead... http:… 7 hours ago
Recent Comments