ID & Dawkins On WBUR
Topic: Science and Culture
I was alerted to this radio program yesterday. Now I had heard of the awesome debating skills of the ID people such as those from that pseudo-academic Discovery Institute (talk about Orwellian!) So I went online and listened to this set of interviews and ..?

Well the ID guy (George Guilder) was horrible - basically he sat there and gave an unintelligible ramble about "information" and how evolution was Lamarck-ism. I could have made a better case for Intelligent Design (ID) than this guy! 20 mins of garbled ideas. What a disappointment. To the credit of the host, Tom Ashbrook, he got George Guilder to admit that ID implies the existence of God. Thus it follows that ID is nothing but creationism (with some advocates of ID throwing a little evolution in the mix).

Then Richard Dawkins came on. I basically agreed with everything he said, but I must say that he could have done a better job of it. Dawkins made the mistake of criticizing ID because it's foundations are based on a creator (i.e. God) and then advocated that ID couldn't be because there was no creator. Richard you are not going to convince the faithful (I not being one of them) using this line of reasoning. It is enough to say that the existence of God is untestable but in any case God does not have to be invoked to understand how diversity and complexity are generated in Nature. I also thought that Dawkins should have glossed over the main axioms, which underpins evolution. Overall, Steven Pinker gave a better critique of religion in this Time Mag. article.

Well if you are still interested follow this link to hear the episode "Debate Over Intelligent Design" on WBUR's (Boston's NPR) show OnPoint.