Stephen C. Meyer | The Ben Shapiro Show Sunday Special Ep. 43

He we can see Ben "my doctor wife the doctor's dry-ass gunt" Shapiro, happily buying into the blatant propaganda lies of Meyer. Shapiro is in favour of lying too, then?

Just watching this in February 2025 I am amazed by Meyer's extant in a grasp of scientific knowledge, but feel this man is driven by and need to prove the existence of God. Just as Newton prescribed angels to explain planetary orbit eccentricities, which we can now explain with science
I feel that the darwinian evolutionary gaps that Meyer uses to bolster his beliefs will eventually also be explain scientifically. Great strides have been made recently and hundreds of intermediate forms have been found for the evolution of horses and the evolution of the eye. It is very nice discussion and I appreciate being able to see it.
I do wonder if there will come a time when we get to a wall where things cannot be explained and scratch our heads and assume something else must have intervened. I do not think that time is upon us yet

Stephen Meyer is a genius

For some reason, this video appears to have been sped up when published. Do yourself a favor and watch it at .9 X it will be a lot easier to follow.

man, saul goodman sure is doing great at his new job

DNA dosent have a code , we have it one to organise it

🤣 because you don't understand emergence. DNA/RNA hold blueprints for initial conditions of emergence, not the full "design" 🤣
everything else is driven by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. That's why everything is the same in the universe.
Lagrange has solved this long-long-long ago, but no, you must beat around the bush to create confusion.
And why most of you folks never mentioned the mitochondrial DNA? Most of your questions are answered by the mitochondrial DNA which drives or pilots the cells.

This man is fascinating… Brilliant, genuine, and driven by truth, not politics or agenda.

Wow. I just finished and I'm about to replay this.
I wonder how many times I'll listen to it in my lifetime 🤔

This man is clearly a literal angel pretending to be human to explain the existence of his creator lol

A Simon and Garfunkel song says," a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest".
So it is with those who disregard God throughout their lives,:( as made abundantly clear in many of these comments.)

Im going to read the book!!

Amazing interview, and I came across it 5 years later!

Meyer's arguments have been widely debunked by evolutionary biologists. Who knew? Maybe you should include a bibliography of work by professional biologists who detail the mistakes Meyer makes in his attempt to calculate the odds. As a philosopher, I have more basic questions, apropos your closing remarks. 1) Can Darwinism not account for functional information? Aren't successful (functional) changes ones that promote procreation? Isn't that what natural selection provides?
2) Meyer claims (as do you) that his is not a God-of-the-Gaps argument. But it obviously is, in multiple crippling ways, even if it's the only explanation you can think of. a) How is a disembodied mind possible? b) How can a mind of any sort be a necessary, uncreated being? c) How can an immaterial being cause changes in matter without violating local conservation of energy and momentum? - which requires figuring out what laws of nature are and what their modal status is. Plenty of really hard gaps to be filled in. Waving around a magic wand labelled "omnipotence" is to name these problems, not solve them.

Why does ben talks like bugs bunny from time to time?

I heard of a story in my church. The quote goes simular to this.

‘A dumb geese has enough sense (instinct) to follow his leader geese down south to escape the harsh winter weather. But a human with all his intelligence. Will not follow a leader human (I would say a pastor) to escape judgment. God wants us to believe His Word. Not explain or prove It.’

The silliness of the pseudoscience of the "multiverse" being raised as a "possible answer" needs to met with the following:

Can you show me the UNASSUMED OBSERVATIONAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE for any other universes?
Or is this just what you FAITHFULLY BELIEVE in mythology?

God does design anything a person who designs something, as a process of trial and error then comes to a point of satisfaction. God doesn't go through any process of trial and error. He speaks and it was made. God is God because he is exactly that, he is beyond our imagination and thought.

Do I need to be a resident in the States to be insured with Policy Genius?

Great info Stephen.

Much obliged for this video

Matter to energy? Been there done that. Energy to matter? Well...

Evolution is a Religion, not observable nor provable at the molecular level

So if natural evolution is impossible, where does COVID come from? It does not exist before 2012AD.

Based on the information theory, it is specificly made by an intelligent being, or by human as we are the only known species to cross breed virus in the known history.

Lots of credit given to other people in various fields. I enjoyed this discussion.

Another problem with multiple universes is that we have absolutely no evidence they exist at all. Only ideas. It is a religious belief.

Materialist cope is strong here.

As a natural scientist and biotechnologist with decades of experience in programming and using artificial evolution algorithms and in-depth study of consciousness research, the following thoughts come to mind:
A lot of claims are made here, but the scientific basis is incomplete.
Who is the intelligent designer? How did it come about? This is a catch-22 situation.
The maximum number of possibilities exists in chaos. This also applies to the "initial" universe. Evolutionary algorithms in nature show that if a structure that has arisen by chance, no matter how simple, has a property of self-reproduction, the probability of this structure spreading increases significantly due to this intrinsic advantage and the evolution of such structures is extremely accelerated. From this point onwards at the earliest, the purely combinatorial consideration of the probability of a structure arising no longer makes sense or is correct!
There is no external force that specifically directs evolution in a certain direction. It is a crucial intrinsic property that the structure that achieves the highest reproduction rate under the current conditions replicates itself in evolution.
Every replicating and thus developing structure increases its information content. At first only marginally, but through the ongoing potentiation of the resulting increasing probabilities, this process is extremely accelerated.
The meaning of information does not arise; meaning is assigned individually by people. When people assign a functionality to information or discover it, it is recognized as functional. On the other hand, all information is functional, the only question is for what. Even what many people today consider to be superfluous information from structures is functional for evolution in the sense of the informational pool of possibilities of information, since this pool of possibilities is a prerequisite for evolution. Every process simulated today on the basis of artificial evolution algorithms starts with completely random information. The most important operator for evolution algorithms is the random operator, because this is the only way new information comes into the system. All other operators such as selection, information recombination, information migration, ..., whose parameters are also influenced by random operators, process this information in the sense of global optimization. This means that evolution is a universal global multi-objective optimization program with the property of achieving the greatest possible speed of approach to the current multi-objective spectrum. The fascinating thing about this is that evolution itself changes this multi-objective spectrum in every step. In principle, evolution is a process of approaching the constantly receding optimum of the constantly changing multi-objective spectrum at the greatest possible speed, but never reaching this optimum.
Of course, the mutation rate must not be too high, as an evolutionary system collapses if the mutation rate is too high. This is also the reason why in naturally occurring evolution only systems have prevailed where this mutation rate lies in a certain probability interval. The simulated artificial evolution algorithms also only work efficiently in this probability interval. This means that programs could also be developed using artificial evolutionary algorithms, although from today's perspective this would not be efficient because the time required would be too long.
It is precisely a characteristic of evolution to reduce the number of attempts so drastically exponentially in order to reach a certain solution. If you consider that the evolutionary processes on Earth have been going on for over 4 billion years and in the universe for over 10 billion years, it is primitive to expect that these results could be reproduced in a laboratory in a few decades. A new sequence is never searched for or created by random combinatorial means, as this is not possible (as mentioned) for reasons of time. The new functionalities of a protein sequence created today, for example, are always based on the existing and modified information from the information pool of the currently existing structures. The results of evolutionary algorithms do not improve evenly and continuously, but there are always long phases of stagnation and, more rarely, phases with huge leaps in results. Incidentally, this behavior can be reproduced when simulating artificial evolutionary processes, and all based on mathematics! You can be a spiritual person and not a totalitarian materialist and still describe the processes differently. Many people seem to behave in this respect in a similar way to religions, and religions are the opposite of open-minded spirituality, which arises intrinsically in highly developed brains. Everything is connected to everything and is in a constant open flow. This intrinsic openness is difficult or impossible for the ego of most people to bear. Hence the urge to want to explain and control everything absolutely in one's lifetime. Since that is not possible, narratives are constructed on the basis of unprovable assumptions that seem to completely close off this difficult-to-bear openness. The only positive thing about this is that it calms the egos, but ultimately it remains a kind of self-deception.

😊

😮. Amra. 😮. . 😮. 😮. . . .... Nur Hossain..................................................................................................................................................................................... +88i

The book “Rare Earth” makes the case for “anthropic fine-tuning” extremely well.

The popular writings of Sir Roger Penrose present the Completeness and Incompleteness theorems of Kurt Gödel as one more indication of a purposive universe. I particularly like The Emperor’s New Mind, although some of his “easy math” is quite demanding.

DNA, which encodes the production of proteins, amino acid by amino acid, also RELIES upon proteins for its own replication in cell division. This means that a living cell relies on two distinct, interdependent, and interlocking systems of complex chemicals, DNA/RNA and proteins, neither of which can manage without the other. How this emerged in the first place is never explained by our current knowledge of biology.

Who was the scientist who concealed the Burgess Shale for decades because he viewed it as irreconcilable with Darwinism as he understood it?

Rosalind Franklin, Watson and Crick’s assistant, was apparently instrumental in the interpretation of the DNA molecule as a double helix, and was denied credit. “Nature” ran an article on the subject which viewers might be interested in looking at.

For me, this was one of the MOST interesting episodes from Ben Shapiro. So clearly articulated and radical by Dr. Meyer. I don't have the academic background to validate or question Dr. Meyer's assertions, but I know enough about statistics to believe what he says seems plausible. Certainly, my failed attempts to win the lottery by stringing together 6 numbers help me understand his ideas. :-)

As a Catholic, I agree with his case here. The Catholic Church does not disagree either.

Wskslslmr

sean carroll was on the latest startalk and he explained how the wave function works, and the many worlds. it still goes over my head but what meyers said here is drivel, i might not understand it but i understand enough to know meyers just talked gibberish. "entanglement" has nothing to do with wave function collapse.



skydivephil has just posted a new video featuring roger penrose talking about the singularity - both hawking and penrose dropped the singularity idea before hawking died.

what do ross, meyer, behe, tour and pals hope to find? why are they doing science in fact cos
at the bottom of their barrel all you will find is more "nature did it". they must be really
crappy christians to not realise that if god were real he doesn't allow evidence of his
existence, the whole premise of christianity is you are required - it is demanded of you - that
you have faith, not knowledge. are they expecting to find a trade mark? do they think god made
a blunder and has some kind of electronic device hidden in all the nature stuff? they are the
dumbest people in a bucket of dumb people.

0

1

একে চন্দ্র দুইয়ে পক্ষ। চন্দ্রবাবু আর পল্টুরামের টাকার উপরে ছিল লক্ষ্য 😊😊

Zz❤❤55555555555555555555555555❤❤5❤

099o099ooo009990099999099poo909o9000009
9099909990ooop99ooooo0o0pooo090ooo0oo0oo090999o9oo9oo90ooop09o99o9o99oo0oo999p00oo990oo990o99o09o0
O9oooo9990oo0o999o90oo90o99opo090oooo0090o99090oo00o0oo990oo000o9,mll

W

Stephen Meyer is NOT a geophysicist. He worked for an oil company decades ago. That's it. He's a full time lying hack at a rightwing Christian fundamentalist pressure group.

Why do you people lie so much?