@Filosoferik

Why does the title of this video contain the word ‘evolution’ and you folks keep using the word ‘evolution’, when every single objection you raise is about ‘origin of life’, or ‘abiogenesis’?

Those words are not synonymous in any way. What’s happening in this conversation?

EDIT: So many great discussions happening here! I’m still seeing the same argument repeated over and over again, though.

“You need abiogenesis for evolution.” 
No, you need life for evolution. 

Hypothesis: after the first life was created by mischievous spirits, biological evolution lead to diversity of life as we know it.

Hypothesis: after abiogenesis occurred, the Diversity Fairy made sure we have all the different varieties of life we have now. 

You CAN have one without the other. Please stop pretending otherwise. You can believe that both processes are false all you like, you’ll still have to tackle them both separately.

@whatdidtheprophetjesusteac1444

Your idea of an ID conference at Biola is wonderful. I love the possibility of including Bret Weinstein.

@kalebkendall4786

Humans are special because humans say they are special. That's a fair judgment to make within our social context, but it quickly becomes unkind when we use it to say other forms of life aren't special or worthy because we've defined those things as "human." Nobles looked down on peasants because they thought a noble birth is what made them special, but outside that social context it's a meaningless difference. We mature when we notice the areas where we do this and choose to grow our perspective. Moral progress occurs when we broaden our circle of empathy. That's my tangent.

@adamredwine774

Hearing creationists talk about “the state of Darwinism” is like hearing people who believe in the four elements talk about “the state of alchemy.”

@CarmineFragione-u1t

Darwin never knew anything at all about Genetics.   It was Gregor Mendel  , a Catholic Monk who  discovered the Laws of Inherited Traits .   Darwin just took a Latin verb  "Evolutia"  and  promoted that to be a noun subject.

@ObserverOne6727

Seek and be understanding, because understanding is always better than assuming, and knowing is better than believing.  Whenever someone says "I believe ...", then they haven't finished the work of fully understanding.

@praxitelispraxitelous7061

Thank you for bringing Axe on

@vincerice7148

Sean, I think the conference is a great idea but don't forget Hugh Ross and Jim Tour. That would be the dream team.

@viennamoilliet2727

Thank you for having this take on this channel, I have always leaned to this way of thinking, but have felt sort of ashamed of having this take because it seems that theistic evolution has taken over that conversation.  And "you can't be smart and believe in intelligent design" is sometimes how I feel. So refreshing to have this take. Thank you !

@PC-vg8vn

Regarding the genetic argument for Adam & Eve, I am only aware that the genetic information cannot rule out the possibility of such a couple, ie the genetic information is silent on the matter, but that is far from saying the genetic evidence is 'consistent' with an original single couple. 

If youre going to host a conference, perhaps you should ask some Christians who believe evolutionary theory and are qualified biologists, such as from Biologos, so that those hearing can hear the alternative view.

@ramoth777

The Bible and genuine science: There is no need to reconcile good friends.

@robertlaabs5066

I met Doug on the Biola campus a few years ago. Great Guy & Great Work. Thanks!

@richarddodge4827

What about this paper?: Keefe & Szostak (2001, Nature):
	•	Their experiments on random sequence libraries found that functional proteins could emerge from randomly generated sequences at a frequency far higher than Axe’s estimates. They found that functional proteins could appear as often as 1 in 10^4 to 10^5 sequences under certain conditions, particularly when the sequence length was optimized for folding.

@DarthCalculus

Your guest in the thumbnail both proclaim "let's do the science honestly" but you defer first and foremost to scripture. It's a legitimate choice, but if you have a predetermined conclusion you can't do science honestly

@HopeSmyrna

great conversation!

@Alan112573

Please have Ken Miller on your  show to discuss his proof for evolution and his reconciliation with Christian faith.  Have him on with Doug Axe please.

@jimwright9866

great session.   the idea of an ID conference is great,  young people need to hear it and for most purposes at the high school level they are not

@andrebmkt

Yes, that's a GREAT idea!

@imagomonkei

I find it deeply ironic that the guest complains about people saying “Science says this” and then it turns out to be wrong, when he doesn't turn that same lens against the Bible. Science comes out much better than the Bible in that calculus.

@mc07

Biola should definitely host a conference or conversation with a bunch of guests. I just ask that it would be simultaneously online for those of us who don’t live in the US.