God, Science and the Universe: A Dialogue at the University of Toronto on Saturday, March 19, 7-9pm EDT.
Three big thinkers, well-known in their various fields, will be together for the first time on the stage at the University of Toronto’s Convocation Hall discussing God, science and the universe:
- Lawrence M. Krauss World-renowned Theoretical Physicist
- Stephen C. Meyer Cambridge educated author and intelligent design advocate
- Denis O. Lamoureux Science and Religion professor and evolutionary creationist
Questions like these will be posed to the panel:
- How did the universe originate?
- Does God play any role in the cosmos?
- What is the relationship between science and religion?
Individuals can see the live streaming directly on YouTube. Just open this link at the time of the event and no sign-in or other link is needed.
Download The First 3 Chapters of Evolution 2.0 For Free, Here – https://evo2.org/evolution/Where Did Life And The Genetic Code Come From? Can The Answer Build Superior AI? The #1 Mystery In Science Now Has A $10 Million Prize. Learn More About It, Here – https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0
Life is not a random phenomenon; it is subject to the laws of quantum information biology (QIB). QIB is a generalized physics hypothesis, it is a set of physical properties and laws that distinguish life from nonlife, irreducible to ordinary physics, and admit limiting transition to quantum mechanics. In other words, biology, or some aspects of it, is generalized physics. QIB bridges the gap between physics and biology and reveals the fundamental laws that describe biotic evolution and development:
http://link.springer.com/search?query=&search-within=Journal&facet-journal-id=40974&package=openaccessarticles
The question whether these laws are self sufficient or created by god is a matter of subjective belief.
Hi Perry –
I have not seen a video of the Krauss / Meyer / Lamoureux debate yet, but I had a quick look at some of the posts on “ENV” (the ID blog “Evolution News and Views”). Sounds like Meyer was incapacitated by a migrane headache, so the debate ended up being quite different to (and not as good as) planned. Have you had a look at the blog posts on ENV yet? Any comments in response? And do you plan to make any comments on ENV in addition to what you say on your own blog? Among other things, that might give you a higher profile compared to if you confine your comments to your own blog.
At the moment I don’t have time to write a piece for ENV and I don’t know if they would accept it. Thanks for your remarks.
I was a bit disappointed in this debate, largely because of the audio visual and health problems of Dr. Meyer, which really dragged down what could have been a lively conversation.
Dr. Lamoureux appeared to be what has been called a “Theist Evolutionist”. He clearly accepts both evolution and God, but I could not get a read on his scientific ideas otherwise. He hinted at both Lamarckian evolution and materialistic evolution arguments while proclaiming the inspired word of the Bible in every other breath. He seemed to most strongly argue against Meyer, not Krauss.
Krauss was the classic New Atheist Materialist attack dog. He went straight for the jugular attacking religion, the Bible and ID. Unlike Meyer, he was cocky, confident and well rehearsed. He drew the most applause from his attacks on ID, all the while insisting science had answered all questions but he didn’t have time to explain any of it. Although I disagreed with every bit of his “scientific” claims, I thought he won the debate.
Meyer was a mess. He could barely speak, couldn’t see and was agonizing to watch. He had some great points but was excruciatingly incapable of expressing them in an effective way. It isn’t his fault he had health problems, but it did bog down the flow.
Oh well. It was still more enlightening than Nye versus Hamm. It just could have been better. Thanks for the link to it.