My interview about evolution and WEIT with Dr. Alvin Jones at The Paradise Radio Network on WCBQ-AM (North Carolina) is now online.
Dr. Jones is a religious guy, and told me before we went on the air that he didn’t accept evolution. I have to say, though, that on the air he was absolutely polite and let me present my case without too much dissent. A pleasurable experience.
Jerry, your link is incorrect to:
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/05/11/online-radio-interview-with-dr-alvin-augustus-jones/ww.dralvinjones.com/content/01%20Jerry%20Coyne.wma
The correct link is:
http://www.dralvinjones.com/content/01 Jerry Coyne.wma
That link does not work if you click on it but if you cut it all and paste it, it works.
Thanks! Fixed.
You can make the link work so that people can click it if you use the following link:
http://www.dralvinjones.com/content/01%20Jerry%20Coyne.wma
(You have to replace spaces with the URL encoded value which turns out to be %20. This is done to ensure that the correct number of spaces are included. It’s possible that if several spaces come sequentially one maybe lost)
Good interview. It sounds like Alvin Jones actually read your book from the way he claims to want to gain knowledge and truth, yet he also claims to disagree with evolution 1000%. I don’t understand how someone can read your book, or any book on evolution, and still deny the evidence.
It seems the only barrier Dr. Jones had was the inability for evolution to make predictions about the future. Why would that be such a big issue for him? I also wonder what exactly he does believe (ID?) and what evidence it has and the predictions it can make.
Great interview, I thought. Jerry explained the main points really well, and it was good of Jones to ask about the basics and let Jerry explain without interruption. Jones’ final comment about Jerry raising his uncertainly level was a good sign, for him and his listeners.
–“The non-random survival of the randomly generated mutations. That’s what Natural Selection is.”–
When it came to the point on “Intelligent Design”, I think it was handled very well, though I would have perhaps added that it is dismissed by scientist as non-science, ID is not a scientific theory, it is not scientific. It almost ends up sounding like it was put to a vote – that evolution is true because it won the prize for “best” theory. Though, that’s a minor point…
I’ll echo the people above in saying that you did an excellent job.
I think there was a moment where Dr. Jones was making the classic “only a theory” argument and though it’s old hat, I think it would have been valid to correct him again. Monday-afternoon quarterbacking aside, great chat.
Linus Torvalds just mentioned WEIT is his blog:
http://torvalds-family.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-reading.html
Thought you might like to know.
Torvalds mentioned WEIT “in” his blog, not “is” his blog.
I also appreciated Dr. Jones’ approach to the discussion – thoughtful and irenic. His objection that evolution is not encompassed within a predictive, mathematical formulation is somewhat unique. I think a good response would be a comparison to Darwin’s other time-tested theory developed on the Beagle – his theory of atoll formation. Darwin’s ideas on atoll formation provided a comprehensive theory of their historical development that is also not predictive in the sense that there is no formula that can predict the future development of a particular volcanic cone and coral reef. But, this does not diminish in the least the theory’s accuracy and value as a description of the historical develop of atoll islands.