Yesterday, ENV observed that contrary to what we always hear, it doesn’t require a PhD in biology to hold an intelligent view on the controversy pitting ID versus Darwinian evolution. Now here’s a great podcast by Twin Cities talk host John Gilmore, trained as an attorney, chatting in depth with Discovery Institute’s William Dembski (pictured above). They discuss the challenge to Darwinism from information theory and the implications of that challenge, described in Dembski’s latest book, Being as Communion: A Metaphysics of Information.

Guys like journalist Kevin Williamson at National Review would have us throw up our hands and cry in despair, "I don’t know the first damned thing about it" — since when it comes to this subject, "’The needed study’ = graduate-level work in evolutionary science." But no — you don’t in reality have to be a professional in a relevant scientific field to grasp the main contours of this debate. And Gilmore proves it.

As Mr. Gilmore notes, when Dr. Dembski spoke recently at the University of Chicago, his host physicist and mathematician Leo Kadanoff observed:

I think the ball is in the court of people who believe in evolution. They have to deal with these questions. …Bill has made his case and we should all go home and think.

And that may be the most important point of all. A serious challenge has put been set down, and Darwinists haven’t as yet responded adequately (though they’ve had decades to do so). Any serious person, holding a PhD in "evolutionary science" or not, ought to be able to acknowledge at least that.