Join hosts Fred Williams and Doug McBurney as they delve into the concept of settled science and its implications on our understanding of allergies and evolution. With special guest Dwayne Bartley, an experienced researcher and electrical engineer, the conversation navigates through alternative scientific perspectives often overlooked in mainstream discourse. Discover how past expert opinions on issues like peanut allergies have influenced public health, and explore the lessons learned from challenging these established norms.
00:00:00 The Importance of Science from a Christian Perspective
00:01:34 Discussion on Settled Science and Allergies
Do not fear the science. The science is good. Some of the extrapolations are not. We as Christians have no need to fear the science.
SPEAKER 03 :
Intelligent Design and DNA Can’t explain it all the way Get ready to be awed By the handiwork of God Tune in to Real Science Radio Turn up the Real Science Radio Keepin’ it real
SPEAKER 05 :
Greetings to the brightest audience in the country. Welcome to Real Science Radio. I’m Fred Williams.
SPEAKER 04 :
And I’m Doug McBurney. Fred, it’s October 31st, and I know what everybody’s thinking. It’s Reformation Day. It’s Reformation Day. But, Fred, bigger than that. It’s the final day of our telethon to stay on the air on KLTT AM670, the 50,000 watt blow touch for the gospel right there in Denver, Colorado. And we need people’s help. Folks, if you want to advertise your business or your product, You can advertise. You can sponsor a show for $200. You can sponsor a whole month for just $800 a month. You can subscribe to the RSR archives, go to the store, buy some of our products. We’re not going to take up a lot of your time because we know you have Reformation Day plans, but it is the final day of the telethon. So help us stay on the air.
SPEAKER 1 :
$20,000.
SPEAKER 04 :
If you can write that one check right now, please do that. Okay. Now, Fred, what do we got for Reformation Day?
SPEAKER 05 :
So for Reformation Day, we have joining us in the studio, Dwayne Bartley. Wow. It’s an honor to have you here, Dwayne. So he’s a researcher. He’s been challenging mainstream science for quite a long time. I’ve heard you give a talk at Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship. You’re now the vice president. And I just had to have you on the radio because people need to know about you. You’ve done so much research. You know like every little crevice and corner of really science in general. And we’re going to talk today about the dangers of settled science. And I’m just looking forward to hear what you have to say about it. And I know, Doug, you mentioned something off air about peanut allergies. And I think that plays in. There’s a recent study on that, right?
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes, yes. And now, Dwayne, before we get to that, we also want to point out that Dwayne earns a living in the real world as an electrical engineer making products that people actually buy. So he doesn’t work for a think tank or a university or… He works in the real world.
SPEAKER 02 :
I was going to say, I actually have to earn it. No, don’t say that. Yeah, currently I am building a power plant that keeps our men and women in uniform, safe, downrange. And so it’s a big deal. And most of my career has been in failure analysis. So I have spent a long time looking at quote-unquote settled science. And from a failure analysis standpoint, there are some – it’s not an intuitive field, failure analysis. There’s a lot of things where you go, wait, right? Follow that either backwards or forwards in time. Follow that through the process of cause and effect. That breaks down and it’s hard. And like I said, it’s not intuitive. People have a very difficult time Looking at it, they can take a snapshot and go, I can explain this picture. Well, when you back the picture out, well, when you play the film forward, when you play it backwards, now your theory doesn’t work. And so, yeah, I’ve spent 20 years researching. I spent about the last five teaching it. As you said, my daughter calls it a vast expanse of useless knowledge. It’s not useless. She’s told me repeatedly. I never said useless, but it is a vast expanse of curious knowledge.
SPEAKER 04 :
So listen, speaking of failure analysis, let’s look at the last several decades of the civilizational response to the rise in childhood allergies. Apparently, before 2015, this is an article I got. CBS News is quoting a study, but for the last several decades, maybe you’ve noticed that kids have peanut allergies. Not just kids, but lots of people. They have peanut allergies.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, you never used to see a thing. Good grief. When I was way back in the dark ages, I think, okay, the planes didn’t have propellers. Some of them did. But they used to serve peanuts on the aircraft when you got on board. Yes, yes. Peanut allergies. Now that’s like, apparently you could drop an airplane out of the air with peanuts if you serve them on board.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes, yes.
SPEAKER 02 :
So I’m with you.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, and that’s something I noticed. And I don’t know about you, Fred, but when I was a little kid, I didn’t know anybody with really any allergies that I can think of. Maybe they had some secret allergies, but certainly no peanut. No, you’re absolutely right.
SPEAKER 05 :
I can’t think of any. And it’s interesting because both of my kids have a tree nut allergy. Now it’s different than a peanut allergy. But they both, that’s a leg.
SPEAKER 02 :
That’s a bean. Yeah. Yeah.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah. And they have to have, you know, they have their EpiPen and my daughter’s not quite as good as my son at avoiding it. And so I’ve been with her taking her to the hospital because she’s having a reaction. Wow.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yes.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yes. Well, she’s had to use her EpiPen like three times. She’s starting to get a little bit better, but like she’ll like some kind of Indian dish or something that doesn’t, you wouldn’t know has tree nuts in it because it’s like a, you know, a sauce. And she’s like, uh-oh, and then they have to rush her to the hospital.
SPEAKER 02 :
So, Doug, if I read that right, the report was talking about, because I saw the same thing. I was up early this morning, and I saw that, and I was like, that’s really strange. And, you know, it seems to me everybody’s saying, oh, keep kids away from it.
SPEAKER 04 :
And it’s always this thing they try and… Yeah, well, that’s the thing is that apparently for the last several decades… the expert opinion has been keep infants away from peanuts. And for whatever reason, that’s the advice that doctors, allergists, pediatricians have given parents for the last several decades. Well, there was a study done in 2015 that proved, clinically, with a real trial, that if you exposed infants to peanuts, you could dramatically reduce the incidence of allergy later in life. And that study has influenced a significant amount of guidance from doctors for about 10 years now. and the data’s in, it works. Expose your kids to peanuts early and the doctors say, don’t have them tested, don’t freak out about it. Just give them a little bit of peanuts when they’re little and they’ll probably develop a tolerance and will reduce allergies. The data’s in, it works. And when you read the article and look at why did we accept the advice to keep our kids away from peanuts and there doesn’t seem to be a reason, Duane. It seems like somebody said it was an expert’s opinion, and everybody just said, oh, well, it’s the expert’s opinion. Yeah, the expert’s settled science.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, well, you know, it’s like, well, somebody was near water and drowned. Well, the answer to that is don’t go near the water. Hold on. You know, besides, I’m pretty sure that’s some form of child abuse. If you remove peanuts from a kid, where does the peanut butter and jelly sandwich come from? I mean, that’s child abuse right there. You’re no longer qualified to be a parent if your kid can’t have a PB&J.
SPEAKER 05 :
i’m sorry america was built on peanut butter and jelly and so yeah there’s something wrong with we should have known we should have had some suspicions right there just it should just be a natural dislike because there’s certain people that don’t like certain kinds of foods if ryan was here right now he’d tell you hey look i don’t have a peanut allergy but i hate peanut butter so oh funny we have a kid that hates peanut butter i have a brother-in-law says he can’t stand cheese but he likes pizza and i have to go
SPEAKER 02 :
Or it’s tomatoes. It might be tomatoes. I apologize. It might be tomatoes.
SPEAKER 04 :
I wonder, and I want both of you to address this. I think it’s quite possible that the reason the expert’s opinion was accepted so nonchalantly was just an accidental, incidental misreading of… creation versus evolution. So if you don’t look at our immune system and our bodies as a created system designed for a purpose, and you look at it as an accidental hodgepodge of parts that just evolved by chance, you might not understand that the immunologic response is best based
SPEAKER 02 :
built up by exposing the person to small amounts you might not understand the immune system if you think it just evolved is what i’m trying to say and that’s just dumb and you know like you said you have the smartest audience so they’ll hopefully forgive me for a bit of this but that’s happens a lot that’s where the arrogance of science and especially medicine comes in it’s like well We can’t trust the body. We need to take that over and run it intelligently. So the intelligent thing is to remove peanuts from the environment. And there’s so much more that that goes into. We’ve virtually sterilized the world of an infant. When I was a kid, you had to have a tablespoon of dirt daily, guaranteed. Absolutely. I mean, my parents also said, go play in the intersection, but it never made me allergic to cars. Yeah. It might play a role. But you look at that and they say, we need to take this over. And they never stop to realize, hey, the immune system is an amazing system. You really break that down. I mean, from platelets on out, the body’s ability to do that. And if you don’t give it the smorgasbord of, hey, this is what’s in the world. And you need to learn what that is and react to it. God built an amazing immune system.
SPEAKER 04 :
There’s the problem. That’s the problem right there is that the majority of people educated in the public schools and the public universities, we got to the point where we didn’t think about God first. And so we end up with some expert who, I mean, I don’t know how many children have died from anaphylactic shock from peanut allergies, but it’s a significant number. And it goes back to some expert who didn’t really mean to do all that harm, but because of a civilizational shift away from God first and understanding creation and just knowing that we were created, we end up like this. And that’s the danger of expert opinions and settled science. That’s what I’d like to talk about. I’d like to hear from both of you about the dangers of all of that.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, I agree with you. The dangers of settled science. Somebody says something, and I think, I guess we kind of talked about this, but one of the sources of this problem is that I don’t think there’s many nefarious people. There are. Make no mistake. There are people who are out there that have a deliberate, intended desire to eliminate God. Okay, but there’s a lot. that they want to study something and they have a brilliant mind and they go about it. And they believe and often do know a great deal about the science they study, right? And they know their science so well that assuming it’s true, they say, I’ve done my research. I know how this works. I can cause an effect, make things change to the betterment, right? And they say, I know my stuff so well that, well, you know, I hear from the biologists that this is how life works. And I listened to the astronomers and they know this. So I assume, and it’s not an irrational assumption. I assume that I know my stuff well, because I’m passionate about it. This is what I do. They do too. They must. Otherwise they wouldn’t be in it. Right. And so they piggyback this whole thing and it winds up being the string of dominoes that in the end all lay upon each other. And they don’t actually know they build on what other people say is settled science.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah. And, you know, an example that comes to mind for me was an email exchange I had with a guy named Dr. James Crow. He wrote prolifically for Nature magazine. Okay. That’s not a creation magazine, right? No. Not the CMI. No. And he said something real interesting because I had always heard about how scientists will say, well, you know, in my field of science, there’s not a lot of evidence for evolution, but there sure is in all the other fields. And he had written a lot of articles on the mutation rate and how we can’t sustain it. And why are we, why do, how do we even exist right now with the mutation rate? And I asked, well, you know, why do you believe in evolution? And he said, well, because the other sciences support that, you know, astronomy, just like you said, geology, right? other fields. This guy was a geneticist. His major field was biology, and he could not defend evolution from his field.
SPEAKER 02 :
No, and when they try, they often do that. They say, well, that’s a smart person, and they said, so therefore I trust them. Exactly. And they put their trust in man, and I mean, you know where that goes. It’s like evolution, you know, one of the things I wanted to just throw out there, molecules to man, right? Yeah, yeah. from goo to you via the zoo and it’s just there’s so many gaps like for instance they’ll they’ll tell you in evolution it’s like oh well single-celled organisms the the luca the lowest universal common ancestor was some kind of amoeba looking thing right and of course that’s great and evolution’s never stopped in theory as far as we know right so single-celled organisms And I actually heard somebody put this together so cleanly that I’m going to borrow it, and I can’t remember his name. He’s a fabulous gentleman. And he said, okay, single-celled organisms evolved into multicellular organisms, right? And you go, okay. So there were one-celled organisms, and then… And now we know what life is, right? How many cells are in your body? And I will tell you that the smallest plant life form with the fewest number of cells is duckweed. And it’s in the thousands, tens of thousands, right? The smallest animal side of it is a rotifer. Again, thousands of cells. Name me one two-celled organism. Three. Five. Twenty. A hundred. They don’t exist. So if evolution’s never stopped, why don’t we have all the other ones? Now, fully acknowledge that there are things that are colonies, but within a colony organism, each individual cell is self-sufficient. It need not have the rest of them make it survive on its own.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, wait. I haven’t heard this before. Tell me if I’m following the lot. Since we still have single-celled organisms, which I’m pretty sure we do. It would make sense that we should have some two and three and all the way to $2,000, $2 trillion, right?
SPEAKER 1 :
$2,500, $2,200, $700.
SPEAKER 02 :
Pick a number anywhere between tens of thousands and one. This is like a carnival trick.
SPEAKER 04 :
Pick a number. That’s where the term missing link comes from, and it should be plural. Missing.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yes. Oh, my goodness. Yeah. Wait until you get the missing link. You know why they call it the missing link? Because it’s missing.
SPEAKER 04 :
Because it’s missing.
SPEAKER 02 :
And, you know, it’s like roll back and just, you can go either direction. Like I said, you know, play it forwards or backwards. It evolved. Okay. Well, why isn’t it evolving now? Why did it need to evolve? Because if you really look at evolution, they say like, oh, it becomes the best thing it can be. Well, then if I’m fully self-sufficient, do I need anyone else? Nope. So why? And I love it when they say, well, lizards needed to fly. It’s like, I need to fly. I still don’t have any relatives that can fly because airplanes make me dicey. It’s like I trust most pilots. Most. But if I could fly, I wouldn’t need that. And I still haven’t grown any wings. There might be more than one reason for that.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, well, you know, they have the answer to that as well. It just happened so slowly, of course, you can’t see it. Don’t be childish about this now.
SPEAKER 05 :
Or it happened so fast you didn’t see it.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, there is the… Well, what do you need?
SPEAKER 02 :
What do you like? Like I said, I’ve been researching it for 20 years, right? And I love those moments where you get smacked across the back of the head with a 2×4. The Cambrian Explosion is a massive… in their theory because there’s no predecessors to that. We find a layer, and we won’t go into the circular logic of how do we know how old the layer is because they have fossils in it. How do you know how old the fossils are? Well, based on the layer they’re found in, right? There’s carbon dating, and I have a complete breakdown on that, but if you’ve ever read The Rate Project, you know there’s some serious problems there. I won’t go into it, but when you look at where everything evolved from… Every one of those animals that’s evolved, no matter where you find them, at the Cambrian explosion, there was nothing, there was no predecessor. It’s not a tree, you know, the tree of life. It’s a lawn. Yeah. All of a sudden you find this one layer and everything goes, and it has no predecessors whatsoever in any layer anywhere on the planet. There’s no predecessors. Yeah. And then they build them and they say, well, its predecessor was this and this. And I watched one the other day and I swear I was laughing at it so hard because they have all these little circles and say, and this animal became this one. They’re all blank until the ones that you can actually find. And then there are pictures. And if you look at the number of dots versus the number of pictures, you’re like, wow, that’s a lot of dots. You had to connect a lot to get here.
SPEAKER 05 :
Well, you can go, anybody listening to this show, and if you’re an evolutionist, go grab a textbook, one of your science books on the evolution of dinosaurs. And they’ll show these different dinosaurs. And guess what? They’ve got…
SPEAKER 02 :
dashed lines and other creatures and that means they don’t have any evidence of this alleged evolution they’ve got dashed lines so they want you to believe in their dashed lines you know one of the funniest things that came out of that on the dinosaurs it’s like uh birds evolved from dinosaurs right so dinosaurs in general they have two distinctly different hip formations and one is bird-like and one is lizard-like guess which branch the birds evolved from by their wild guess. They came from the lizard side. And you’re like, so they just reverse it. Maybe that does work. They’re like, Hey, it worked better for those guys. Let’s turn ours around too. I’m not buying it. Here’s the part that really blew me away about the Cambrian explosion. I thought it was fascinating. And you look at all the animals erupt out of it and you go, wow, that’s really cool. Here’s what I didn’t know. There are 17 other explosions of life. That suddenly occur in the timeline and you’re like, this was never here before. Flowering plants, insects. They’re massive. There’s 17 of them and they’re huge.
SPEAKER 05 :
Yeah. Well, you know, last week we did a show and we played a short from this secular person who has a pretty popular channel now. And she mentioned the great unconformity. In fact, you… Oh, my goodness. We got some of it right there.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 05 :
Dwayne’s wife had created this on a 3D printer, right? Yeah.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, we shot it. I appreciate that.
SPEAKER 05 :
And she talks about the great unconformity and the layers and how you have these flat gaps. Yeah. And it’s like, well, you know, first of all, wouldn’t… And she believes in millions of years. And, you know, maybe this happened by a catastrophe. You know, some of them almost have to say that.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 05 :
But she also mentions the Cambrian explosion. She does. Still in a framework of millions of years, and it’s like you can’t have that. You know, it’s like what Bob used to talk about, the shrinking timeline. And the Cambrian explosion keeps getting… The gaps between the gaps are like almost they’re blurred now. They’re yeah. The Cameron explosion and then major, other major life forms and body plans. And you can’t do that. There’s no way that that can have evolved. There’s no way you can take and put millions of years on that. You said there they’ve been taught that they hear it from other experts. So a lot of these people aren’t necessarily nefarious. I don’t really think that girl doing that YouTube channel is nefarious.
SPEAKER 04 :
No.
SPEAKER 05 :
She’s been brainwashed her whole life, her entire life through the public school system, into college, all the times her parents… took her to the museums, the TV shows she watches. Yes. And you start to believe it because a lot of the guests we’ve had on this show, and I think you might even be one of them, you used to buy into all that stuff.
SPEAKER 02 :
I did. There was a point in my life where, that’s a longer story, and I’ve got to be careful. I have to have a handler. That’s my beautiful… bride does that for me because otherwise i will chase squirrels for hours and so i caution you to be careful what you start me on right that reminds me i think when you gave your talk at rocky mountain creation fellowship didn’t you have a sign or something no i have um my wife was so funny if you’ve ever looked it up it’d be so funny if you can find a picture of it i have one but my daughter said you chase squirrels dad and this is the squirrel you chase and if you look it up it’s a malabar giant squirrel and I swear it was created by Disney. It has purple and red and blue and gold. And it’s a beautiful creature, right? And she goes, that’s the squirrel you chase. And so my wife actually… Is that a real squirrel? It really is. It’s a beautiful thing. It’s a Malabar giant squirrel. My wife actually hand sewed two stuffed animals together. And the reason she made two was one of them doesn’t fly well. The other one, Elway could put a cross on your chest with it. So could Peyton. Well, that’s going back the old way across. The old way across. The old way across. And she actually built one of these, and one of them flies like a football. And she would sit in the back of the room, and the one that doesn’t fly, she would just give me that look. And she would start playing with the squirrel like this, like you’re squirreling. And I had five seconds. And if I didn’t, out came the other squirrel, and she would ping me with it while I’m up there talking. Get back in the car.
SPEAKER 05 :
so i have to have a handler and thank god he gave me that one she’s awesome yeah so just so the audience knows the elway cross isn’t a crucifix john madden because elway threw the ball so hard the receivers they said they have a cross on their chest yeah i’m that old oh well well so listen if you guys want me to keep you on track i want to help i’m here to help
SPEAKER 02 :
You better.
SPEAKER 04 :
Somebody’s got to. If I’m not mistaken, the Cambrian explosion is a relatively new, it only started in the 1960s. And before the 1960s. Well, no, Doug, I got to correct you. Well, okay.
SPEAKER 05 :
It started about 6,000 years ago.
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, yeah. Okay. Well, when I heard Dwayne… You said it was an explosion. Wasn’t it about 6,000 years ago?
SPEAKER 02 :
I’m telling you, there’s someone telling you it’s 85 million years ago, but let’s not go there.
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s so funny. When I heard you, Dwayne, start describing the explosion of flowering plants, I was like, I remember reading about that somewhere.
SPEAKER 02 :
Anyway… There I go.
SPEAKER 04 :
Don’t distract me from my point. So the Cambrian explosion as a description of evolutionary biology only came along in the 1960s. And before that, there was settled science about how all this evolved. And the settled science, it gets overturned within the evolutionary atheistic model all the time. It gets reset. It gets blown out of the water. It gets completely upended is another very popular term.
SPEAKER 02 :
Oh, you know, the biggest hammer to that was Dr. Mary Schweitzer.
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, absolutely.
SPEAKER 02 :
You know, and I know I’ve listened to you guys and stuff and you guys have been through that, but okay. When I’ve taught, I got to tell you this, that I’ve had people in my classes and I used to do the social butterfly and bounce from table to table as I would pick. I’m more of an accumulator than a researcher. I actually do find people and I investigate them first to find out where’s your mindset and, how good can I trust the data you come up with in your procedures? You know, so like Dr. James tour and, um, Stephen Meyer and Douglas acts and all of those guys, when it comes to the bio side, I’ve seen enough of their work that I’m like, wow, these guys really have it together. And it took me a whole bottle of Aspen to get through the signature in the cell, but it was awesome. And then when I got to Doug’s book of undeniable, that was awesome. No Aspen needed. That was great. But I studied both. It was like, wow, these guys are deep. And I, So I try and do that with everybody. It’s like, where does your science come from? And when I know I can trust that, then I build on it. So when you were talking about evolution and you go, when I would teach those classes, there would be people in there and they would look and they would have, you know, you get the people that are like, wow. And they just sit back in awe of it. Maybe it’s not their thing, but they’re fascinated by pieces of it. And you get people that do know something about it. And they’re like, I, you know, they get the squinchy face and they’re like, wait, I think I get that. Oh, I can follow that. And you show them the failure analysis of how you get there. Then I had the people that were absolutely angry. You could see it on their face. Yeah. And you’re like, oh, and so I would write down, I was like, talk to Bob. Right. And I’d go sit with him. I was like, hey, so what was going through your head when I was doing this part? And I’d had it said to me and they were like, my biology teacher was my favorite teacher all the way through high school. And he lied to me and they’re mad about it. Yeah. And I’m like, I understand. And I would always have to do the same thing. And this is the hardest part, even for me, from a scientific standpoint, when somebody is just dead wrong, you want to be binary and go. You were wrong. This is right. Move forward. And when they don’t, I’m frustrated with that. And the hardest part is to correct them in love. And I’m not good at that when it comes to the sciences. But these people would be mad. And I was like, hold on. I want you to consider… And they would take it as a personal affront. Like, he lied to me. And you’re like, let me offer a thought. You ever considered that he was lied to? Have you ever thought that… He’s teaching you what he believes to be true because nobody’s ever showed him anything different. And then I’d always flip the coin on him and go, were you their favorite student? Yeah. You know, I used to spend, you know, an hour after class talking to him. And it’s like, have you ever considered you might be the only person that could reach them? Yeah. Good point. And bring it back. Yeah. And that was hard. So you see it, you see it in the world where they’re like, when people find out that it’s not true, but that’s why I say they’re not nefarious. People study this and they’re like, Hey, this guy who has a PhD told me that this is what I need to study because this is fact. And that’s why settled science can be so hard. And there is good science. There’s excellent science out there and there’s a great deal of it. So I don’t want to say all science is wrong. That is, oh, 180 degrees from the direction we should be going. The problem comes when the hard science, the good science says, well, we figured this out. Great. The next rock solid point that we can see is that one. So now everybody extrapolates. They use their, sometimes their imagination. They take their best guess and I’m not condemning them for that. That is a scientific method, right? You go, I have a hypothesis and then you try and prove it wrong. The failure comes when someone else has built the storyline and your hypothesis influenced by that. And now all of a sudden it’s no longer real science. It’s how do I get to the points that they said are definitively true when they’re actually not.
SPEAKER 05 :
And you go down the wrong path. You know, it was Dr. Joel Brown that said really all science is creation science. And that’s what, you know, we’re trying to let people know. So I do think this might be a good time for the interesting fact of the week.
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, do it. I love it when you guys do this. I had another very deep, meaningful point that I was about to make, Fred. I’m trying to think of it real quick, and I guess we’re stuck.
SPEAKER 05 :
Are you intimidated by every time we have this segment and my finger’s right on this red button?
SPEAKER 04 :
There’s a green button and a red button. By the way, I want to let people know this is the last day of the telethon.
SPEAKER 01 :
Stop the tape, stop the tape. Hey, this is Dominic Enyart. We are out of time for today. If you want to hear the rest of this program, go to rsr.org. That’s Real Science Radio, rsr.org.
SPEAKER 03 :
Scholars can’t explain it all away. Get ready to be awed by the handiwork of God.
SPEAKER 1 :
Tune in to Real Science Radio. Turn up the Real Science Radio. Keeping it real.
