ID the Future, a podcast about evolution and intelligent design.

Welcome to ID the Future. I'm your host Andrew McDermott.

Well, it's quite common these days to hear biological systems being compared to machines to convey

their complexity and their design but some consider this an inadequate and

even inappropriate metaphor after all if life of all life is the result of

unguided evolutionary processes then even things like meaning and purpose

would also just be byproducts of a bottom-up development.

And so, you know, people have trouble with this metaphor.

My guest today is Dr. Emily Reeves, a biochemist, metabolic nutritionist, and aspiring systems biologist.

Her doctoral studies were completed at Texas A&M University in biochemistry and

biophysics. Emily is currently an active clinician for metabolic nutrition and nutritional

genomics at neutroplexity. She's also working with fellows of Discovery Institute and the greater

scientific community to promote integration of engineering and biology.

Emily, welcome back to the podcast.

Thank you so much, Andrew.

It's great to be here again.

Yeah, yeah, it has been a while.

And it's great to have your voice on the show.

And we can see each other, too, which is great.

Well, you recently wrote an article at our flagship news

and commentary site, EvolutionNews.org, that piqued my interest. It's called the end of the machine

metaphor, question mark. And in it, you discussed some ideas put forward by science writer Philip Ball

...