Ham vs. Nye Debate: Take Two


Moonshine by Kenny LingI have had some time to think about the debate last week in a little more detail. I have come to have a different view of it. As I go back over it, I think it is clear that Ken Ham had the better debate.

Ham made points for which Nye really had not rebuttal. I focused on the Ham statement that the earth is 6000 years old, and perhaps he oversold that point; the issue, however, is whether it is millions of year old or thousands.  The issue is whether the evidence that the earth is millions of years old is fact or misguided fiction.

On this issue, Ham drew a distinction between observable science and historical science that is quite good. He said that creationists do not disagree with evolutionists on the observable science; the conclusions drawn in regard to the age of the earth, for instance is a different story. Nye kept stating that only science that is reproducible is real science, but how can scientists reproduce the big bang? How do we observe primordial goo turning into a life form (any life form)? How do we observe that fossils are millions of years old?

Nye, of course, relies on carbon dating, and he accepts it as accurate. How can we be sure? Ham responded that there are dozens of dating techniques, and they all produce different results. So, which one is accurate?

Nye oversold the point that creationists cannot test and reproduce the theory of creationism because evolutionists cannot test and reproduce the ultimate conclusions they reach either. In fact, both conclusions of the origins of man and of the earth are steeped not in observable science. They are extrapolations. To hold those conclusions requires something other than pure science. It requires something some people would identify squarely as… faith.

To hold those ultimate conclusions requires a premise that is also not based on science, but rather on worldview. Worldview has more of an impact on science than the scientific community cares to admit.

In this 30 minute piece called Evolution vs. God fundamental holes in the evolutionary theory of the origin of the earth and man are exposed, and this is out of the mouths of evolutionary theorists themselves in response to questions asked of them. It is well worth the time to watch it.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Christian, Faith, Materialism, Science

Comments are welcomed

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: