Bill Nye Ken Ham Debate In Depth Recap Synopsis and Who Won

Nye

The Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham debate has just concluded, and  Nye has emerged the clear winner. The event has been widely anticipated for weeks, and was available for free on YouTube. The recorded event can also be accessed on YouTube for a period of time. DVDs and downloads are also available for purchase on the Creation Museum’s website. Here is an in-depth recap and synopsis of the events as they unfolded, leading up to the dramatic victory of  Nye, much to the delight of the secular community.

7:00 p.m: There’s a strange animated commercial for the Creation Museum. Ok, here comes Tom Foreman from CNN as the moderator. The stage looks good. The question that will be asked is “is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era.” Where are Nye and Ham?

7:01: Here they come! They shake hands and exchange what looks like pleasant words. Ham will go first because he won the coin toss. Foreman is doing introductions.

7:04: Ham gets five minutes for an opening statement. He says secularists have “highjacked” the word science. He’s carting out Stuart Burgess, a scientist and inventor… whoa… he jumps over to defining the word science. He says there are different types of science: observational and historical. Again he says the word science has been highjacked. Aaaand right on to the Bible verses. His main point here is that historical science is basically the Bible.

7:10: Nye’s turn. He’s counting bowties. Uh oh. He’s telling a story about bowties. Why is he doing that? Oh boy. Tuxedos… bow ties… his grandfather needed help tying a tie. Ohh it’s a joke. Ok. Now he’s talking about CSI. Ah, ok, he is explaining that there’s no such thing as “historical” science. That’s a Ken Ham construct, he says. Ham has a remarkable view about a worldwide flood. Nye asks if the story of the flood is reasonable. He’s moving on to fossil evidence and how there is no fossil evidence of the great flood. He says that we have to embrace science to keep up with technology and that Ham’s model is not viable.

7:15: Ham is carting out the small group of scientists who are young earth creationists: Raymond Damadian who invented the MRI scanner; Danny Falkner is into astronomy; Dr. Stuart Burgess invented some piece for a satellite. Ham admits that these scientists are “a small minority in the scientific world.” Burgess says that a lot of scientists are just afraid to speak out because of the “atheist lobby.” Again Ham is back on the “historical science” idea. He uses “historical geology” to illustrate this idea of historical science. “There’s a difference between what you observe and what you interpret with regard to the past,” says Ham. He explains that it’s a battle over philosophical world views and that you either believe God is the ultimate authority or man is the ultimate authority. He says kids are not being taught to think critically in schools and that there are different animal “kinds” and a “creation orchard”; and that observational science confirms this.

He says that the evolutionary tree is “belief” because we can’t see one “kind” changing into another. He says we can see and observe animals being different from each other and that’s observational science. Again, he says the word science and the word evolution have both been high jacked. Andrew Fabich is on screen giving his credentials and says he believes in creationism. Ham is excited to announce that the antiquated view which used to be taught was based on Darwin’s ideas about the highest race being Caucasian. He says that because this “foundation” of Darwin is wrong, all of Darwin’s ideas are wrong.

7:40- Still on Ham. Ham says you can’t observe the age of the earth and that students are being confused by terms. Ham says evolution is a belief, and that his beliefs stem from the Bible and what he can observe and see today. He says he admits his historical science idea is based on the Bible and that he takes Genesis as literal history. Now he’s quoting the Bible again and telling the story of the Bible and Jesus.

7:41: Jesus. More Jesus. More Jesus. Back to the difference between “historical” and “observational” science. Again he asserts that God is the ultimate authority. He says he wants children to be taught the right foundation. Back to Jesus dying on the cross… aaaand… his turn is over.

7:74: It’s Nye’s turn. Nye says thanks to Ham because he learned something from the presentation. He leads with a fossil and explains that we’re standing on millions of layers of ancient life. There is not enough time in 4,000 years for there to be millions of years of fossil layers present, he says. His colleagues drill out ice rods called snow ice and he finds 680,000 layers of winter/summer cycles within the layers. It’s impossible that the ice could have formed in 4,000 years. He’s showing trees that are 6,800 years old and 9,550 years old. How could those trees be there is there was a flood 4,000 years ago? he asks. Trees can’t survive under water.

He explains that scientists study and see exactly how long it takes sediment to turn to stone. He’s showing pictures of the Grand Canyon and says there should be a Grand Canyon on every continent if the flood had happened. He says as we look at fossils we are looking at the past. You never, ever find a higher animal mixed into the lower ones, but if the water drained away so fast after the flood, there would be many animals mixed together. He says scientists challenges one person to find one example of animals existing concurrently in fossils.

If there were just man and all other species, where would you put modern humans among all the animal skulls in fossil history? he asks. He says that if a giant wooden ship went aground safely in the Middle East, we would expect that some evidence of kangaroos traveling from the Middle East to Australia would be found in the last 4,000 years. There is no land bridge like the one claimed, and there are no fossils to support the creation theory. Nye says there are about 16 million species that exist today. If these species came from the 7,000 “kinds” as Ham claims, we would expect to find at least 11 new species every day. We would have seen these changes among us, but there is no evidence for that.

Inherent in the Ham’s view, says Nye, is that Noah’s family would have built a ship that would have housed 7,000 kinds of animals, and they would have had to feed those animals, but we can run a scientific test that disproves their ability to do so. A huge wooden ship was actually built many years ago, but that ship would twist in the sea, and in all the twisting, it leaked and eventually sank. The best ship builders in the world could not build a ship that would be viable.

“What we want in science is an ability to predict,” Nye says; a natural law that we can understand. He gives the example of the Tiktaalik which is an animal that is a cross between a lizard and a frog. Scientists predicted they would find it and they indeed discovered it where they thought they would. Nye is talking about “traditional fish sex” now, and is asking why does anybody have sex? The answer, he says, is your enemies. Your enemies are germs and parasites and the purpose for sexual reproduction is that it causes genes that are susceptible to fewer parasites.

He goes on to say that the explanation provided by evolution gives scientists the ability to make predictions, and he says it is generally agreed that the Big Bang happened 13.7 billion years ago. Oh no. It’s the periodic table of elements. He explains that elements come into being when stars explode and that it’s possible to tell exactly how old each fossil is and therefore how old the earth is. It is easy to observe these fossils and the animals represented therein, he says. He asks Ham how there can be billions of stars that are much older than 6,000 years old. How can we have rocks and trees that are “far, far, far older than you claim the earth is?” he asks.

He concludes with saying that the Constitution states we should promote science and pleads with Kentucky to not let students fall behind in science education.

Applause.

Here comes the five minute rebuttal. Ham goes first: He repeats that we can’t observe the age of the earth. He says his understanding of science is built on the Bible and that God created the world in six days. Adam, Abraham and Christ equals 6,000 years. He says different dating methods give different dates and that you can’t age date a rock. Then more Jesus, Jesus, the Bible, Christ. The Bible. Death is a result of man’s sin. Adam and Eve, Jesus. The Bible, the Bible, God, God, the Bible. There are hundreds of dating methods out there and they are all fallible, he says, and he claims that the word of God is the only fallible dating method.

Nye’s counter-rebuttal:

Nye says dating methods are very reliable and that using the Bible as a dating method is “troubling.” Nye says we can definitely observe the past and that’s all they do in astronomy. The heart of the disagreement, Nye says, is that Ham is using magical thinking and it’s not conventional mainstream science. He refutes Ham’s claim that animals were all vegetarians. He concludes by saying The Bible is not a science text and we should not use it as such.

Ham’s counter rebuttal:

Ham again carts out the small minority of creation scientists and says they agree with him. He says Nye is confusing terms. He says species did not get on the ark, but rather “kinds” did. He says Nye’s fossils illustrate his (Ham’s) point and that since we didn’t see the layers of fossils being laid down, we can’t say how old they are. It all comes down to interpretation, he says. He says Nye can’t claim Noah was unskilled because Nye never met him.

Nye’s counter rebuttal:

Nye says he is completely unsatisfied because Ham did not address his questions. In Ham’s view, Nye says, we would have 35-40 new species every day. Nye is skeptical of Noah being a great ship maker because he would have had to have superpowers to do so, and that’s not reasonable. Nye wants to know why we should accept Ham’s word for it that natural law completely changed 4,000 years ago but there is no record of it. Nye says that there are millions of religious people who do not accept creationism. What is to become of all those people who do not see it Ham’s way? He says if Ham can come up with any fossil to prove the theory he would love to see it and that we need scientists and engineers for the future so that we can continue to innovate. “We need innovation and that means science education,” he says.

Time for audience questions! The following is a synopsis of a sampling of questions and answers:

How do you account for celestial bodies?

Ham’s answer: the Bible accounts for it. God is all-powerful. More stuff about God. “Wow, what a God.”

Nye’s answer: Astronomy, natural laws, science.

How did the atoms that created the Big Bang get there?

Nye: It’s a mystery. We want to know, so let’s keep trying to find out. The universe is accelerating and we don’t know exactly why. “This is why we get up and go to work every day.”

Ham’s answer: “God created the heavens and the earth.” The Bible, the Bible, God, the Creator.

What evidence besides the Bible supports creationism?

Ham’s answer: Just because the majority says it’s true does not mean it is true, because the majority often gets it wrong. I made predictions and my prediction about one race was right. We are not scientifically able to prove it but we can investigate the present.

How did consciousness come from matter?

Nye’s answer: “We don’t know.” It’s a great mystery.  We want to know and that’s what we are trying to find out.

Ham: The Bible. God. The Bible. God gave it to us. God’s glory.

What, if anything would ever change your mind?

Ham: I can’t prove it to you, but basically, God and Jesus. “The Bible is the word of God.” No one will ever convince him that the word of God is not true. Like, ever.

Nye: “We just need one piece of evidence like a fossil that swam from one level to another.” We would need evidence that rock layers could form in 4,000 years. Bring me any of those things and I would change my mind immediately.

What scientific evidence supports your view of the age of the earth?

Nye: Radiometric evidence, radioactivity. “If things were any other way, things would be different.” These are provable facts.

Ham: Scientists are just making assumptions and most of them contradict each other.

Can you explain the speed of continental drifting?

Ham: I’m not an expert in this area. Scientists are just making assumptions when they measure the rate at which continents drift.

Nye: We can measure sea floor spreading and we can measure exactly how continents drift.

What’s your favorite color?

Nye: Green

Ham: “Observational science, blue.”

Is there room for God in science?

Nye: Billions of religious people accept science. Everyone uses science. Using science is not all that connected to spiritual beliefs yet science and belief are compatible.

Ham: “God is necessary for science.”

Do you believe the entire Bible should be taken literally?

Ham: “I take the Bible naturally.” Some parts are more poetic and some is prophetic. God, God, God etc.

Nye: It seems like Ham is cherry picking.

What is the one thing upon which you base your belief?

Ham: the Bible. There’s no other book like it. It tells us everything we need to know. Man is a sinner. The Gospel…Jesus died on the cross. Salvation, Jesus, God, God, the Bible. The Bible, the Bible, the Bible. God will reveal himself to you.

Nye: “I base my beliefs on the information and the process that we call science. It fills me with joy. It is a wonderful and astonishing thing to me. If we abandon all that we have learned, if we let go of everything we have learned before us, if we stop looking for answers, we will be defeated…We have to embrace science education. We have to keep science education in science classes.”

In the Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham debate, the answer to those asking who won is: it’s clear Nye emerged the winner because he relied on a large amount of fossil and scientific evidence. Ham relied almost exclusively on the Bible and provided no fossil or scientific evidence whatsoever. As predicted, the debate was friendly and completely civil. In addition to this in depth synopsis and recap, the debate will be available at debatearchive.org for a few days, and on YouTube.

By: Rebecca Savastio

Source: Live debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

238 Responses to Bill Nye Ken Ham Debate In Depth Recap Synopsis and Who Won

  1. Mike Garber March 24, 2014 at 1:12 pm

    “You should always listen to both sides with an open mind.”
    “You should always listen to both sides with an open mind.”

    Tell that to Ken Ham. When Ken admitted that there was no evidence that could be conceivably produced that would change his mind, it was “game over”.

    Reply
  2. Zack Fulmer March 24, 2014 at 11:19 am

    obviously this was written by an evolutionist,”god god bible bible i hate other beliefs”
    You should always listen to both sides with an open mind. Creation and science are both combined. even if you don’t believe in creationism you don’t have to write about it like anyone that believes it is an idiot. i will admit that ham probably wasn’t the best man for this job but he’s not a dummy either.

    Reply
  3. William D. Simpson March 5, 2014 at 12:50 pm

    Its not about who won or lost. Ken Ham did what most professing Christians will not do today. That is to present the Gospel to an unbelieving society/culture which is hostile towards the One true GOD Jesus Christ. I fully understand the back lash that he has received from both enemy and supposed believers in Christ. I published a book several years ago that presents the undeniable evidence of how the Gospel’s message of salvation by grace through Jesus Christ alone will transform a person’s life. The book was received with mixed reviews and the publisher even backed away from the marketing agreement. Currently the book has a 5 star rating on Amazon and I have made the eBook free to anyone that wants to read it. To those who identify themselves as atheist or anyone else, read this testimony but be prepared for your world-view to be challenged.

    http://wsimpson.wordpress.com/2013/08/01/living-in-the-hope-of-my-imagination-ebook/

    Reply
    • TheDukeOfHighwayJ March 7, 2014 at 9:35 am

      “Ken Ham ….. present the Gospel ….”
      Which had no bearing on the topic of whether the OT account of the creation has any validity.

      “…. to an unbelieving society/culture ….”
      Which also has no bearing on the topic, as faith in Christ has no connection to the validity of the OT account of the creation..

      “which is hostile….”
      If you kept bringing an unrelated topic to a discussion, you’d get a bit of hostility, too.

      Reply
  4. Jack K February 23, 2014 at 7:30 am

    Why go through all of this extra debate. It’s called Faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. If you do not have it you will never understand the truth. Very simple. “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” Romans 10:17.

    Reply
  5. Noah Bradley February 19, 2014 at 5:10 pm

    Nobody won. This debate wasn’t worth having. Ken’s view of Creationism isn’t worth debating and Bill Nye did nothing but joke around and repeat the same science-y mumbo jumbo while completely avoiding the question.

    Reply
  6. TheDukeOfHighwayJ February 17, 2014 at 1:03 pm

    Sounds very cult-like. Albeit, it tad more grandiose than most.

    Reply
  7. nick houllis February 17, 2014 at 3:41 am

    I believe in God but I do not believe in creationism. Science actually proves the bible but the bible is not a literal word. Its the word of god translated to people from thousands of years ago.
    Imagine explaning DNA to someone 200 years ago? well imagine explaining any science to someone 5000 years ago?
    Think about this..
    what is a day to god?
    why cant parts of the bible just be stories and there still be a god? The idea that an all powerful god would prevent any untruths in the bible is the same as saying an all powerful god would not allow children to be kiilled/tortured.

    Either way…you cannont disprove science and science must move forward if were ever to understand the real nature of the universe.

    I would say this author would have more credit if his recap of Ham were trying to write what he actually said. The reverse could be true on a creation site where the author says “and nye said Science this, science that, proof proof proof…observation this, observation that…”

    Reply
  8. Kirkules February 10, 2014 at 6:57 pm

    It is completely viable and accurate to use the Bible as support. Ken Ham uses the Bible as historical evidence, not as a completely religious document. The author of this article is very ignorant in their use of substituting Ken Ham’s arguments with, “The Bible, God, Jesus, The Bible.” Biblical evidence is just as accurate as any other form of evidence. State the facts and let others draw their own conclusions from that rather than shoving your own biases down our throats.

    Reply
    • Trevor D February 10, 2014 at 11:06 pm

      The world was not created in 6 days. We know this, it’s established fact.

      Therefore the bible is not accurate and therefore cannot be used as evidence along side *real* evidence which has been repeatedly tested, verified and which can be used to make predictions.

      The bible is fiction. Just like all other religious text found on this planet.

      Reply
      • Jason February 15, 2014 at 8:56 am

        The bible does not state it was created in 6 24hr days, the bible says a day to god is “as a thousand years”, so it could have been thousands if not milllions of years, as I have commented before. And it shoes the earth was after the universe aka heavens.

        Reply
        • Murchad99 February 16, 2014 at 3:53 pm

          “so it could have been thousands if not milllions of years”

          Well that’s one of many problems with calling the Bible a historical source… you must cherry-pick which parts to take literally, which parts to reinterpret to suit your needs, and which parts to discard entirely as parables or moral cautionary tales. And all of this cherry-picking and reinterpretation occurs in line with specific agenda.

          The only part of the bible that is remotely acceptable for use as a “historical source” are the portions recording the tribal history of the Jews, and later the early societies of Christianity. It’s historical because it’s rooted in actual history, despite very little of it being independently verifiable and despite much of it strongly resembling the pseudo-historical exaggerated mythology and legend of other cultures.

          There are many people who say (quite correctly) that the bible can teach you a great many things and make you, in their eyes, a much better person. They can also claim that if there is a god, the bible has the inherent ability to bring your mind closer to understanding Him. But those who claim the bible is historical fact worthy of trusting over observable and verifiable evidence and testing deserve the scorn and dismissal they receive from scientists and most mainstream religious people alike.

          Reply
  9. Mike Garber February 9, 2014 at 2:08 pm

    Trevor is right. How silly would it be if I beleived in unicorns and asked you to prove they dont exist. Pretty silly.

    Reply
  10. Jason Gilmore February 9, 2014 at 8:31 am

    Since majority of people here don’t believe in God and believe in the unproven theory of evolution, here is a challenge, prove to me there is no God.

    Reply
    • Trevor D February 9, 2014 at 12:42 pm

      Sorry, it doesn’t work like that. YOU are the one that is making this claim your god exists, therefore the burden of proof is on YOU to prove that there it exists, not the other way around. Furthermore, I challenge you to prove that your bible is in fact divine and why it supersedes all other religious texts that other religions use as the basis for their faith.
      Do it, I bet you can’t.

      Reply
      • edenoutpost February 9, 2014 at 1:20 pm

        YAHWEH my Creator has always existed and always will. You and I may not, but He has been, is and forever will be. For me, God is personal and has worked many wonders in my life. I have trusted Him and He has delivered me in miraculous ways many times. I hear His voice in His Word and in my heart. I see His character revealed in nature and in the heavens. I have tasted and have seen that the Lord is good. I have hope and a sure future. Death is but a sleep and I fear it not. I know Him in whom I have believed and have perfect peace. Jesus is real to those who invite Him into their hearts and minds. The proof is in the daily walk and communion with the Creator. God’s word is true and that is historically proven over and again. True science verifies the bible’s authenticity for those willing to admit it. The simple fact that we think, reason and have moral sensibilities proves to me that a higher intelligence than I exists. God speaks in a thousand ways to those listening.

        Reply
        • Trevor D February 9, 2014 at 3:14 pm

          I realize you believe you know god, that you believe he exists. Yet that doesn’t mean it *actually* exists…
          Know that none of what you said fulfills the request for evidence and none of it will change the mind of someone looking for the truth in OUR SHARED REALITY.
          Tell me, what’s the difference between your trust, your hope, your belief that your god is real and that of say a Shintoist, or a Hindu, a Jew or a Muslim? Their faith in their version of a deity (or deities) is no doubt as strong as yours yet you all believe in different truths and ideals. What makes your version of reality more truthful than theirs? What makes you right?

          And again, can you prove that the bible is the divine word of god? SHOW ME EVIDENCE. Telling me to listen to god in my heart isn’t going to cut it.

          You know what it looks like to an observer when you are praying or are supposedly having a conversation with (or simply ‘listening’ to) your god?

          Nothing, it looks like you’re simply doing nothing.

          You will claim to be having a spiritual moment with god, yet all you are doing is essentially sitting there talking to yourself. That’s what is observed. People of all faiths will claim to have a personal connection to god and that they speak to him directly, or at least hear his voice.
          This claim that you know that god exists because you hear his voice and his word and in your heart just isn’t going to sway the opinion of a rational human being looking for answers.
          You know what it looks like to me? You are speaking to yourself. It’s a delusion. I can prove that because when you claim to speak to god or are listening to your god speak to you all you can be seen doing at that moment is absolutely nothing.

          Reply
      • Jason Gilmore February 10, 2014 at 9:31 am

        Ok, as I commented before, people believed the earth was flat, yet the Bible stated it is a circle, people believed the earth was supported by giant turtles and animals yet the Bible states it hangs upon nothing. The Bible shows life begins at conception which was contrary to what many scientists previously believed. The Bible set forth cleanliness laws in the book of Leviticus that were ignored by people 100-500 years ago but people now see the truth and reason of. The Bible foretold the fall of Babylons king and realease of the people of Jerusalem 200 years before it happened, not only naming the leader to do that but also how and it happened just as foretold, the Bible foretold the dividing of Alexander the greats kingdom, which happened, the Bible gave the birthplace of Jesus, and listed things he would experience before his death hundreds of years before it occurred. There is numerous amounts of evidence and proof the Bible is not just a random book but that it is a historical and modern day collection of documents that were inspired by someone higher than ourselves.
        But unless you have any faith in such a being, you will continue to ignore the proof right before you.

        Reply
        • Trevor D February 10, 2014 at 2:11 pm

          That’s your evidence? Not impressive in the slightest.

          Makes me wonder why Galileo Galilei was disposed of by the Catholic church for proving the Earth revolved around the sun. You think the bible would of predicted that…

          Here’s a list of failed prophecies in the bible:
          http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Failed_biblical_prophecies

          Isn’t the bible supposed to be the perfect word of god? Then why the mistakes and contradictions? Why the failed prophecies?

          It’s a man-made object, that’s why.

          Also, I was raised a creationist. My mother taught scripture at the public school and then the public high school I went to, so I’m no stranger to your faith. What changed?

          I accepted reality. You’d be surprised with how beautiful it is.

          Reply
          • edenoutpost February 10, 2014 at 2:37 pm

            Friend, your reality is only great until the day comes that you discover a greater reality than the one you now hold onto. One that hits you square in the face and you realize you put your trust in nothing of real value and now its too late to fix it. The bible has no contradictions, when it is understood through the help of God’s Spirit, for spiritual things are spiritually discerned. God hides His deeper wisdom from those who refuse to come to Him in humility and as little children to learn from their heavenly Father. The finite mind of mankind is what makes it at times appear to have contradictions. God inspired the bible and ONLY God can give you the proper understanding of it. If you want contradictions then look no further then the wisdom of the worldly wise and the evolution theories. The examples given regarding the bible were valid examples where Scripture understood the real world far better then the so-called scientists and religionists of the day. Much of what is professed to be Christianity today is in reality a dark and poor example of true Christianity. Jesus Himself is the ONLY unflawed example of God’s character of love and of true godliness. The closer we come to reflecting His character the closer we come to true godliness. He who has the Son has life and he who has not the Son of God has not life. It really is that simple.

            Reply
            • Trevor D February 10, 2014 at 10:38 pm

              How do you know god inspired the bible?

              Anyone can claim to be inspired by god to justify their actions e.g. suicide bombers, politicians (Tony Blair went to war because god told him to), parents who exorcise their children (and kill them in the process), abortion clinic bombers ect. There are people in asylums that claim to speak to god – who are you to say otherwise?

              Are they truly speaking to god? Or themselves? Now what’s more likely?

              What about other religious texts that were supposedly inspired by their respective gods? Why does your religion reign supreme and the others deemed as false?

              You’ve been indoctrinated, like all religious people, and you will struggle at all costs to preserve your faith even if it means ignoring facts.

              I refuse to ignore reality. I care if what I believe is true. Life is wonderful, yes, even without one of the countless gods that man has created.

              Reply
              • edenoutpost February 10, 2014 at 11:45 pm

                I’ve read the Bible cover to cover many times and have studied its history and have compared its claims and prophecies. I have no doubt that it is inspired by God’s Holy Spirit through holy men of old. I’ve done my homework and beyond that I have known God’s leading and personal presence in my life. I certainly have no concerns regarding doubting my faith or the bible. My faith in Jesus is rock solid. Trust in God is a well established reality in my life for over 35 years. If you are satisfied living without God then you are obviously free to do so, but don’t call my choosing to love and obey God ignoring reality. When you die that is it and its over for you, because without Jesus you have no eternal life. When I die that will be a whole new beginning for me and I have no fear of death at all. I would not even spend time responding on this site were it not for the fact that I care about others and want them to know the same hope I have found in Jesus. He is the creator of this world and the entire universe. He is a personal Savior and friend. Knowing God and following the bible in no way removes me from reality or from the deep love of true science. God created all the laws of nature and He is the author of science. It is the religion of evolution that I have a problem with. It is nothing more than the deceptions of the fallen angel Lucifer, now called Satan. Whether you believe in him or not … he is very real and has duped most of the world into believing his lies relating to God and nature. If one person finds hope by the things I post, then I am fully satisfied. I have no agenda apart from spreading the good news that God loves us all and that He sent His only-begotten Son to die for us that we might have eternal life with Him. Without a personal experience with God no one has hope beyond this life. Most world religions are works oriented and will end in death. Jesus alone is the savior of the world and in His name alone is there salvation. If you don’t believe this then it is your loss and I pity you greatly. If we were born to live a few years and then die … what a bleak and worthless existence. I know that is not true and that we are created with a purpose to live forever in a beautiful world, the earth made new. I hope you will find your way there as well. Jesus is the only door to that eternal reality.

                Reply
                • Trevor D February 11, 2014 at 12:37 am

                  Harold Camping no doubt read the bible cover to cover and compared its claims and prophecies…He is what you would call a holy man, he had no doubt, yet he was obviously wrong, wrong, and wrong in his predictions. He was deluded and he scared a lot of people in the process, all whilst he relieved them of their money and livelihood.

                  People who claim to have this profound personal insight with god must always be treated with skepticism, otherwise the least critical thinkers amongst us will be manipulated and outright used by those making these outlandish claims. It happens daily.

                  Your claims of eternal life are pointless, same with stating satan is a real thing. You have simply no way of proving they exist and If you could, guess what, I would change my mind in a heartbeat. Why? Because you would have the evidence to show me.
                  Good luck with that.

                  We are our brain. Everything about us is there. Once it dies, we die. That’s just the reality of the situation. In the meantime I’m going to learn and love as much as possible while I’m here alive and well. That’s not bleak, That’s not worthless. That’s me living life.

                  Look, I don’t want to harp on about this to you. You seem like a good person who cares about people and I don’t want to constantly disparage you because you have faith in the deity of your choosing..
                  Truth is, if it ever comes down to it I will fight for the death for your right to choose in *whatever* you want to believe – I just don’t have to respect it if it doesn’t make sense
                  .
                  The big issue is when the religious, specifically creationists want to circumvent the teaching of science in public schools and replace it with their own creationist myths – that’s when we will clash. Literally replacing provable facts with myth?
                  It’s absurd and morally wrong.

                  But again, I don’t want to constantly tell you how I think you’re wrong and so forth, you seem like a nice person and I truly wish you all the best in the future.

                  Reply
                  • edenoutpost February 11, 2014 at 1:03 am

                    What you call myth (God, bible, creation) is truth to me and what you call truth (theory of evolution) is myth to me, so I suppose we will have to settle with freedom to believe what we each see to be truth. If you have some extra time check out this video by Professor Walter Veith. He used to be a Evolutionist and Atheist until some things happened in his life that he could not explain. Very interesting testimony about his journey from Evolutionist to Creationist. He was a professor in South Africa. See what you think.

                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LETvVezBXio

                    Dr. Walter Veith’s personal life story from an atheistic evolutionist to a creationist. Professor Veith is an internationally renowned speaker and author who received training as a Zoologist and Comparative Physiologist at the mainstream University of Cape Town in South Africa. As former evolutionist, and having taught evolution for many years, Professor Veith’s life changing testimony is an amazing witness that touches hearts and minds as he candidly shares his story of God’s leading.

                    Reply
                    • Trevor D February 11, 2014 at 11:24 pm

                      But this is the thing – we both can’t be right can we?
                      We live in a shared reality. Truth is not subjective.

                      The only way we as a species can determine what is true is to test a hypothesis until it is falsified. It’s the only way we can determine what is real or not.
                      And it works.
                      It’s how we have accomplished so many amazing feats in this relatively advanced technological age e.g. evidence-based medicine, computers, space travel….(Check out this site for a look at how science has enabled us to observe the universe with a mind-blowing amount of detail: http://htwins.net/scale2/ ).

                      Science simply works. Only an irrational person would deny that. Evolution is recognized as fact by people who respect the scientific method, and denied by those who have no evidence and think they know better.

                      I’ve watched some of the Walter Veith testimony. I’m sorry to say he lost me when he started going on about seances, possession and the occult. His various accounts are anecdotal and none of them prove the existence of the supernatural in any way.
                      Also the “I’m an atheist I didn’t believe in anything” made me roll my eyes (as an atheist I believe in plenty of things, just not anything in the religious sense).
                      That said, he had a sad childhood and I’m glad to see he was able to rise above it.

                      On the flip-side here’s an interesting recent article about a deaf pastor who recently came out as an Atheist: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/10/deaf-pastor-atheist-a-big-surprise-to-his-congregation/

                    • host4truth February 14, 2014 at 11:04 pm

                      Trevor, I have seen the Scale of the Universe (http://htwins.net/scale2/) many times and love it. I love the Hubble telescope pictures, even though they only show a very small portion of the visible universe. I love true science and this not only includes the physical sciences, but also the science of redemption and salvation, the science of prayer and the science of eternal realities. Too bad you don’t see beyond the visible realm. There is a spiritual realm that is vast and complex and very real. I attended the Navy Nuclear Program in Orlando, Florida (1978) and learned to build and operate Nuclear Reactors. I’ve had my share of the physical sciences, including chemistry, physics, and advanced calculus.

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Power_School

                      “The nuclear program is widely acknowledged as having the most demanding academic program in the U.S. military. The school operates at a fast pace, with stringent academic standards in all subjects. Students typically spend 45 hours per week in the classroom, and are required to study an additional 10 to 35 hours per week outside of lecture hours, five days per week. Because the classified materials are restricted from leaving the training building, students cannot study outside of the classroom.”

                      I had a secret clearance. I may be considered peculiar because I choose to see more than just the physical realm in front of me, but I find it very rewarding and challenging mentally. You stated, “Evolution is recognized as fact by people who respect the scientific method, and denied by those who have no evidence and think they know better.” and I find that very closed minded. Many people that I associate with, who very much respect the scientific method, find evolution to be unfounded and simply unprovable, as do I. What we are and what we believe does not in any way change the universe or the Creator of it all. It only changes us and our future outcome. There is much more to this universe than meets the eye. :)

                    • Trevor D February 11, 2014 at 11:36 pm

                      I had a long reply typed out but it was eaten in the submission process *shakes fist*, so I’ll be brief,

                      I saw some of Walter Veith’s testimony, He lost me when he brought up seances, possession and the occult. He accounts were anecdotal and none of it proves the existence of the supernatural. That said, I’m glad he was able to rise above his sad childhood.

                      Here’s a recent article about a pastor who recently became atheist:

                      http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/10/deaf-pastor-atheist-a-big-surprise-to-his-congregation/

                      bonus awesome look at how science has enabled us to observe the universe in mind-blowing detail: http://htwins.net/scale2/

                    • Austin Williamson February 15, 2014 at 8:13 pm

                      Host,

                      I know you don’t disagree with speciation, genetic inheritance, genetic mutation, the fossil record (slightly on a limb there). I know, you only disagree with the narrative: that humans arose by a freak of nature, as part of a long process.

                      I know.

                      I used to be quite religious. Can I offer you a workable, beautiful alternative to ape-relative vs outright creation?

                      I’m cribbing quite a bit from Michael Hawley, but please bear with me.

                      Earth and water in the genesis account are actually the same word. God said “let the earth bring forth”, and then “let each bring forth after its kind”. It’s not outlined how long this process took.

                      Then, over a chapter, we read that God made man from the dust of the earth. There’s something odd about that translation, though: that word means remains, not clay/dirt. From the remains of the dirt? What leaves remains?

                      Aha!

                      Could God have simply borrowed from nature, a self-tweaking process he’d set in motion? Could it be that he took remains, and built something in his own image, with appropriate upgrades?

                      Christians like to quote me the famous line from Hebrews: “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, forever”

                      They say that God doesn’t change his ways.

                      If he were to borrow skeletons and build a new lifeform, he’d have to do it elsewhere in the bible. Which takes us to Ezekiel.

                      “Son of man (adam), can these dry bones live?”

                      And then, miraculously, bit by bit, God turns skeletons into flesh-and-blood humans. A vision, but still.

                      There you have it: God made man in his own image. And man descended from primates. Not mutually exclusive, but harmonized.

                      And like Adam, we too were once remains, aimless husks. Empty, devoid of life or purpose. Then Jesus came, and gave us his life, gave us a makeover. Every day we are made more and more like him-

                      Have you ever looked at it that way?

          • Jason February 10, 2014 at 3:11 pm

            Your basing your “understanding” on a wiki page? lol I feel sorry for you and your so-called reality. No matter what anyone says when your convinced, your convinced, nothing will change that, I believe what I believe because I am convinced without a doubt it is the truth. And if I happen to be wrong, if there is no God, and we are all here to fend for our selves with no hope for the future, and all of our lives will end, then as Ham put it, whats the point of all of this? What’s the point to do anything good? What is the point to discover anything? Shouldn’t we just live, kill, have sex, and do what ever we want without worrying about consequences? Evolutionists and atheists will never convince anyone who truly believes in God there is no God, and apparently vice versa.
            So, oh well.

            Reply
            • Trevor D February 10, 2014 at 10:58 pm

              You presumed I am basing my understanding on a wiki page. I merely posted a link and you jumped to that conclusion, no doubt to create a strawman and shift attention away from the article itself. Very predictable, Jason and I’m not at all surprised.
              The article is one of many that critiques the bible and highlights its *many* contradictions and failed prophecies. Not like you’d read any of them anyway, right?

              What’s the point of all this?

              You sound so pessimistic about the *one* life we know for sure we have. It actually scares me that people like you, when faced with undeniable facts will do their utmost to ignore it, just to preserve their preconceived notions about reality. That’s intentional ignorance. That’s fanaticism. And it’s dangerous to humanities future.

              People convert to different religions everyday and yes, even from atheism to religion and vice-versa. That’s the world we live in, ever changing, always with something new to experience and to learn. It’s just people like you who ignore facts in order to preserve their faith who don’t learn anything new – Now I understand why you see no point.

              Reply
      • Jason February 10, 2014 at 3:13 pm

        Also, evolutionists try to disprove God, so that is the way it works, you want to disprove God, than go ahead and prove it.

        Reply
  11. Jason Gilmore February 8, 2014 at 9:31 am

    No one won the debate, all this does is give each side reasons to believe what they believe. For me I believe and see clear evidence that there is a creator behind the natural laws we see, the rotation and alignment of planets, and growth of life here in the earth, it is a impossibility for all of that to happen by chance, and if you believe you can take a hand full of marbles, throw them on the ground and they land in a perfect circle and perfectly spaced between each other you have some serious mental issues, that is how evolutionists think. There is incredibly clear evidence aka proof there is a creator. There is no proof it all came by chance. I love the point Ham made, we don’t see random animals springing from other animals, in other words you don’t see cats giving birth to dogs, or fish to birds, yet evolutionists want to believe that is what happened, it’s sad and hilarious at the same time.

    Reply
    • Guenter Dantrimont February 15, 2014 at 2:44 am

      quote: “I love the point Ham made, we don’t see random animals springing from other animals, in other words you don’t see cats giving birth to dogs, or fish to birds, yet evolutionists want to believe that is what happened, it’s sad and hilarious at the same time.”

      More than a strawman argument: If you find a cat giving birth to a dog etc you would definitely DISPROVE evolution, since evolution theory (=model) predicts this will never happen. If your perception of natural science is deluded to such a high degree it is no wonder that you believe in creationism instead.

      Reply
  12. Danes February 8, 2014 at 2:56 am

    The Bible was written in hebrew not aramic! You people are all experts here,yet everyone of you don’t know anything,you just listen to ,,scientist,, and not doing your own research…

    Reply
    • Marcel Koníček February 8, 2014 at 6:13 am

      Certain parts of bible were written (or at least this form surivived until today) in Aramaic, not aramic, other we know to be hebrew. New testament was chiefly written in greek and all the parts were translated to the other languages at one point (so we have septuaginta, the greek version of the hebrew bible). This is what I have learned in my studies of religionistic at least… Please dont tell other people they lack rigor when you cant even write the word “Aramaic”!

      Reply
  13. Richard Wells February 6, 2014 at 7:56 pm

    Ham believes that “certain part of the bible are to be believed literally”, and that he gets to choose which parts are literal. Yet the original bible were written in Aramaic, then translated into Hebrew, then into Greek, then into Latin, then into German, and finally into English all over a period of thousands of years. Is it reasonalbe to believe that today’s English version of the bible is the actual word of God?

    Reply
  14. bgurrl February 6, 2014 at 12:17 pm

    Can people please stop using the flat Earth myth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

    Reply
  15. Bill G February 6, 2014 at 9:23 am

    Personally, I am agnostic, but I wish Bill Nye had driven home the point that science

    is not inherently incompatible with faith, it is simply a different discipline or

    focus. And science should simply remain a different discipline.

    If you accept creationism a la Ken Ham, not only do you have to exclude much

    scientific evidence, you also have to go through several hoops of excluding other

    people’s faith based beliefs:

    1) You have to believe that the Bible is the only true word of God, excluding all

    other religions and religous text. In other words, all other religious beliefs are

    excluded from creationism.

    2) You have to believe that the version of the Bible Ken Ham uses (King James?) is the

    only correct version of the bible, somehow all of the previous translations in

    English, Greek, Hebrew, etc. didn’t quite get it right. In other words, many

    christians are excluded from creationism.

    3) And most importantly, you have to believe God’s word on creation literally

    describes what he did. If we are God’s children, would he literally tell us all of

    the complicated ways that he created the universe? When we explain complicated

    matters to our own small children, do we not expain those matters in simple terms or

    stories?

    To me, if you are strong of faith:

    1) You can believe that God communicated his word to different peoples in different

    ways.

    2) You can believe that the bible, even with its imperfections communicates God’s

    message.

    3) You can confirm your faith with the wonderful discoveries of science. When we

    discover more about the universe around us, including the past, doesn’t that make the

    universe that much more wonderful? Therefore, doesn’t it make God’s creations that

    much more marvelous than literally described in the Bible?

    Reply
  16. Tom Gentry February 6, 2014 at 6:02 am

    One of the most telling responses from Nye was when asked what if anything would change your mind, he pointed to physical evidence rather than God making Himself known to Nye. In other words, he is not interested in communing with God no matter what. He is only interested wanting to know how things can be explained.

    Reply
    • christian February 6, 2014 at 11:19 am

      Actually it was Ham who refused to commune with God and listen to the Science that he credits God with creating. Nye was speaking (in Hams words) Gods language of science thus communing with him, while Ham trusts his own ignorant beliefs over the evidence his god left for him.

      Reply
  17. BabbieG February 6, 2014 at 12:39 am

    I wish Bill Nye would have brought up the recent discovery of traces of Neanderthal DNA in present-day humans. Were Neanderthals on Noah’s Ark since they would have been a “type” of human being?

    Second, stating that the Bible was inspired by God and therefore it must be true would be like me saying . . . “I was inspired by Nature and decided to write a book about trees. Nature is therefore the source of the content in my book and whatever is written in the book about trees MUST be true . . . it was inspired by Nature”.

    Would that explanation be acceptable? Even if my book claimed that when you hear leaves rustling in the wind, its actually trees talking to each other. It’s true!! My book was “inspired by Nature”, and Nature cannot be questioned.

    Reply
  18. john lawton February 5, 2014 at 7:31 pm

    http://www.livescience.com/29152-oldest-tree-in-world.html <—-oldest tree link…5,600+ years old…

    Reply
  19. AL verum February 5, 2014 at 7:21 pm

    Frankly, if what evolutionary scientists say is true it would make sense that the evolution / creation debate should have been settled a million years ago.

    Reply
    • TheDukeOfHighwayJ February 6, 2014 at 1:37 pm

      What?

      Reply
  20. edenoutpost February 5, 2014 at 5:50 pm

    As a sincere Christian, I love science and I spent 6 years in the US Navy and was part of their Nuclear Power Program. Personally, I find perfect harmony between Scripture and Science, and I believe the Creator is the author of both.

    My concern is with the common idea that God cannot exist and cannot be allowed to be the Creator of all things, when it comes to modern science. Evolution, as commonly taught, is simply an attempt to replace belief in God with a belief in materialism and to remove moral accountability.

    According to Scripture, planet earth was created approximately 6000 years ago, as were the sun, moon and local planets (all were called stars). This does not remove the possibility that the rest of the vast universe was created before the earth and our solar system, many, many ages ago.

    Also there is no everlasting burning hell as some claim in these posts. This is a misinterpretation of Scripture.

    An excellent book which describes our origins and also the flood and Noah’s Ark is the book, “Patriarch’s and Prophets,” by Ellen G. White. In the 1800′s she spoke of stars as all illuminated heavenly bodies and not just “fixed stars.”

    star – noun
    1 the sky was full of stars: celestial body, heavenly body, sun; asteroid, planet, dwarf planet.

    Mr. Nye stated that there are trees as old as 6,000 to 8,000 years old and yet my online research proves no such thing. The oldest know tree is estimated to be 4841 years old, which is in the ballpark of the worldwide flood which occurred approx. 4,400 years ago.
    http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/photos/the-worlds-10-oldest-living-trees/methuselah

    Mr. Nye stated that ice rings are yearly summer/winter rings but this is simply not true as these rings are hot/cold rings and can occur hundreds of times in one year. The example of Mr. Ham was a good one relating to the airplane squadron lost in the ice and 43 or so years later they were under hundreds of feet of ice with many more rings than 43 or so.

    My personal conclusion is that there are many misstatements and misunderstandings on both sides. Truth takes time, and humility of heart to be a learner, to discover its depths and wonders. Biases and preconceived opinions need to be laid aside.

    Reply
    • S. Mullin February 6, 2014 at 10:05 am

      You didn’t do enough research on the oldest tree. I know that the sources below are wikipedia, but if you had just gone beyond the first link in your google search you would have found that your article is lacking. There is a Great Basin Bristlecone pine that is confirmed at 5063 years old.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Basin_Bristlecone_Pine

      Then there are The Sisters which is a grove of olive trees in Lebanon that are estimated to be 5000-6000 years old.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisters_Olive_Trees_of_Noah

      And the above trees are non-clonal, so when you look at clonal trees the age jumps drastically. The oldest confirmed individual clonal tree is the one that Nye mentioned, Old Tjikko, which is 9550 years old.

      I know you would desperately like to hold on to your beliefs, but there is an enormous amount of evidence that events in the Bible, events that are considered to have actually happened by many people, did not in fact happen.

      Reply
      • edenoutpost February 8, 2014 at 9:16 am

        Dating those “supposed” long-lived trees by radiocarbon is at best unreliable beyond 3000 years and nothing so unreliable will ever shake my faith in the living God. If I had nothing more than my personal experience of God’s working in my heart and life that would be enough. He is a personal God to all who are willing to open their hearts to Him. Those who reject God are actually rejecting the reason and purpose for life. We were all created to live forever and sin (transgression of God’s holy moral law) is what caused this planet to fall. God’s only-begotten Son, Jesus, shed His blood to save us and bring us back into harmony with truth and righteousness. If I am wrong, then I die like you and cease to exist, but if I’m right you die eternally and I will be with God, the holy angels, and holy inhabitants of the other worlds for eternity. The bible says clearly that the just shall live by faith and oh what a faith that is to trust God and know His personal presence in your life. True science always confirms the bible accounts. Speculative science changes like the wind … first this theory and then another theory. Anyone can see that a Designer created all the wonder things around us. In nature God has given us ample evidence of His existence and Godhead. The only problem I have with Christians is that so many promulgate false ideas about God which makes others look upon Him in a negative way. There is no everlasting burning hell to torture the wicked for eternity. Man is not naturally immortal. This is a gift from God to those who honor and obey Him. Those who have the Son have life and those who have not the Son of God have not life (eternal life). There are so many lies in this world and only those who dig deep and are willing to obey God will know of Him. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. God loves all mankind but He can only help those who choose to come to Him of their own free will. He forces no one. God is love in essence and character and He is spirit. He is the I AM and is truth. I would much more prefer to trust His account of life and creation than any fallen, sinful short-sighted man on earth. The proof of God is in my heart and the glories of creation and wonders of science are all around me. I can behold God in all that He has made, even though this fallen world is a dark reflection of His infinite glory.

        Reply
        • TheDukeOfHighwayJ February 9, 2014 at 2:23 pm

          “Dating those “supposed” long-lived trees by radiocarbon is at best unreliable …”
          And at worst….??
          What if multiple techniques were used that all arrived at a very similar date?

          Reply
    • christian February 6, 2014 at 11:22 am

      Wrong, the Bible says the luminaries in the heavens were created on the fourth day. (Genesis 1:14-19)

      Reply
      • Jason Gilmore February 9, 2014 at 8:38 am

        Actually in 1 Peter it says a a day to God is “as a thousand years”, so God’s measurement of time is vastly different than humans. So it could have been thousands if not millions of years during the creative days. That is if you go by what the Bible says which most people miss these parts.

        Reply
        • christian February 14, 2014 at 7:18 am

          You obviously didn’t read the original post.

          “This does not remove the possibility that the rest of the vast universe was created before the earth and our solar system, many, many ages ago.”

          We are talking about chronological order here, not what constitutes a day. The bible clearly states the earth was created before the heavens. Of coarse this could just be figurative and the heavens merely appeared visually after the veil of the expanse was lifted. I stated in another post that there are much better theories on creationism than Hams foolish 6000 year old earth model. Most rational Christians have believed in an older earth for several decades. Ham is trying to roll Christianity and science back to the dark ages.

          Reply
          • Jason February 14, 2014 at 8:32 am

            Um no it doesn’t genesis 1:1 “created the HEAVENS and the earth” then goes into the process of the earths creation, in chapter two it states “the HEAVENS and teh earth came to their completion”. No where does it state the heavens came after the earth. With the Bible focusing on the creation of man, sin and the ransom sacrifice there is no need to go into a detailed description of the creation of the universe before speaking of the earth. But it clearly shows the heavens, aka the universe came before the earth.

            Reply
            • Jason February 15, 2014 at 9:09 am

              And this doesn’t erase the possibility the sun and earth were created at the same time since we don’t know exactly how Gods view of time is since the bible says it’s “as a thousand years”.

              Reply
      • Jason February 15, 2014 at 9:05 am

        Actually your wrong it says nwt “And God went on to say: “Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night; and they must serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years.” KJV “And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:” this showed God made it so the sun could shine through to the earth, who knows what kind of atmosphere there was during the earth creation, this doesn’t say “god made the sun” on the fourth day.

        Reply
    • Bob J. February 6, 2014 at 3:37 pm

      Science moves on … 9,550 years old
      http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080414-oldest-tree.html

      Reply
      • edenoutpost February 6, 2014 at 4:08 pm

        That Radiocarbon Dating will do it to you every time. No value to this dating method at all. Date this same tree several different times and you will get different dates each time.

        “Bristlecone pines in the western United States are generally recognized as the world’s oldest continuously standing trees.

        The most ancient recorded, from California’s White Mountains, is dated to around 5,000 years ago.

        Bristlecone pines are aged by counting tree rings, which form annually within their trunks.

        But in the case of the Norway spruce, ancient remnants of its roots were radiocarbon dated.

        The study team also identified other ancient spruces in Sweden that were between 5,000 and 6,000 years old.”

        Reply
      • edenoutpost February 6, 2014 at 4:11 pm

        Radiocarbon Dating is another word for “fairytale” and “unreliable.”

        Reply
    • Bob J. February 6, 2014 at 3:44 pm

      Oldest plant, a bush, at 11,700 years old
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Clone

      Reply
  21. Maynard McGuffin February 5, 2014 at 4:42 pm

    I was reading this until the author of this article misspelled “hijack.”

    Reply
  22. edenoutpost February 5, 2014 at 4:21 pm

    Here is my take on the debate … in my own words.

    Ham: The Creator speaks and things exist.
    Nye: Everything came from nothing, we are still trying to figure out how.

    Ham: The Bible explains our origins clearly.
    Nye: We don’t know where we came from or where we are going.

    Both: Observational science is important.

    Ham: Historical Science is religion or belief.
    Nye: Historical science is provable, I’m just not sure how.

    Clearly Ham has the upper hand and offers hope for the future for those who love and serve God.
    Nye has nothing to offer concerning the future. Everybody dies. End of story.

    Reply
    • jfmguitarist February 5, 2014 at 9:33 pm

      sounds like wishful thinking, edenoutpost. sorry, but wish-thinking never gets the upper hand on reality. Nye relied on actual science, which endeavors to build and grow our knowledge of the universe… Ham relied on an old book: “it’s true because it’s in the book…. how do i know the book is true? well lt says so in the book”. That’s begging the question, aka circular logic, and it gets you nowhere.

      Reply
      • TheDukeOfHighwayJ February 6, 2014 at 1:41 pm

        And based on a book written thousands of years ago, and as we all now know…. you cant trust knowing the cause of past events.

        Reply
    • Austin Williamson February 7, 2014 at 10:29 pm

      Which god? Which version of the rulebook? In fact, do they even play by a rulebook?

      Before you rush out to say either YHWH or Jesus, please take a moment to slap yourself in the face. Even a few years after 33 AD, there were differing opinions on who Jesus was (the SON of god, or was he a son of a second? or was god? did it even matter?)

      Ham has nothing to offer in terms of knowledge.
      Nye does.

      Ham has a comfort story.
      Nye has a dream.

      Given the choice between comforting ourselves or building a better future for our descendants, which would you rather have?

      Reply
    • Jason Gilmore February 9, 2014 at 8:25 am

      Very well summed up. To say “no god can’t be real because I can’t see Him” is not a reason to not believe in God especially when there is so much natural proof is exists and was behind the creation of things.

      Reply
      • Austin Williamson February 9, 2014 at 1:46 pm

        Ah, Gilmore – it’s not that we don’t believe in a higher power, it’s that we don’t believe in a higher power that interferes with the natural operation of the universe.

        What’s greater: a mechanic who builds a car that never needs tweaking, or a mechanic who’s always changing something on the weekend?

        In fact, we deists have more faith in the creator than those who constantly call for divine intervention (Roberson, please stop calling strikes on people – your aim is lousy)

        Reply
        • Jason Gilmore February 10, 2014 at 9:25 am

          I’m glad you have faith in a creator, it is sad though you feel He has no interest in His creation though.

          Reply
          • Austin Williamson February 10, 2014 at 6:22 pm

            I dunno if it’s sad, but if I succeeded in creating a simulated universe, I might be more interested to sit back and watch (with popcorn).

            Then there’s the juvenile half of me that thinks it would be fun to do stupid stuff (meteor strike! earthquake! tornado! sharknado!) just to see how it would affect the organisms.

            Reply
  23. Jack Parker February 5, 2014 at 3:34 pm

    Ham started out a little stronger in terms of form, but once Nye warmed up, it was over. He clobbered Ham. (Clobbered Ham would make a great band name!)

    My take on it was not nearly this in-depth, but for what it’s worth, here it is:
    http://jacksrantspace.blogspot.com/2014/02/nye-vs-ham-science-with-side-of-bacon.html

    Reply
  24. PhD in science February 5, 2014 at 2:41 pm

    When someone doesn’t have anything intellect to say in response, they begin to attack the individual. Where have I seen this before?

    Reply
  25. Stuart February 5, 2014 at 2:25 pm

    I have a question for those who believe that Mr. Ham won the debate: Given the number of alternative Creationist stories, as well as the “fact” that no human was available for direct observation of the creation of the Universe, what independent, observation-based proof can you offer that any individual creation story is any more valid than any of the others? Since my understanding of Mr. Ham’s argument is that any of the argument come down to “faith” in the original precepts isn’t it logical that all creationist stories are equally valid?

    Reply
  26. ADime February 5, 2014 at 2:10 pm

    The only remark I have on this is that you should have interpreted Ham’s part in a more respectful manner. I watched the debate and your synopsis is quite accurate, but show some respect for a man who’s dedicated his life to at least something and has achieved a variety of success, unlike many other people who can’t even share the time to watch a debate about one of the most crucial questions in their lives and choose to watch pictures of cats in the spare time they get.

    Reply
  27. Mike Malone February 5, 2014 at 12:25 pm

    I truly think most people are missing the point here… In my opinion the answer to all of this is not choosing which side of the debate is correct, but instead realizing that both sides could be correct. Scientific observation and mathematical equation prove that light from stars which are millions of light years away could not have reached the Earth in 6000 years. Thus the universe cannot be 6000 years old. On the other hand biblical doctrine states that the earth, the universe, and all other things were made in 6 days and one can count the generational timeline from there on. But who is to say how long a day is in the eyes of God? Or that god, in his infinite power, couldn’t change the length of those days as he saw fit. One day in the understanding of God could be millions or even billions of years to our limited human reckoning. A marriage of these two concepts is the most elegant answer to the main question here, which is how do we consolidate spontaneous life, concsiousness, and universal beginning with concrete scientific discoveries about the physical world and life’s history on planet Earth.

    Reply
    • christian February 6, 2014 at 11:16 am

      Exactly Mike, you just proved Nyes point and disproved that of Ham. There is no way we can prove that God did not create the universe, but we can very easily disprove that he did it in 5 actual days only 6000 years ago. Most logical Christians have come to this conclusion a long time ago. These new wave creationists are doing no service to rational Christians like yourself. All Nye was there to do was discredit Hams theory of young earth creationism and he did it. Nye himself said that this doesn’t disprove other more rational explanations like yours, and it is still possible that creation happened much earlier in history and over a much longer time period.

      Reply
    • Jason Gilmore February 9, 2014 at 8:08 am

      The Bible says that a day is “as a thousand years” so Gods time table is much different than humans. I believe in God, and creation, but I do not believe it only took 6 24hour days to create the earth, it could have taken thousands upon thousands if not millions of human years to create the universe nd the earth. But I’d much rather believe the earth was created by an all powerful being with a plan than believe that it began by some random chaotic event, that just doesn’t make any sense. We have natural laws, Ham stated these laws were out in place by someone, no such laws could have come by chance.

      Reply
      • edenoutpost February 9, 2014 at 11:07 am

        The earth was created long after the original universe was made, so there is no problem with light traveling to earth. The earth and its local solar system were created in 6 literal days and thus the weekly cycle and rest on the Sabbath day (7th day). There are unlimited galaxies and unlimited worlds that have not fallen. Our world was a special creation and I personally believe that the redeemed will replace those fallen angels who fell in heaven. We will have the high privilege of being members of the Royal Family of God (we are given crowns) and will sit with Christ on His throne as joint-heirs with Him. This humble planet will one day be exalted to be the center of the universe, where God’s throne will be in the New Jerusalem. All galaxies circle the throne of Diety and He is the source of all life and creation.

        Reply
  28. Sean February 5, 2014 at 12:17 pm

    Nye won by a huge margin. Saying “There’s this book,” is completely idiotic and a straight up ignorant answer by Ham. You cannot keep going back to a book that was written by random people for answers. This alone is moronic and scares most of the world that people rely so heavily on a piece of made up literature. Nye isn’t the best at debating/speaking, but he never claimed to be, he is a scientist. Nye had all the evidence needed in this argument and shut down all of Ham’s claims. Ham couldn’t answer any of Nye’s questions straight forward and mostly just talked in circles using mumbo jumo words that made anything he was saying not understandable, Nye was very straight forward with answers and with questions he had.

    If I write down a bunch of stuff – laws and rules and why things are the way they are, then translate it to a bunch of different languages over and over again. Will people believe me? Because that is exactly what has happened and is still happening.

    Reply
    • Jason Gilmore February 10, 2014 at 9:22 am

      So you doubt the Bible because it is a historical document that has been translated from Hebrew and Greek into English and numerous other languages? So we shouldn’t trust any historical document then written more than 200 years ago? Or any piece of paper written in another language? The Bible has survived the test of time, men believed the earth was flat, yet the Bible stated it was a circle, people believed the earth was hung upon giant turtles and animals, yet the Bible says the earth hangs on nothing. The Bible shows life begins at conception, proven by scientific discovery. As well the Bible foretold the fall and dividing of numerous kingdoms and those prophecies came true. A big prophecy is the fall of Babylons king and the take over by the medes, the individual to lead the army was even named 200 years before it happened in the book of Isaiah. You can say all you want that it is a old book with numerous errors, yet you have no proof or evidence of that statement. Do people misunderstand parts of the Bible, heck ya many do and have, that doesn’t make the book wrong.

      Reply
      • edenoutpost February 10, 2014 at 10:29 am

        Amen. The Word of the living God is sure. It will stand even when the naysayers are all gone. If it were not for those who love and obey the Word of God, the inhabitants of earth would have perished long ago. God’s mercy and long-suffering will soon cease for those who continue to despise and neglect His Word. He is righteous and pure and will in no wise pardon the unrepentant ones who steadfastly refuse to come to Him. The clock is ticking and soon there will indeed be a big bang and then much wailing, as Christ comes in the clouds, in all His glory, with the shout of the Archangel and the trumpet of God. God’s people who trusted in Him will go home while the wicked and unbelievers will be destroyed by the brightness of His coming. After the 1000 years they will be raised to stand in the executive judgment of God. They all will be consumed and will perish in the lake that burns with fire when the earth is purified and cleansed of all sin and unrepentant sinners. They are destroyed, once and for all, as if they had never been. Today is the day of salvation, today if you hear His voice come to Him before it is forever too late.

        Reply
        • Jason Gilmore February 10, 2014 at 10:50 am

          Just fyi Eden, it is this type of religionist preaching that typically turns people away from religion. I wholeheartedly believe in God, and appreciate greatly His son for giving his life. But there needs to be balance when talking to people about biblical things. And coming at people as strong as this will 9/10 times turn them away because they will think it’s “another religious nut job”. Believe me, my family and I preach to people constantly on a weekly basis, but we typically do so subtly and respectfully. It is much better received. Although I may have been a little abrupt with comments about evolutionists in this series of comments…..

          Reply
          • edenoutpost February 10, 2014 at 1:39 pm

            Thank you Jason for your comments. Here is where I am coming from: It is clearly taught in God’s Word that His people are to give a final warning message to the world and at the same time seek to reveal the amazing love of our Creator. Revelation 14. It is a message of divine love and divine justice. God loves the sinner (all of us) and very much desires to forgive and restore us all, yet time for repentance is quickly running out and God will soon, of necessity because of His justice, cleanse His universe of sin and those who choose to cling to sin. Yes we are to show love and patience and yet there is also the real need to speak frankly, else the blood is upon us who know God’s message of truth and fail to sound the warning to others. The wages of sin is death, eternal death and those who feel no need to turn from sin are in grave danger every moment. If I was walking in the dark towards a hidden cliff would you softly say “ummm be careful” or would you in love and concern give the trumpet a certain sound and let the warning go out loud and clear, “Beware the cliff ahead. Stop or perish.” Your comments are taken in love. Thank you for your concern.

            Reply
  29. Tim February 5, 2014 at 11:52 am

    Nye-1
    Ham-0

    The bible is for cherry-picking whatever you do or don’t want out of it and ignoring the rest.

    Reply
  30. Laura Murphy February 5, 2014 at 10:41 am

    Bill Nye did not win. Nye only kept his stupidity going, couldn’t answer his questions. Went off topic, and was derogatory when speaking to Mr. Ham. The jury was evidently already decided before the debate began, or they were delirious. Totally ridiculous debate. Many things wrong.

    Reply
    • pythagoreanvegancommunity February 5, 2014 at 10:58 am

      Ham didn’t win the debate. His answer to everything was simply god. That’s not an answer. That’s just what one says when he has no answer.

      Reply
    • JESUSWILLSAVEYOU February 5, 2014 at 12:32 pm

      JESUS IS THE TRUE WINNER OF THE DEBATE. HE IS THE SON OF GOD AND DIED FOR OUR SINS. HE IS COMING SOON TO SAVE YOU. THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE WILL FOREVER BURN IN ETERNAL DAMNATION!!!!!

      Reply
      • James February 5, 2014 at 2:08 pm

        If only Jesus was true, you are just as ignorant as Ham. This shouldn’t even be a debate as it is only a STORY and not real.

        Reply
      • Maynard McGuffin February 5, 2014 at 4:42 pm

        MY CAPSLOCK IS LOUD!!!!!!

        Reply
      • edenoutpost February 5, 2014 at 5:55 pm

        http://www.HellTruth.com – Brother, there is no everlasting burning hell. There is a lake of fire, which will destroy the fallen angels and the unrepentant wicked at the end of the age. They will be judged as their works have been and then they will be no more. God is Love and not a sadistic torturer. Jesus is the Creator of the worlds and He knows science infinitely better than any poor human on this planet. I trust Him to know “how” everything works and where they came from. Meanwhile evolutionists keep wondering .. and wondering.

        Reply
      • TheDukeOfHighwayJ February 6, 2014 at 1:45 pm

        “THOSE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE WILL FOREVER BURN IN ETERNAL DAMNATION!!!!!”

        What a friend you have in Jesus. Nice friend!

        Reply
        • edenoutpost February 8, 2014 at 9:20 am

          No they won’t. There is no eternal burning hell. http://www.helltruth.com
          There is a lake of fire that will consume and destroy the wicked once for all, but no eternal torture. The fallen angels and unrepentant wicked will perish … they will not have life. The wages of sin is death, not eternal life in hell. Do a word study on the word hell and see that it most often refers to the grave. God is love and no one is going to believe in Him by treating them with damnation.

          Reply
      • Jason Gilmore February 9, 2014 at 8:14 am

        Actually you are wrong, there is no eternal hellfire, nor would a God of love do such things to people. God punished ancient people because of their cruel actions, it would be hypocritical of Him to act the same. He wants people to know Him, and He wants people to live, he does not get enjoyment out of seeing people suffer, hell fire is a twisted belief. And yes I believe in creation.

        Reply
  31. Scott Miskowiak February 5, 2014 at 10:29 am

    Nye did not win that debate! Not even close. Ken Ham won that by a landslide. While Bill Nye was stuttering through his points searching for proof, Ken Ham was prepared and had evidence after evidence of creation.
    Bill Nye: How did the big bang happen? We don’t know.
    Ken Ham: There’s this book that was written thousands of years ago that tells us how it happened.

    Evolutionists will argue until they’re blue in the face that Nye won that debate. But it’s simply not true. Ken Ham won it based on clear observational science and the inherent word of God.

    Reply
    • Miguel February 5, 2014 at 11:04 am

      Just because scientists can not explain why or how something happened, does not mean you can simply put god as an answer, not knowing means we have the lack of technology or knowledge at this moment to figure that out, only future technologies and knowledge can answer with great accuracy why we have here. God will not be the answer to that however.

      Reply
    • Jacob February 5, 2014 at 11:33 am

      You’re already wrong when you say the “inherent word of God.” Something can’t be evidence and a claim at the same time. The Bible is a claim, not evidence.

      Nye presented evidence that is widely accepted within the scientific community. Don’t be so naive.

      Reply
      • summaryjudgment55 February 5, 2014 at 3:55 pm

        “Widely accepted within the scientific community” tends to exclude all beliefs contrary to what is popular today, much like when the earth was flat (although the Bible said it was a sphere suspended in space 3000 years prior to this idea changing within the scientific community).

        Reply
        • Ro February 5, 2014 at 8:42 pm

          The bible refers to the earth as a circle, not a sphere.

          Reply
      • Jason Gilmore February 9, 2014 at 8:16 am

        The Bible is evidence. The Bible foretold the fall of Babylon 200 years before it happened, it even named the person who would end the world power before he was even born, that’s not a translation error or some secret twist translators out in, it’s proof it is inspired by a being higher than humans.

        Reply
    • Marcus February 5, 2014 at 11:40 am

      In what way did Nye lost? every point he made is back up by evidence and logical reasoning, something that Ken Ham was not able to produce. His rebuttal for most questions is God did it and the bible. The Bible is just a book, a very very old book which was translated and reinterpreted countless time. To use that as evidence is like saying magic is real because of the Harry Potter book series.

      Reply
    • ZJayJohnston February 6, 2014 at 2:43 am

      It doesn’t matter if Ham gives a definite answer to the origin of life if he can’t even prove that what was between then and now credible evidence to support his claim. Nye isn’t going to give you an answer of the origin of life unless he has actual evidence of it(which he does for the Big Bang theory) Han has no evidence what so ever that his statement is true and in science evidence is EVERYTHING. I bet you Ham can’t give a definite answer on where the bible came from, which was most likely from when Christianity was first accepted politically in this world, the priests came together within a roman cathedral and create the bible through months of planning, but where did they get their information? There is NOTHING that was available in that time period that had any hints of recorded history of the events of the bible, so how did these priest come up with such specific facts of the bible itself? Saying ham won because he had a definite answer for the origin of life but could only prove it with a book that has no credible value in the world of science is absurd. He has absolutely no evidence of his claim, yet he won the debate of it cause he had an answer? Nye won with honestly, logic, and evidence. You can’t when a debate of science by just saying your belief is right without evidence.

      Reply
      • Jason Gilmore February 8, 2014 at 9:33 am

        Sorry there is no proof of the big bang theory. That is why it is called a theory lol, if it was fact it would just be called the Big Bang. Lol.

        Reply
        • Jonathan Hatch February 8, 2014 at 11:35 pm

          Cosmic microwave background and the expansion of space support the big bang theory.

          Reply
          • edenoutpost February 9, 2014 at 10:44 am

            An expanding universe is solid science, but a big-bang, in which everything comes from nothing, only makes since if God is the source of the universe. How God created the universe is a great mystery that only He understands, but a creation without a Creator is nonsense.

            Reply
        • TheDukeOfHighwayJ February 9, 2014 at 8:22 am

          Nobody said any thing about proof, Jason besides the whole concept of proof doesnt actually exist in Science. But there IS a boatload of evidence, in fact the evidence fits the BB theory better than any other; thats why its the currrent leading contender.

          Thats how science works.

          Reply

We will read your comment immediately so leave a remark!

RSS Guardian Express

  • Nokia Halts Lumia 2520 Tablet Due to Faulty Chargers April 17, 2014
    Nokia has halted the sale of its new Lumia 2520 tablet due to faulty chargers. Those who currently have the tablet are being warned to stop using the AC-300 charger right now. There are fears that the fault could lead to electric shocks. The good news is there are no confirmed incidents yet. The news […]
    Alexandria Ingham
  • J.K. Rowling Continues Potterverse With Ginny Weasley April 17, 2014
    J.K. Rowling has continued her Potterverse with articles written by Ginny Weasley, under her married name Ginny Potter. The Harry Potter author is continuing with works that she knows will make her money, and focusing on the Quidditch World Cup. It seems like she cannot get enough of her fictional world, and who can blame […]
    Alexandria Ingham
  • Brett Favre and the Green Bay Packers, Can They Reconcile April 17, 2014
    Everyone in Packer land has an opinion on what happened between the Green Bay Packers and Favre. Thompson, Executive Vice President of the team, and Brett Favre were unable to come to an agreement after the 2007 season. The deal left a bad taste for a lot of fans, wondering why Thompson would let their […]
    Jabar Morarend
  • Republican Party Backs Cory Gardner at Colorado State Assembly April 17, 2014
    Last weekend Colorado Republicans held their State Assembly in Greenwood Village to gear up for an ever more closely contested election to be held in November.  The Assembly showed just how strongly the Republican Party backs current U.S. House Representative Cory Gardner within state ranks as their candidate for the available Colorado seat in the […]
    Joseph Porter
  • Bottle of Wine Is NSW Premier’s Undoing April 17, 2014
    Red, red wine, goes to your head, sang UB40 back in the eighties. “Makes you forget..” It certainly had a potent effect on Premier of New South Wales, Barry O’ Farrell’s memory. The NSW premier completely forgot he had been given a bottle of the most expensive wine ever produced in Australia, the legendary Penfold’s […]
    Kate Henderson

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 628 other subscribers

Quantcast