This was the title of the debate: Is Creation a Viable Model of Origins in Today’s Modern Scientific Era?
Bill Nye and Ken Ham squared off the evening of February 4, 2014, attempting to tackle this behemoth in just a few hours.
It was a layman’s debate of sorts, neither man with an advanced degree, but both with years of experience in science education. This gave us a unique look into the differences between the public school and the homeschool or private school classroom.
It wasn’t a debate over terms, though Ken Ham valiantly tried to make it so. It wasn’t a battle over presuppositions and assumptions, though Ken Ham valiantly tried to make it so. Bill Nye deftly avoided the real challenges to radioactive dating methods, the real challenges to uniformitarianism, the real challenges to the evolutionary family tree, the real challenges to the big bang. He even avoided dealing with numerous video testimonies from credentialed, published, research scientists currently working in a variety of scientific disciplines.
Many, many more topics were discussed during the 2 hour debate than simply the viability of creation as a model of origins.
In addition to taking on the title track, Ken Ham preached the gospel message, gave an introduction to the theological problems associated with trying to fit an evolutionary perspective into the biblical account, and he attempted to answer all of Bill Nye’s questions honestly. He was met with a “disturbed and unsettled” Nye.
By ignoring Ham’s questions and by honing in on topics tangential to the specific debate question, ranging everywhere from the construction of the ark to application of Old Testament law and hermeneutics, Nye kept the debate unfocused and kept the burden of proof on his opponent.
The take homes are these:
1) As a good friend put it, acting as spokesman for an entire paradigm is a hefty challenge.
2) There are myriad limitations embedded within the evolutionary paradigm. These limitations were not adequately addressed during the debate. These limitations are not taught in the public school classroom and are not taught in introductory science courses at public colleges and universities. Here is a short article on a few of these limitations.
3) As a method of conducting historical scientific investigation, “inference to the best explanation” (pioneered by Darwin himself) is a valid and useful technique. For many reasons Creation can be inferred as a superior explanation for the origin of life. Learn more about inference to the best explanation through this short video.
4) In this post-modern increasingly non-scientific era, Creation is the most coherent and academically honest model of origins, period. As homeschoolers, we must educate our children concerning the History and Philosophy of Science. Reading about our Christian heroes of science past is a great place to start. Check out these resources: Isaac Newton, Galileo
