Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

Oct
31
Delicate, Precise Designs
Matthew 6:28
"And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:"
When a flower lives in harmony with and is dependent upon, say, an insect for fertilization, this is known as symbiosis. Creation Moments programs have given many examples of this, and each one...
RSS

The Ham-Nye Debate ... from One Who Was There

 

A few minutes after 6 a.m. on Tuesday, February 4, while it was still pitch black in Lynchburg, Virginia, I grabbed my hot coffee and headed west on route 501. My destination was the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, location of the Great Debate between Ken Ham and the Science Guy, Bill Nye. Nine hours later, my friend from Atlanta and I entered the museum, hoping to get a brief look at some of the exhibits. Unfortunately, due to the increased security and preparation that the debate required, the museum exhibits had already closed for the day. The entire focus was now on the debate, which was still almost four hours away. Already, however, there was electricity in the air. It was clear that something special was soon going to take place, and everyone knew it. 
After eating dinner in Noah’s Café, with its beautifully handcrafted solid wood tables and chairs, we headed toward the Conference Center, site of the debate. I wasn’t able to secure a ticket to the live debate for my friend, so he went to the room where it was going to be simulcast. After passing through a security check worthy of Delta Airlines, I entered the Center. Although it was only about 5:30, the room was already about three-quarters full, and seats in the front were scarce. I found one, though, on the far right, about four rows back.  About 6:45, a murmur arose from those around me. The star had entered the room, Ken Ham. He was standing near the exit door right in front of me, along with his support team. Although not physically imposing, Mr. Ham definitely has an aura about him that is impossible to ignore. 
At precisely 7 p.m. the moderator, Tom Foreman of CNN, presented his opening remarks and introduced the debaters. The “Debate of the Century,” as some have titled it, was underway.
The debate went about according to my expectation. It was obvious that both men entered the debate with an agenda, a list of points that they were determined to make, and, generally speaking, they achieved their goals. There were no real “gotcha!” moments. I did think that Mr. Ham failed to address some issues that Mr. Nye raised, which unfortunately left these issues as check marks on Mr. Nye’s side. 
Let me give you one particularly glaring example of this. In his half hour presentation at the beginning of the event, Mr. Nye showed pictures of some fossils in the Grand Canyon, explaining that these fossils appeared in distinct layers of the canyon walls. He then stated that “never, ever do you find a higher animal mixed in with a lower one.” That is, never is a fossil that is indigenous to one layer found in another. Instantly recognizing the utter absurdity of this claim – such “out-of-order fossils” are actually ubiquitous in the geologic column – I wondered whether I had misunderstood the speaker’s words. His next words proved that I hadn’t. Directing his remarks to the audience, he said, “If you can find one example of that [a fossil being out of order], scientists would embrace you, you would be a hero, you would change the world.... People have looked and looked – they have not found a single one.” 
Mr. Ham had just been thrown a slow hanging curve ball, and he didn’t even take a swing at it. On the positive side, however, Mr. Ham forthrightly defended the absolute authority of the Bible and clearly proclaimed the gospel of salvation, which is the heart of the entire Answers in Genesis ministry.
At the end of the debate, it was announced that the area was in the throes of a Level 2 snowstorm, and everyone was advised to exercise extreme caution on the roads. I wasn’t sure what a Level 2 snowstorm was, but I soon found out. Icy, dense snow was falling hard, and several inches had already accumulated. The trip back to our motel in the driving snow was a bit of an adventure, but we made it safely. 
Once we settled in to our room, my friend and I had a wonderful conversation about the debate and related subjects, and I knew that such conversations were taking place all over the United States at that very moment. The Great Debate was over, but I knew that its impact would ripple through the land for a long, long time. The gospel of salvation was clearly proclaimed by Ken Ham, and as a result, God’s Kingdom will surely grow – exactly the result that Mr. Ham desired. He may not be the best debater in the world, but he certainly is a faithful defender of the faith, and for that he deserves nothing but praise. 
Today’s guest blogger is Stephen Bartholomew, author of Scopes Retried. He wasn’t even planning on attending the debate until his friend, who is new to the creationist perspective, persuaded him to go. This is Steve’s account of their experience.

 

A few minutes after 6 a.m. on Tuesday, February 4, while it was still pitch black in Lynchburg, Virginia, I grabbed my hot coffee and headed west on route 501. My destination was the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, location of the Great Debate between Ken Ham and the Science Guy, Bill Nye. Nine hours later, my friend from Atlanta and I entered the museum, hoping to get a brief look at some of the exhibits. Unfortunately, due to the increased security and preparation that the debate required, the museum exhibits had already closed for the day. The entire focus was now on the debate, which was still almost four hours away. Already, however, there was electricity in the air. It was clear that something special was soon going to take place, and everyone knew it. 

After eating dinner in Noah’s Café, with its beautifully handcrafted solid wood tables and chairs, we headed toward the Conference Center, site of the debate. I wasn’t able to secure a ticket to the live debate for my friend, so he went to the room where it was going to be simulcast. After passing through a security check worthy of Delta Airlines, I entered the Center. Although it was only about 5:30, the room was already about three-quarters full, and seats in the front were scarce. I found one, though, on the far right, about four rows back.  About 6:45, a murmur arose from those around me. The star had entered the room, Ken Ham. He was standing near the exit door right in front of me, along with his support team. Although not physically imposing, Mr. Ham definitely has an aura about him that is impossible to ignore. 

At precisely 7 p.m. the moderator, Tom Foreman of CNN, presented his opening remarks and introduced the debaters. The “Debate of the Century,” as some have titled it, was underway.

The debate went about according to my expectation. It was obvious that both men entered the debate with an agenda, a list of points that they were determined to make, and, generally speaking, they achieved their goals. There were no real “gotcha!” moments. I did think that Mr. Ham failed to address some issues that Mr. Nye raised, which unfortunately left these issues as check marks on Mr. Nye’s side. 

Let me give you one particularly glaring example of this. In his half hour presentation at the beginning of the event, Mr. Nye showed pictures of some fossils in the Grand Canyon, explaining that these fossils appeared in distinct layers of the canyon walls. He then stated that “never, ever do you find a higher animal mixed in with a lower one.” That is, never is a fossil that is indigenous to one layer found in another. Instantly recognizing the utter absurdity of this claim – such “out-of-order fossils” are actually ubiquitous in the geologic column – I wondered whether I had misunderstood the speaker’s words. His next words proved that I hadn’t. Directing his remarks to the audience, he said, “If you can find one example of that [a fossil being out of order], scientists would embrace you, you would be a hero, you would change the world.... People have looked and looked – they have not found a single one.” 

Mr. Ham had just been thrown a slow hanging curve ball, and he didn’t even take a swing at it. On the positive side, however, Mr. Ham forthrightly defended the absolute authority of the Bible and clearly proclaimed the gospel of salvation, which is the heart of the entire Answers in Genesis ministry.

At the end of the debate, it was announced that the area was in the throes of a Level 2 snowstorm, and everyone was advised to exercise extreme caution on the roads. I wasn’t sure what a Level 2 snowstorm was, but I soon found out. Icy, dense snow was falling hard, and several inches had already accumulated. The trip back to our motel in the driving snow was a bit of an adventure, but we made it safely. 

Once we settled in to our room, my friend and I had a wonderful conversation about the debate and related subjects, and I knew that such conversations were taking place all over the United States at that very moment. The Great Debate was over, but I knew that its impact would ripple through the land for a long, long time. The gospel of salvation was clearly proclaimed by Ken Ham, and as a result, God’s Kingdom will surely grow – exactly the result that Mr. Ham desired. He may not be the best debater in the world, but he certainly is a faithful defender of the faith, and for that he deserves nothing but praise. 

Today’s guest blogger is Stephen Bartholomew, author of Scopes Retried. He wasn’t even planning on attending the debate until his friend, who is new to the creationist perspective, persuaded him to go. This is Steve’s account of their experience.

Comments

The presentation of evidence, and the forensic proof of a position, is not new to me -- I have been a trial attorney since the mid AD1980s, 20 years with a post-doc certification for litigating in federal court trials, plus service as a part-time judge (for the State of Texas) since AD1996. The rules of evidence are old friends of mine -- and I know the difference between solid proof and popular opinions. Also, I hold 2 other post-doc credentials relevant to forensic science, one for adjudicating nonjury cases and another for establishing paternity (with forensic evidence that is used to change birth certificates).

Please appreciate that there is a huge difference between proving you are right, with competent evidence, and impressing the audience with Hollywood tactics. Also, please recognize that the prove-up of a case is often attended with communications that reveal an additional agenda -- a goal beyond that of clearly proving one's case (such as Ken Ham's extra agenda of presenting the Gospel, plus his clarification that empirical science is qualitatively different from origins science, because the latter analyzed the no-longer-observable events of the past).

Based on the debate's official purpose (i.e., the debate's formal question), Ken Ham won the debate with overwhelming force, within the first 5 minutes (!), when he used Dr. Raymond Damadian as "Exhibit A" proving that Biblical creation scientists can and do provide the modern world with top-quality scientific research and technology. The official debate was over at that point -- because, as a matter of forensic proof, Ken Ham had irrefutably won the debate with the medical MRI device illustration (plus a few other examples). If Ken Ham had wanted to be sarcastic, then, he could have chided Bill Nye about whether Nye would submit to a medical MRI in a modern hospital, knowing that it was invented by a Bible-believing young-earth creationist! But, having won the debate (as it was officially defined), Ken Ham went on -- like Stephen (in the book of Acts, chapter 7) just before he received his martyr's crown from the Lord Jesus Christ -- to broadcast the Gospel to the live and electronic audiences.

The specific detail arguments -- tree rings, rock layers, and the like -- could all be addressed (in evidentiary detail) another day, by quoting Nye's "I-dare-you" propositions and then refuting each challenge topic, one DVD at a time, with creation evidences that show each of Nye's errors. In sum, Ken Ham is a successful champion of the faith, and also of the formal debate -- he prudently sidestepped the distractions and won on the 2 most important tasks -- the official debate question and presenting the Gospel. Hallelujah!

I have found that evolutionists are not motivated in the least by a desire for truth, but a desire to cover it up. What is the truth that they want to cover up? That there is a God, and you must humble yourself before God and walk in righteousness, or you will find yourself brought down to nothing. Why would this fact bother them? They are not humble, but full of pride. They have every desire to walk in wickedness. They will never admit they are nothing, and can be nothing without God. They want to lift themselves above God. They want to run amok, like a vacuum cleaner spitting dirt all over the place instead of doing the job it was created to do. They are, in short, not authorities on anything but how to make an utter fool of yourself and mark yourself as a target for eternal oblivion.