Bill Nye "The Science Guy" vs. Ken Ham in a Creation/Evolution Debate

A review on the recent Nye vs. Ham debate held at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky.

Written by Donna Whistler

The question: Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?

For background information on Mr. Nye, click here for a link to the biography on his website. (Billnye.com)

For background information on Mr. Ham, click here for a link to his biography on his ministry’s website. (Answersingensis.org)

The purpose of this review is to give my own thoughts on the statements made and of each individual. There will be no synopsis or overview of the debate, so if you have not seen it, I encourage you to go to debatelive.org and watch it before reading the rest of this post. Please comment in the section below whether you love it or hate it, I would love to hear your thoughts!

The recent creation versus evolution debate held on February 4^th, 2014 has taken the media by storm. As the number one trending topic on facebook and twitter, as well as the number one watched video on youtube, this debate clearly caught the public’s eye. And not just America, it has been viewed in many different countries around the world.

Mr. Bill Nye “The Science Guy”

There were a few things Mr. Nye did that I absolutely loved and think were great tactics. He used anecdotal stories and humor, he stuck to his time limits very well, (he went over by a couple seconds a few times, but quickly wrapped it up when warned by the moderator) and he showed his passion and love for science. His love and enthusiasm for observational science is definitely something to be admired.

On the downside, his part of the debate didn’t hold up too well. He had trouble sticking to the topic, went off on a lot of bunny trails, and failed to acknowledge the questions presented to him by Mr. Ham. He came off very negatively to the scientists at the creation museum, Dr. Damadian, Dr. Stuart Burgess, and the residents of the state of Kentucky.

Think my negative opinions of Mr. Nye’s side of the debate are isolated to the creationist side of the argument? Think again. In this article of the Daily Beast, the author, Michael Schulson, had this to say about Nye’s presentation: “He spent 10 minutes delivering a dry lecture on geological sediments and biogeography, using the kind of PowerPoint slides that a high school junior might make for his AP Biology class.” Although this article was very negative towards Mr. Ham as well and he agrees with Mr. Nye’s viewpoint, he didn’t agree with the debate at all. He also said: “It was like watching the Broncos play the Seahawks. Nye never had a chance. Ham won this debate months ago, when Nye agreed to participate.”

Ouch. Schulson, who gives some low blows to Mr. Ham, dealt a few even worse ones to Mr. Nye. He said: “Last night, it was easy to pick out the smarter man on the stage. Oddly, it was the same man who was arguing that the earth is 6,000 years old.” He also said Mr. Nye had “less political acumen than your average wombat.”  I realize this is all from one article, but there are many more like it out there. This is an extremely leftist, liberal, and atheistic newspaper, (with the full support of the ideals Mr. Nye stands for) and he completely insulted and degraded Mr. Nye. To top off his article with a flourish, Schulson entitled it “The Bill Nye-Ken Ham Debate Was a Nightmare for Science”.  Here is the link to the article; I encourage you to read it. It is very interesting.

Mr. Nye also received a rebuke I found very interesting. A man wrote him a letter and corrected some of his statements about science and his generalization against Kentucky. Attached is the link to Mr. Ham’s blog where he posted the letter.

There are many other things I could touch on, and mostly what I did was pull resources and state a little opinion. That was the purpose of this post though and I hope you find it thought provoking whether or not you agreed with my conclusions and/or tactics. I also wish to say I do not hate or wish to rag on Mr. Nye in any way, but I disagree with him deeply.

Mr. Tom Foreman

This is just a quick side note on the moderator of the debate, Mr. Tom Foreman from CNN. He was fabulous, both sides of the fence can agree on that. He kept both sides even and fair, handled it professionally, and was an excellent time keeper. Mr. Foreman wrote his own review on the debate entitled "What I learned moderating the creation/evolution debate". It is an excellent, well written and thought-provoking article sure to please. I encourage you to click the link and read it.

Mr. Ken Ham

Mr. Ham all around did an excellent job. Now I know everyone wants review to be “neutral” in order to please more readers, but neither this post nor any are neutral. In order to be fair to this post and my beliefs I can’t be neutral on this.

I can’t find fault in Mr. Ham’s approach. He spoke well, clearly, used professional slides and a professional manner when going about his business. As always, he was humorous and delightful to listen to. (Maybe having something to do with that great Australian accent!) He only hesitated once in the debate when asked what would make him give up his beliefs. In his post-debate interview with Dr. Georgia Purdom, he explains why. Mr. Ham says he hesitated, not because he did not know how to answer the question, but because he wanted to word it the best way he could for the non-Christians in the audience and watching the live stream. He then pulled out a thorough and polished answer, whether you agree with him or not.

Now many Christians I am sure find fault with Mr. Ham’s side. Either he did not say what they wanted him to say, or they are old-earth creationists and side with Mr. Nye on that matter. Many on both sides of this divide have criticized Mr. Ham for his lack of scientific evidences in the debate. As Mr. Ham believes though, it does not matter how much evidence you point out, we all have the same evidence, just different starting points. He clearly demonstrated his starting point and the world got the message.

(He did include some scientific evidences. Also on his website they answer the questions that came up in the debate but he didn’t have time to answer. Check out this link and click on the drop down bar next to the debate. Scroll through your categories and pick a topic, and you will find a Biblical and scientific answer to the question.)

I can’t agree with them. Mr. Ham stuck to the topic, tried his best to answer Mr. Nye in the few precious minutes he had, and explained himself well. He stuck to the authority of the Bible, and preached the gospel several times to everyone listening.

That’s what really matters and what Mr. Ham is all about. He isn’t trying to look good, make himself sound smart or sophisticated, or just get a chance to argue on TV. His goal was to spread the gospel and defend the Scriptures, and he did just that.

And remember, "there is a Book...."