Evolution vs Creation? Bill Nye The Science Guy vs. Ken Ham Debate who won?

Share Button

Evolution vs. Creation

12 thoughts on “Evolution vs Creation? Bill Nye The Science Guy vs. Ken Ham Debate who won?

  1. The only thing you have to realize is that creationism is based on faith and A book and not a very good one at that. Science and Evolution is based on fact. Fact will always win over faith. For a Science person to argue with a creationist is like expecting a cat to speak 10
    European languages. Virtually impossible. I don’t dislike Creationists but their indoctrination and lack of ability to accept truth
    and fact is not rare. “It is easier to fool someone then to convince them they’ve been fooled.

    R Brentnall
    Toronto, Canada

  2. Bill Nye won the debate; hands down.

    The Q and A at the end of the debate summed up it all up.

    Question: “What, if anything, would ever change your mind?”
    Ken Ham: “Nothing will ever change my mind. The Bible is the inerrant Word of God. So nothing.”
    Bill Nye: “Evidence. Evidence will change my mind.”

    BTW, to say Ken Ham and his creationist ilk was Christian is laughable. He needs to teach them the “evolution” of the Bible.

    Sumerian legends and myths >> Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy) >> (Add new chapters and A New Testament) = Bible

    • There is nothing on your website link to defend your position except for a bias statement from a creationist.
      Please provide proof for your statement otherwise you look like a fool.

    • This is not the kind of evidence that will prove your point.
      A paragraph from your link.

      “Some of these men went to Borneo and caught female Orangutans and sailed across to South America and had sex with the female Orangutans and created the Indian. And the men who stayed in Africa caught female Gorillas and had sex with them and created the Black man.”

  3. “If get a microscope and some bacteria, you can WATCH evolution happen!”
    -MICRO evolution, adaptation, NOT molecules-to-man evolution.
    “The Bible is not a good science book.”
    -Actually the Bible is full of science, and by the way science means “to know”
    The Bible is not a moral book.
    If there’s no God, where does this “moral” you speak of even come from?

    • “Actually the Bible is full of science, and by the way science means “to know””
      Quotes, please.
      Why didn’t Christians discover and invent things before Jews did?

  4. Bill Nye won because “science is real”.

    The earth is not 6000 years old (More like 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years).
    Two of every kind of animal could not have fit on Noah’s ark.
    We can look at the results of the Humane Genome project and every other Genome project and see the history of evolution before our eyes.
    If get a microscope and some bacteria, you can WATCH evolution happen!
    The Bible is not a good science book.
    The Bible is not a moral book.
    Any book that says “slaves obey your masters” is not a moral book!
    – Colossians 3:22
    Get a better book. Get several!

    • Cor 3:19: For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight. As it is written: “He catches the wise in their craftiness”;

      Yes, micro evolution is easily observed and tested. No one has watched/seen/experienced/tested macro evolution, not even Bill Nye the science guy. Therefore, macro evolution cannot be substantiated by science’s rigorous standards of evaluation, which require observation.

      The earth is not 6000 years old (More like 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years). <= Because man was there to see it begin, right?
      Two of every kind of animal could not have fit on Noah’s ark. <= 2 of every kind (kind, not sub-species) from when they were young or just born could, most animals are quite small right after birth, and obviously all marine animals didn't need to be on the boat.
      We can look at the results of the Humane Genome project and every other Genome project and see the history of evolution before our eyes. <= By the Human genome projects own words, they say that 2% of the human genome codes for building proteins, 30% regulates when to build these proteins, and the other 68% is UNKOWN. Meaning, the majority of the human genome is a mystery, meaning it couldn't possibly definitely tell you anything about 4.5 billion years of never observed before macro evolution.
      If get a microscope and some bacteria, you can WATCH evolution happen! <= Micro evolution, micro!

      And don't try to say the Bible is immoral for placing morality on what was a immoral legal practice of that culture at that time. God never wanted slavery in the first place. It exists because of the sinful nature of man, just like so many other evils of the world, like murder, theft, rape, adultery. The Bible brought morality to a sinful concept, meaning it forbade slave owners to abuse their slaves. In turn, the slave was to obey, to keep the peace. Many of the slaves during the writing of Paul's letter, were in slavery by choice, and before you laugh ignorantly, read a history book. You think the world is tough in the 21st century? Most of the population of the world was starving 2000 years ago, so it was common for a man to put himself and his entire family into slavery to someone wealthy (like a Bill Gates or Warren Buffet), in order to provide food and shelter and protection for their family.

      I implore you to read the Bible, especially the Gospels of Jesus Christ, and live it. There is no better way to experience true peace, love, and joy than to walk in His footsteps. You can read all the books written on this planet and you will never find anything close to the wisdom contained in the Bible.

      Be blessed.

    • Neither won. God has two revelations (Creation and scripture) and they can’t be in conflict. Both Ken Ham and Bill Nye prove that these two things are in conflict. That is why I think there is huge middle ground that is left out of the equation. Hugh Ross from “Reasons to Believe” proves how today’s science affirms our faith in the God of the Bible. The earth is 4 billion years old and scripture (when put into context) does speak of an old Earth. Also Noah’s flood was a regional flood and not a world flood. I challenge anyone to check this out for yourself http://www.reasons.org/. This really helped me get my head around this difficult topic and strengthened my faith.

      • In response to the claim that the flood was only regional and not global, I quote from the 7th chapter of Genesis, “…and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered.”

        I believe that this means that the waters rose 15 cubits above the highest mountains. In my mind, that would certainly cover the whole planet.

        Someone might argue that the author meant that the waters only rose to a total height of 15 cubits. The ark was built with a height of 30 cubits. So if the waters only rose to half the height of the ark, I think it would be hard to explain the following occurrences also listed near or in the previously mentioned passage of Scripture:

        -the waters lifted the ark, and it rose high above the earth.
        -the ark moved about on the surface of the waters.
        -the mountains were covered.

        I think this argument, though, ultimately comes down to whether we can trust what is written in the Scriptures or not. I believe that the more we dig into Scripture, the more we will see that it is trustworthy. If anyone reading this wants a good place to start digging they should start with the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection, especially the ones that were written long before it happened 🙂 I pray that in the process, you will meet Him yourself.

  5. Ken Ham won the debate. Not due to the convincing arguments, although he was, or persuasive evidences, although they are, but because he stood on the authority of God’s word and preached the Gospel!

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *