THE CREATION VS EVOLUTION DEBATE CONTINUES IN SPITE OF DENIALS AND TACTICS

Reads: 113  | Likes: 0  | Shelves: 0  | Comments: 0

More Details
Status: Finished  |  Genre: Editorial and Opinion  |  House: Booksie Classic
On February 4, 2014 another historical debate took place, a debate that once again pitted atheist evolutionists against theist creationist.
The atheist (he claims to be a agnostic) evolutionist was the popular “Science Guy” television personality Bill Nye and the theist creationist was the popular leader of Answers in Genesis and the creation museum on Kentucky, Ken Ham.
this is my brief analysis.

Submitted: February 17, 2014

A A A | A A A

Submitted: February 17, 2014

A A A

A A A


THE CREATION VS EVOLUTION DEBATE CONTINUES IN SPITE OF DENIALS AND TACTICS

By Danzil Monk

Those of you who know me and follow my reporting know that I have been spending much of my time on the front line in dialogue with atheist evolutionists for the last three years. During that time I have accumulated a wealth of information about how evolutionists argue their case and the many tactics that they employ to help them keep the credibility of their false evolution afloat.

I have logged quite a number of such dialogues and will some day put my findings in a book. But until then I think it is important for me to continue sounding the alarm about the importance of Christian ministries and their leaders being well informed about the creation VS evolution conflict that evolutionists seem to be so determined to trivialize, and the necessity of their knowing about some of those “tactics” that are used by atheist evolutionists to keep evolution afloat.

One such tactic, "using arguments that were already thoroughly refuted by creationists", and another, "stating as emphatic what was known to be speculative", and yet another, "sounding a false alarm about creationism hindering science advancement", was prominently featured in a resent public debate.

On February 4, 2014 another historical debate took place, a debate that once again pitted atheist evolutionists against theist creationist.

The atheist (he claims to be a agnostic) evolutionist was the popular “Science Guy” television personality Bill Nye and the theist creationist was the popular leader of Answers in Genesis and the creation museum on Kentucky, Ken Ham.

The debate was held at the Answers in Genesis Museum and according to some reports was viewed by more than 10 million viewers.

For those of you who missed this important debate you can get a good summery and review by watching the recent Creation Magazine live episode: “Ken Ham/Bill Nye debate Analysis” by host Calvin Smith and Richard Fangrad here:

 http://creation.com/ham-nye-debate

Calvin and Richard do a fine job of covering the debate and pointing out the weaknesses and problems with Bill Nye’s arguments. They also include links to articles and videos that clearly refute all of Bill Nye’s arguments.

I will be writing an analysis of the debate also that will address my biggest concerns about how the debate went, but let me say briefly here, that while I applauded the great job that brother Ken Ham did, my only regret is that brother Ham was not as assertive as he should have been.

I feel that Ham played too much of the “nice guy” to the “science guy” and lost a great opportunity to challenge Nye’s illogic and dishonesty.

My understanding of such a debate is that it is a battle of knowledge and truth and the object is to “defeat” the opponent and not just end in a draw or close decision.

Had brother Ham focused more on exposing not only Nye’s errors but also exposing Nye’s stated motives and challenging Nye’s ignorance or intentional attempt at misinformation he would have done a much better job of exposing atheistic-evolution for what it truely is. This is of course my opinion.

Ham should have mentioned the fact that Nye’s being called the “Science Guy” made it unacceptable for him to be so uninformed about the weakness of his evolution views. And if he was informed, that it was inexcusable for him to act as if he was not. Far too much creationist material was available for him to make such false arguments and Brother Ham had those answers in his own ministries archives and had been exposed to them enough to have been ready to share them during the debate.

Evolutionists Have No Answer For Origins Or Mechanism For Evolution 

Ham failed to press the issue of the missing starting point for neo-Darwinian evolution on the origins issue, Nye’s acknowledgment that “We don’t know” should have been pressed much more than it was by Ham and the missing mechanism for the supposed neo-Darwinian evolution from one kind of creature to another that supposedly resulted in the millions of life forms of the past and present should also have been pressed by Ham.

Ham should not have allowed Nye to seem so intelligent about his evolution but should have pressed and driven home just how impossible and thus illogical it was. He should have explained forcefully, why evolutionists needed to insist on their millions of years and why even millions of years could not produce their evolution.

Ham’s goal should have been to so clearly point out just how impossible neo-Darwinian evolution was that nothing Nye said would have made any logical sense. This brother Ham failed to do.

While I understand and concur with brother Ham’s desire to maintain a respectable and friendly disposition, I believe that he could have done so while still making it clear that Nye was aware of his untrue statements and forcing Nye to explain why he was knowingly refusing to tell the whole truth about the arguments he was using, and why Nye was ignoring Ham's clear answers to some of his questions.

Putting Nye on the hot seat even in a loving and respectful manner would have destroyed Nye’s illusion of credibility and would have gone a long way in helping many who were deceived by Nye’s confidence to see more clearly the weakness of his views and why it was so important for Nye to ack as if none of his arguments were answered sufficiently.

Another of my concerns is that Ham agreed to a debate that did not include cross-examination of the opponent.  Much of what I said Ham should have done could have been done during cross-examination that never occurred.

In my opinion, no debate is worth its efforts if there is no lengthy cross-examination and those who refuse to allow for such have left out the best part of a debate.

I look forward to the day when our Christian leaders will be more concerned about defeating lies than being viewed as kind.

Our Lord and Savoir, Jesus Christ left us a pattern to follow and to strive for in Matthews 22 and when He was done it said in verse 46:

“And no one was able to answer Him a word, nor from that day on did anyone dare question Him anymore.”

May we study and pray so well, that we gain just such ability to silence the deceivers and inform the masses about the truth that sets us free.

The full debate can be viewed here: 

http://debatelive.org/?utm_source=aig-homepage&utm_medium=banner&utm_campaign=bill-nye-ken-ham-debate-campaign

Ken Ham's post Debate interview is a must see

http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/features/debate-answers

Answers I Genesis link to Answers to the most common evolution arguments

http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/features/debate-answers

 

 


© Copyright 2018 Danzil. All rights reserved.

Add Your Comments:

More Editorial and Opinion Articles