Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis and founder of the Creation Museum and Bill Nye "The Science Guy" debated each other Tuesday night, Feb. 4th. The debate remains available for viewing here and here.
I confess I am one of those who cringe at the 6,000 year old-earth position Ken Ham defends. The debate came off better than I had feared, but I still lament that many uninformed viewers will conclude that anyone who believes in the authority of the Bible must reject the scientific evidence that contends for an old earth. Interestingly, Pat Robertson stated on the 700 club that he holds to an old-earth position as well.
Ham's post-debate reflections are available here. Nye reflects here.
Dr. Albert Mohler, a young-earth adherent and President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary offers his reflections here.
Those associated with the BioLogos Forum which adheres to a theistic evolution perspective (renamed "evolutionary creation)," published their perspective here.
Casey Luskin of the Intelligent Design movement wasn't happy. He titled his response, "The Ham-Nye Creation Debate: A Huge Missed Opportunity. Michael J. Behe, a biology professor at Lehigh University and an advocate of Intelligent Design said, "I was upset that both the parties kept talking on about the age of the Earth than on the elegance and complexities of life." David Klingfellow, another ID adherent and an orthodox Jew, offers a substitute debate more to his liking, that of Stephen Meyer vs. Charles Marshall. That debate is on Intelligent Design and the explosion of life.
Wintery Knight likewise preferred steering people to debates with which he is more comfortable, namely a debate between young earth scientist Jason Lisle and old earth astronomer Hugh Ross. He also recommends the Stephen C. Meyer vs. Keith Fox debate on intelligent design and evolution as well as the Michael Behe-Keith Fox debate. Speaking of Hugh Ross, his organization, Reasons to Believe, published RTB's general perspective on debates without commenting specifically on the Nye-Ham debate.
I was struck by evolutionist Michael Shermer's tweet - "People of all faiths and no faiths accept Big Bang cosmology because of evidence, but no non-Christians accept young earth creationism." I suspect that is true. Shermer coached Nye before the debate.
Respondents to the U.K. Christian Magazine gave the debate to Nye.
In terms of who "won" the debate, the audience of Britain's Christian Today website says it was Nye, hands down. With 42,567 responses, the site's online poll finds Nye with 92 percent support, compared with 8 percent for Ham. An option for "neither" is not provided in the poll, which is still taking votes
On the general matter of "evidence" vs. "the Bible" the key issue revolves around interpretation of both science and the Bible. In my judgment, Dr. John C. Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University, has provided excellent help in his book, Seven Days that Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science. Dr. Lennox gave the following talk on January 31, 2013 at New York's gathering of Socrates in the City. A talk Lennox gave of a similar nature is summarized here and critiqued from a young-earth perspective here. It should be noted that although Lennox believes in an "old earth," he rejects theistic evolution and believes man a special creation of God.
I have blogged previously of John Lennox's visit to Yale. Lennox has debated Princeton ethicist Dr. Peter Singer and Oxford's evolution propagandist Dr. Richard Dawkins among others. Lennox is the author of the following books:
- God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? (2009)
- Seven Days that Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science. (2011)
- God and Stephen Hawking: Whose Design is it Anyway? (2011)
- Gunning for God: Why the New Atheists are Missing the Target. (2011)
I have blogged previously of John Lennox speaking in New Zealand on "Natural Disasters, Pain and Suffering" and at Harvard in 2012 on "Miracles: Is Belief in the Supernatural Irrational?"
The Lennox-Singer debate can be found here and his first debate with Richard Dawkins in Alabama here and a follow-up with Dawkins at the Oxford Museum of Natural History here.
My regret is that the Ken Ham-Bill Nye debate focused almost exclusively on the age of the earth instead of focusing on the complexity and grandeur of the created world which cries out for God as its author as opposed to undirected chance explanations. Huge problems inhere in the latter position which need public airing.
I highly recommend the DVD trilogy known as "The Intelligent Design Collection" composed of "Darwin's Dilemma," "The Privileged Planet," and "Unlocking the Mystery of Life."