The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!
33 votes

Ken Ham vs Bill Nye the Science Guy 2-4-14

Just wanted everyone to be aware of a very exciting debate coming up. As much as I prefer that fellow freedom activist Kent Hovind debate Bill Nye the Science guy on Creation vs Evolution, Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis is going to do it. This could be good!

I'm excited!

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"Dogs experience paralyzing self doubt" - Bill Nye

Was he serious about this statement? Thoughts?

Ever try to teach a dog to jump off a dock?

I know what he means. Those moments of "you can do it" are the response to the dog's self doubt.

I'm not sure I would equate

a little fear with paralyzing self doubt.

Alot of the hostility between science and religion

was manufactured by Andrew Dickson White, founder and first president of Cornell University, in his book "The Warfare of Science and Theology". This has been discussed by both John Taylor Gatto and Rodney Stark.

I don't know how old the

I don't know how old the Earth is, and neither does anyone else for sure. I believe organized religion is mostly corrupt because it is run by man. I think the bible was divinely inspired, and is not literal. I don't think the bible can be properly understood by someone that has not been saved, they don't have the proper powers of discernment to interpret it correctly. I also think most of the people that believe they are saved, are not saved. How can a person without the ears to hear and the eyes to see, properly interpret the bible?

I believe Jesus Christ was the savior, and that God has a way of sending subtle hints to us. I believe he listens to all prayers, and in a roundabout way gives you what you need, not what you want. I also believe in judgement upon death.

Now that you all know where I am coming from, there are some things about atheists that worship science, that does not make sense. Many people treat those in lab coats as an all knowing priest class. When you take a scientists word on global warming without yourself knowing how to read climatology data, you are exercising faith. The same goes for carbon dating, if you don't know how to do carbon dating, you are exercising faith in a priest class to be truthful.

When a person holds up science as the answer to all things, and they themselves are not scientists, that is a huge leap of faith, especially if you know how self motivated humans are. Don't believe anything you hear, and half of what you see.

Also, the big bang theory makes no sense, it fails to address the beginning of the universe, as in how matter came from nothingness. It starts with the idea matter exists, and explains how they think it expanded. Scientific fail, big time.

The umbrage

displayed by both "sides" is ridiculous. I am an Atheist, I do not care what Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhist, etc. believe. We all have the natural right of freewill/self-determination; your own religious texts and doctrines are implicit on this point.

This is my stance; I will defend your right to believe whatever you want; as long as you abide by the Non-Initiation Principle and do not use the state (force) to further YOUR beliefs and YOUR moral code on others. I would ask that you would extend the same courtesy to non-believers and defend our right to believe what we want as well.

Science and religion are not diametrically opposed in my opinion, if everyone will move past the specifics of each others belief system and look at the broad strokes; both science and religion are used as a mechanism for humanity to describe the universe in which we live, the only real overall difference I see is that science allows for the acceptance of new information to enhance and alter the "belief system"; where as religion is rigid and does not allow for new information to alter its perception of the universe or "belief system", i.e. "It is this way and only this way, and will forever be this way until such time as Deity _________ decides to change it".

Respect and defend the rights of the individual, regardless of what YOUR beliefs are and we can all get along......(for the most part).

I Agree

I cant wait till they end public schools, paid for with forced taxation that teaches the Atheist Religion of Evolution ... but it is science,ha soft science story telling ... When will there be Freedom


I believe as you
only the 'State' would stay out of it. They do not.

It's easy to 'ignore' and dismiss things that are 'breached' by the State if you assign no relative importance to it. You, as an atheist, are not particularly 'troubled' by this 'breach'.. I would venture to say you hardly 'see' it and absolutely do not 'feel' it.

We feel it every day and are deeply troubled by it.

You feel it as benign; we see it as malignant with far reaching implications. I spoke earlier about it Here .

When you try and convince someone who doesn't really care... that 911 was an 'inside job'... what do you get? Apathy.
That's only a 'little' frustrating... you can deal with it. Whatever.

When you try and convince someone who's 'bought' into the 'system' version... what do you get? maybe curiosity at first... wondering what the hell you're talking about.
Then... it suddenly 'occurs' to them... the IMPLICATIONS of what you are REALLY saying... and they STOP listening... right there.

It doesn't matter HOW much sense you are making... HOW logical you are laying it out... HOW many pictures or videos you show them...

The IMPLICATIONS (not the proofs or logic) have become the issue..
their fingers are in their ears and they're like la-la-la-la....

For instance..
I show you a picture like this and ask:
How does one 'bend' brittle sedimentary layered rock w/o fracturing/shattering it??

You probably don't care... meh... apathy.

The ones with 'umbrage' are the ones who REALIZE just the 'tip' of what this picture REALLY means... the IMPLICATIONS... and begin to mock or get angry... because they DO know what it means.. and have no GOOD answer from their paradigm. Just like those that KNOW buildings on fire can't freefall straight down but will even bypass logic... just so their worldview stays intact.

That's enough... no umbrage meant, none taken.

Over hundreds of thousands or millions of years

"How does one 'bend' brittle sedimentary layered rock w/o fracturing/shattering it??"

By applying pressures over hundreds of thousands or millions of years.

Or in 6 days with magic.


the community you're defending would disagree with that as being ludicrous.
I'll give you a piece of glass.. take as much time as you need.
Go ahead, bend it into an arch without fracturing it.

It was a Miracle (Magic)

If you look closely at the strata, they are fractured. They, in this case, are not smooth like melted glass but rather thousands of tiny fractures at the bends. There are instances where semi-molten rock is bent without fractures under high heat and pressures.

But it seems that the folks who think Jonah spent a few days in the Whale Stomach Hotel find it less ludicrous that God laid down that particular area of stratified rock all zig-zaggy, while laying it down flat elsewhere.

MAGIC, why can't you all simply admit that God used MAGIC to form the Earth and used MAGIC lay down similar fossils in each layer of strata starting with simple life leading up to more complicated life as the layers get shallower?

The problem with the 6,000 year old Earth is that you need thousands of cases of MAGIC to explain what in reality happened over billions of years.

Why don't you simply call them all Miracles instead of Magic? God performed all sorts of Miracles before modern observation and recording methods, right? How about saying God used thousands of Miracles to turn a few thousand 'kinds' of animals into 10's of millions of species. He used Miracles to turn herbivores into carnivores overnight. He used Miracles to layer strata in zig-zaggy forms in an instant. Miracles to make Kangaroos hop a thousand miles leap to get them back to Australia and then another Miracle to take that super power away. Miracles to keep birth defects down from Noah's family interbreeding. Miracles, miracles, miracles.

And then God created the last Miracle called the Scientific Method and stopped all the other miracles (magic) that can't stand up to the Scientific Method.

That makes as much sense as anything found on

BTW - I can easily bend glass with heat and pressure, and the cool thing is that you and everybody can too without MAGIC.

GoodSamaritan's picture

The MAGIC of the Flying Probability Monster

He waved his MAGIC wand and >>POOF<< ... nothing created matter.
He waved his MAGIC wand and >>POOF<< ... disorder created order.
He waved his MAGIC wand and >>POOF<< ... racemates created chirality.
He waved his MAGIC wand and >>POOF<< ... non-life created life.
He waved his MAGIC wand and >>POOF<< ... chaos created information.
He waved his MAGIC wand and >>POOF<< ... simultaneous male and female.

That's a nice story but adults need hard evidence. Wishful thinking and billions of years of atomic collisions doesn't make the chemically impossible possible.

BTW - speciation can happen thousands of times faster than what the evolutionary model predicts:
And here's some light reading on transposon amplification:

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

OH... you're going to ADD heat now?

Gee you left that out of your first comment.
I see...
ok, I'm your huckleberry...

Well let's see here Steve... these are SEDIMENTARY rocks.
Layered across your 'millions' of years.. thoroughly dried out
and brittle.

You're (now) going to 'add' your (magic) HEAT to your pressure across your 'millions of years?

No. There's no escape for you here Steve. That won't do either.

See, your problem is, you are now talking the process of metamorphosis
metamorphosis leaves 'fingerprints' in the crystalline mineral structures of ANY rock composition it touches...





YOU need the magic here Steve... not us.

Cheers, Game, Set, Match.
Check your 'umbrage' meter.. it's pegging.


Who is claiming it took 6 days?

Who is claiming it took 6 days? Not the bible O.o

"You only live free if your willing to die free."


Are you suggesting that it occurred instantly?

Both instantly and 6 days are equally preposterous.

Perhaps 3 days, that's how long Jonah sat in the Whale's tummy. Makes sense, right?


Careful your fear of divine judgement is showing :)

1 Year 0 Months 10 Days.

Do the math your self.

Or an explanation of the math at the end here.

It was not the creation of the earth that caused the strata but the flood and that took 375 days to complete.

To hear how it happened go here.

If your going to mock a claim you should understand it first.

"You only live free if your willing to die free."

No more

The number of questions sandstone being created in 375 days, or even a few thousand years with erosion taking place all the while (sandstone caves for example would not exist) are too many to go into.

With each explanation you all give, a hundred more questions arise.

Where did all the water go?

Why aren't there coconut trees/fossils all over the inlands?

How did the kangaroos get back to Australia?

How did the animals eat for a year? Where is the evidence that herbivores instantly turned into carnivores?

How did Mount Everest and all the other mountains higher than Ararat grow after the Flood and why did they slow to the current rates?

How is Speciation easy for you to believe and Evolution difficult?

Please don't answer any of these questions as your answers will just lead to hundred more questions. With each new set of questions your answers create, the less respect I have for your general intelligence.

I can accept that you can/will say the same about me. I regret pining in on this subject altogether because I have no want, need, or desire to be at odds with those who are against Statists. I don't give two ficks about your beliefs on how we came to be, I care a great deal about the future of Liberty.

There is no reason for us to continue this argument. All it is doing is creating apathy between people who have a common cause of Liberty.

Denise B's picture

The Bible,

on the Seventh Day, God rested.

Yes he did, but your a few

Yes he did, but your a few thousand years off of the cause of strata in the soil.

The flood is the claimed cause.

Hence 6 days is irrelevant. 375 is the number of days.

Not your fault.

That would be Steve A Morris's mistake.

Peace :)

"You only live free if your willing to die free."


Thanks for the picture. I'm wondering where this is?


Used as part of lecture material on 'how' rocks deform..
and from a non-creationist site.
Starts talking about metamorphic rock anomalies and heat..
then moves on to sedimentary and never skips a beat.
This really is classic.. cognitive dissonance at its best.

My journey to truth and liberty began here

I first heard Ken Ham speak at my church about 10 years ago. At the time I believed God somehow used evolution to create - the notion that anyone still believed in a young earth was absolutely foreign to me. Ken Ham's stand on the authority of God's Word opened my eyes and transformed my worldview. Bottom line: theistic evolution completely undermines the message of the gospel by insisting on death and suffering before sin, an affront to His holiness and in effect calling Him a liar.

I had attended church my entire life - and prayed the sinner's prayer dozens of times, but for the first time I took the Bible seriously and had assurance of my salvation. I hungered for God and the truth (actually one in the same - John 14:6) like never before which led me to read dozens of books carried by Answers in Genesis and ICR and dig into the Bible. I had not hardly picked up a book in years since graduating from college (like all good publicly educated students)...

A few years later, the rise and fall of the housing bubble and various liberty minded blogs eventually led me to Ron Paul's books: Revolution, End the Fed, The Case for Gold, exposing the theft of the federal reserve, slavery of the IRS, and our unjust wars... which led me here. I know not everyone here agrees with my worldview, but I appreciate the freedom to speak about it here. Because you won't hear about it on TV, in schools, or sadly even in most churches.

So I encourage anyone who hasn't carefully investigated the Biblical young earth worldview and the faults of evolution to do so. To be at peace with our fellow men is satisfying. But peace with God and citizenship in the only kingdom that will last is priceless.

For truth and liberty.

I am glad for you

that God has reached you through their ministry, more importantly through His own word!

So, salvation and redemption aside, I have researched into the theories of young earth and came up with many Biblical scriptures that do not support such theory.

One more important thing is this, in Genesis 1:1, God created the heavens and earth. In Genesis 1:2, it says "and the earth is void". The word void implied it to be an empty, dark, state that results from judgement. This word "void" was also used in Jeremiah. Also, the face of the earth was covered with water. Why would God create something that was "void" and covered with water? While we know that God creates everything to be good! There are many other issues with young earth theory. For example, when were the angles created? Day 1? Day 2? Day 3 in Genesis account? When were Lucifer created? When did he turn against God?

I read an article from ICR theorizing that the angles were created on Day 4 (stars) and Saturn turned against God sometime after Day 4 and the finish of the creation before men! How absurd does that sound? How can a sentient being just created by God turn against God and have the time to solicit support from 1/3 of the angles in a few days (24-hr days)?

Also, the argument that God can do anything and therefore He can make things look OLD when He created them! This is blasphemy! This is accusing God of able to lie! This is saying God is able to deceive us, on purpose! What kind of argument is that! Our God is NOT Allah! He doesn't do ANYTHING against His own nature and His own laws! He cannot LIE!

If the young earth theories need to resort to these kinds of tactics and arguments to make sense, then I think there's definitely something wrong!

Again, I have no problem that you believe in young earth or old earth, I believe this has nothing to do with our salvation. But I think as we search deeper into the Scriptures, we shall see that their young earth theory is very fallible. But I could be wrong, so if I am wrong, let me know when we get to Heaven!

Denise B's picture

Could you please cite a

reference for your statement that the term "void" as used in Genesis implies an empty, dark state "that results from judgement"; specifically where you get the implication of judgement from. The terms void is used numerous times throughout the bible and typically means "empty" or "without": Proverbs 12:11: "He that tilleth his land shall be satisfied with bread; but he that followeth vain persons is void of understanding." There are a couple of references where void is used as a descriptive word when judgement has taken place, e.g. in Nahum 2:10 in reference to Nineveh being judged "She is empty, and void, and waste:..."; however, I'm just trying to get at how you're coming to the conclusion that the term as used in Genesis 1:2 in any way refers to an empty, dark state "that results from judgement", as opposed to simply meaning empty.

When I read Genesis 1:2, it is talking about when God first created the earth (i.e. "in the beginning"), it was empty of anything, but water and then it goes on to describe what God's creation process was from there. I don't see why that is an issue for a young earth point of view. He had to start somewhere, and for reason's only he can know, God decided to complete the creation process over six days, rather than all at once and started His creation by creating an empty sphere void of anything but water. The problem begins when we try to read more into the Bible than what is actually stated, and are warned against doing this. Genesis; however, is very clear to state that each day was a 24 hour day.

As far as when Lucifer was created and fell, the Bible doesn't get into detail as to the exact timeframe of this (as it does with the earth creation process), therefore, it is obvious to me that it is something that God has decided is irrelevant to our understanding Him at this point, so why argue that at all? God and eternal beings live outside of time, which was created for us, so, perhaps, it is something that cannot be understood from our understanding of time. My point is, the Bible does not purport to give us all of the answers to every single question any human being could ever have about everything and itself states that we are given only some information and all shall be revealed at a later time. Why do we have to have an answer for everything, when even the god of "science" is not expected to do that? Understanding exactly when Lucifer, who was created as an eternal being, was created is irrelevant to the issue of a young or old earth. It is a question that cannot be answered with certainty either way based on the information we have been given, so perhaps in some cases it's ok to say "I don't know".

In any case, the Bible does not purport to tell us everything we need to know about science; however, it does purport to tell us everything that we NEED to know to understand who God is, why we are here, how we got here, why we are the way we are, what He expects from us, what we can expect from Him, and how we can reconcile ourselves to Him through His Son and also promises that when we do so, every other question we have will be answered at some point.

excellent dialogue Denise...

you're hired!



It's obvious we all believe

It's obvious we all believe in different things, but you know what's great??

None of us will pass a law against believing the opposite of what is thought to be true.

Now if only the other 90% of people out there would do the same..


Hey there,

I loved your comment Rix4Paul. I just had to say, I was at our local caucus this last Tuesday night for a couple of hours, and I think it is rather obvious that I am a Christian, but the chairman is not. He's quite against that stuff. He swears and does a lot of things that I wouldn't do. Who's the person he nominates as secretary? Me. So I accept, but afterwards, some people asked how we knew each other. I said, "This guy and I go back to the last election cycle. We have almost nothing in common except for the cause of liberty."

It's so true. I could see those PC vs Mac commercials being extremely effective, only when it comes to the cause of liberty:

"Hi I'm JCNailz316, and I am a pro-life evangelical Christian."
"Hi I'm Rex4Paul, and I'm a (whatever you are)."
and I'm Dan, and I am an atheist blah blah blah.

But one thing unites us - the cause of Liberty. Join us in this movement back to freedom.

Anyhow, not to be long winded, but I appreciate what you said.

Just want to say..

As much as we can disagree on some things..
I love how we come together to defend liberty!!

Great one-liner from the

Great one-liner from the debate:

Nye: There are trees older than you think the Earth is.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:


Specific cuts; defense spending: