TheBlaze posted a story earlier this week about Bill Nye “The Science Guy’s” fears over an upcoming debate with with Ken Ham on Creationism versus Evolution. Nye said that by debating, he hopes that creationist will find some value in the belief system of evolution.
Here is what some readers of TheBlaze had to say about the upcoming debate scheduled for Feb. 4 at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Ky.:
It takes very little critical thinking to blow some major holes in the evolution hypothesis. Did life evolve on this planet from rocks? Maybe, but the current hypothesis that is being pitched as fact and disguised as a theory requires as much on faith as creationism.
I’m not an atheist but i believe in evolution. My faith is much more than what is written in the Bible.
God didn’t explain electrons, neutrons or protons in the Bible either, but it does not mean they don’t exist. He just left that out and kept it simple for us. The story of Genesis is just that...a story that God used to explain to us that he created us. God just gave us the Cliff's Notes.
I’m a Christian, however, I do believe in science… to imply that because I’m a Christian I must not believe in science is a joke. I believe in Creationism, although there are certain facets of it that I still want to have explained… and perhaps modern science will explain how maybe bits and pieces of what we think we know are actually how God accomplished it. That being said, I took a course in a private high school that Ken Ham put together called “Creation vs. Evolution.” I will never forget the course, and, if Ken brings his “A" game, it should be interesting to say the least. It may not have the potential of changing Nye’s mind, however Ken has the potential of destroying him in a debate.
Maybe you don’t know or simply refuse to acknowledge the FACT that there are many, many scientists who happen to be Christians. I am a Christian who loves to engage atheists, non-religious people and so on in debate using only scientific evidence for a young earth and a creator of the earth.
And let us also not forget that Bill Nye the science guy is NOT a scientist but an engineer.
Conservatives value real science, that is, operational science. The evolutionary hypothesis is not proven, in spite of what some “scientists” postulate. Has it ever been observed? Is it repeatable? Of course it hasn’t. Both creationism and evolution are ideas about origins. Creationism has its roots in the Bible. Evolution’s roots are in the unproven ideas of men like Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin. Neither can be “proven,” but there's lots of evidence for God having created life, while there is very little to support the idea of evolution.
I am a conservative and scientist. We have very little proof of evolution, so why poo poo creationism. Neither have been proven scientifically, so let us decide which road to take, not some trumped-up presentations that go nowhere. Science is always evolving but not necessarily nature. Creationism has some things scientifically going for it as well. To me, there are far better ways to spend time and effort and money than on this discussion which goes nowhere and never will.
Evolution is only an unproven scientific theory.
I’ll bet Bill Nye also believes in man-caused global warming.
I am also a mechanical engineer. I do not believe that a random collection of chemicals could assimilate into an amoeba. That would be as likely as the space shuttle designing and building itself. That would be a miracle. That would take God!
I have always been a huge fan of Bill Nye and feel he would do well in the debate with Ken Ham. Even though both men would have different views, it doesn’t mean they can't respect each other and build bridges toward a better future.
I will save you all a lot of time and effort. The results of this will be nothing. Those who are religious will claim their side obviously won the debate, and those who support evolution will claim the obvious win. In reality, they are debating two completely different things. One side is arguing blind faith in a religious belief and the other, a complicated, scientific concept that the vast majority of people have no true understanding of.
Where do these evolutionists get the idea that Christians don’t believe in science? Just because science explains how the universe works doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. With all the intelligent detail and beauty in our world, God must have a detailed plan for how everything is supposed to work. Science is just an explanation of God’s grand design.
To me, these kinds of “debates” always end in a pointless draw. More than that, they seem to degrade and cheapen the view of each party involved. It becomes a contest of “one right” and “one wrong,” meaning that each of these men see the validity of their viewpoint as contingent on the other being invalid.
The ironic thing is that both faith and science are based in mystery. A scientist doesn’t spend his life researching and proving what is already known, just as a monk or a priest or an avid church-goer doesn’t pray or meditate about what they already know, say, the taste of an orange. They will both seek answers to the same questions: what is our purpose, how did it come to be, why did it come to be?
Debates like these will only ensure that the divide is further pronounced, and that both scientists and the faithful will continue to be suspicious and defensive around each other. Such was not the case between Father Georges Lemaitre and Albert Einstein, and I’m quite certain it was more advantageous than not for the two of them.
You know why this argument NEVER works? Why there will never be a conclusion to this debate? Because you CAN NOT debate faith. Creationists have their beliefs based on faith, not fact. There is no proof that the earth was created in 7 days. There is no proof that there is even a God. I ‘m not saying that there isn’t, I’m not an Atheist, I am a person of faith, but I don’t idolize a particular Deity and call his doctrine truth. I look at facts and reason. And with this debate, the simple fact is, that someone rooted in faith will never accept anything other, and someone rooted in science will not accept anything without scientific evidence, a.k.a. proof. This is a lost cause and will only continue to stir up the controversy. You want to learn about creationism? want your kids to learn about it? Send them to Sunday school. Keep church and state separate.
I believe that the reason that believers in evolution and believers in creationism butt heads is because they actually debate apples and oranges. I believe in both creation and evolution: Does that make me wrong? It probably adds to the ire of both sides. In a world governed by the laws of physics and biology, we perceive the world in a certain way. We have no idea what exists beyond what we perceive. That is a matter of faith versus what we can observe with the 5 senses (i.e., science). It is senseless to degrade the scientist, but equally as senseless to degrade the believer. We have no idea what the status of this world was prior to the biblical fall of man, only what is physically revealed to man. A God who is powerful enough to create a universe, a big bang, form the earth in 7 days is also powerful enough to shield evidence of such creation in desire for man to have faith. That may lead everyone to ask what is true/real? As Aquinas even recognized what is real is real. This means science is not futile either. It is necessary to understand how the physical world works.
I am glad they are having this discussion, Bill Nye has a lot to teach people who will listen to him. I think often times Christians forget that the Bible was never meant to be a science textbook. I am not saying the Bible is incorrect but people’s interpretation. Science and religion are two separate things. I am glad Bill Nye is going in with the right attitude. If you truly believe something you should have no problem defending it. I wish people who have no knowledge of science would stop trying to tell people who actually study science that they are wrong. I am not saying scientists have all the answers but they are not all there for a political agenda like some would want you to believe. it is true that there are people who make up things in order to make more money but the majority of scientists actually study science and write about what they observe. Charles Darwin wrote his theories based on things he observed in nature and not everything he said was right but he did make a lot of major contributions to the world of science.