The debate to be evaluated at hand is one that included two renown figures who are well respected in their fields of study. Involved in this meticulous debate was the mechanical engineer and science educator Dr. Bill Nye, along with Christian fundamentalist and young earth creationist Dr. Ken Ham. Dr. Ham believes that creation is a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era. Young earth creationist and professor of Biomimetic and Engineering at University of Bristol Stuart Burgess is renowned for his innovative ideas, which has led to some of his spacecraft being launched by ESA and NASA. Burgess extended his support of Dr. Ham via video stating that he “Fully believes that scientific evidence best supports creationism as the
…show more content…
Ham’s debate podium stood at a podium on a pulpit. As he talked about life on the Ark, too often did he seem to make the case for God. This would have been fine, however, in his case for God his portion of the debate may have been more efficient had he considered using stronger source than the one used. For example, when asked whether the nature laws function differently during the prehistoric age he provided a rather vague answer, something along the lines of “that’s just how it was back then”. One might respectively interject that if referencing scripture was the route that Dr. Ham wanted to take in answering that question, then he would have been more effective in using a passage such as Genesis 6:3. Surely this passage of scripture would have been of some benefit, as today’s lifespan of a human being seems to be significantly shorter than of those seen in the primitive time in Genesis. Therefore, I would ask Dr. Ham that if he believed it possible that there could have been a period a rapid degeneration that could have occurred after the fall to account for the older inner rings on a tree, etc. In addition to that question, could there be any scientific or medical explanation to coincide with the God 's comment in Genesis 6:3 "Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 …show more content…
Dr. Nye made it abundantly clear that he was a man of faith in evidence, and from fossil records to fulfilled prediction made by science it appeared he held the upper hand on Dr. Ham in regard to the age of the earth. However, because that was not the topic of the debate he will not receive a reward for his stellar presentation. Dr. Nye believe that the two theories (creation/evolution) were mutually exclusive, one talked about the origin of life from the top on down(creation); while the other speaks of it from the bottom up(evolution). He believes that evolution is the best theory for creation in the modern society and that from one cell all life
Ham’s debate podium stood at a podium on a pulpit. As he talked about life on the Ark, too often did he seem to make the case for God. This would have been fine, however, in his case for God his portion of the debate may have been more efficient had he considered using stronger source than the one used. For example, when asked whether the nature laws function differently during the prehistoric age he provided a rather vague answer, something along the lines of “that’s just how it was back then”. One might respectively interject that if referencing scripture was the route that Dr. Ham wanted to take in answering that question, then he would have been more effective in using a passage such as Genesis 6:3. Surely this passage of scripture would have been of some benefit, as today’s lifespan of a human being seems to be significantly shorter than of those seen in the primitive time in Genesis. Therefore, I would ask Dr. Ham that if he believed it possible that there could have been a period a rapid degeneration that could have occurred after the fall to account for the older inner rings on a tree, etc. In addition to that question, could there be any scientific or medical explanation to coincide with the God 's comment in Genesis 6:3 "Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 …show more content…
Dr. Nye made it abundantly clear that he was a man of faith in evidence, and from fossil records to fulfilled prediction made by science it appeared he held the upper hand on Dr. Ham in regard to the age of the earth. However, because that was not the topic of the debate he will not receive a reward for his stellar presentation. Dr. Nye believe that the two theories (creation/evolution) were mutually exclusive, one talked about the origin of life from the top on down(creation); while the other speaks of it from the bottom up(evolution). He believes that evolution is the best theory for creation in the modern society and that from one cell all life