Bill Nye-Ken Ham Debate, Anti-Creationists and Preemptive Damage Control

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Ken Ham, Bill Nye, creationism, creation science, evolution, education

Atheists are in a tizzy over the debate, and have launched into damage control mode. Their assertions and accusations are amusing as well as defamatory and libelous.

The big debate between creation science apologist Ken Ham and Bill "I Play a Scientist on TV" Nye is schedule to take place on February 4, 2014 at 7 PM Eastern Time. Excuses are already being offered. One is that Bill Nye is na├»ve and going against an expert charlatan, so he doesn't stand a chance. Richard Dawkins thinks this debate is a bad idea as well.

Various articles, comments and so on around the Web are polarized. Some say that Nye will make Ham crumble to scientific facts (news flash: assertions are not "facts", Skippy). P.Z. Myers seems to agreeHumanists are saying it's a good thing for similar reasons, that "science" will win over Ham's faith-based assertions, which is more prejudicial conjecture (and there is a false claim in the previously linked article that attendance in the Creation Museum is declining, but that is also false). But most seem to be saying that Nye is making a big mistake. In addition, the claim is made that Ken Ham is an experienced debater, but that is not the case. Ham says that both are communicators, so in this regard, it should be on equal footing.

The making of excuses and accusations is typical of atheopaths, as the recent defamation against Ray Comfort and his Evolution vs God video is a good example. What they hope to gain by demonizing the person instead of using facts to support their position is beyond me. Think about it, are people really so galactically stupid as to say that men and women who believe in a holy God that hates lying will lie to get you to believe in God through the salvation that is freely given through Jesus Christ? Oh, please! Perhaps an indication of Ham's character is that he has not sued many people for libel and retired.

Having written some "Logic Lessons" and podcasts about logical fallacies, what I saw in the video practically screamed at me (as did so many things that I've read). Many of the comments were libelous and defamatory (we creationists get a lot of that, plus stalkers as well). They also included prejudicial conjecture, poisoning the well, appeal to motive, ad hominem, appeal to ridicule, assertion and more. Remember, gang, these people are smarter than we are just because they're atheists or agnostics, even though they cannot actually use the "reason" that they pretend to proclaim.

One of the faulty assumptions is that the debate is between science and theology, which is false.

Bill Nye made comments that showed several of these fallacies at one time. He conflated "science" with "evolution", demonstrating that he does not know the difference between the speculations and assumptions of historical science and the observable science that he did on television. Evolution is based on faith, not science.

In addition, he has made statements that I believe are outright dishonest. Nye also claims that belief in evolution is essential to scientific progress, but that, too, is not true. The hoary canard that "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" is also the opposite of the truth. In my opinion, Nye's religion is "scientism".

I am on record saying that Bill Nye will lose this debate because of his faulty understanding of the nature of science and because of his lack of logic. The whole point is not just about "winning" this or any other debate. Ken Ham said,
“A debate with Mr. Nye, nationally known for his children’s TV program and for promoting evolution, will be one of our major events in 2014 to highlight how children and teens are being influenced by evolutionary thinking," declared Ham. “This year, our AiG theme is ‘Standing Our Ground, Rescuing Our Kids.’ Having the opportunity to hold a cordial but spirited debate with such a well-known personality who is admired by so many young people will help bring the creation/evolution issue to the attention of many more people, including youngsters.”

Ham added, “I hope to show Mr. Nye and our debate audience that observational science confirms the scientific accuracy of the Genesis account of origins, not evolution.”