home
RSS
Ken Ham: Why I'm debating Bill Nye about creationism
Bill Nye and Ken Ham will debate the origins of life Tuesday at the Creation Museum.
February 3rd, 2014
01:15 PM ET

Ken Ham: Why I'm debating Bill Nye about creationism

Editors note: Ken Ham will debate Bill Nye on February 4 at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, with CNN's Tom Foreman moderating. The debate will be livestreamed at CNN.com at 7 pm ET, and Piers Morgan Live will interview Ham and Nye on Tuesday at 9 ET.

WATCH TUESDAY NIGHT'S DEBATE HERE: http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/cvplive/cvpstream1.html

Opinion by Ken Ham, special to CNN

(CNN) - Public debates on evolution and creation have become increasingly rare. Several hundred well-attended debates were held in the 1970s and 1980s, but they have largely dried up in recent decades.

So I look forward to a spirited yet cordial debate on Tuesday with Bill Nye, the "Science Guy" of television fame.

I also look forward to the opportunity to help counter the general censorship against creationists' view of origins. While we are not in favor of mandating that creation be taught in public school science classes, we believe that, at the very least, instructors should have the academic freedom to bring up the problems with evolution.

Even though the two of us are not Ph.D. scientists, Mr. Nye and I clearly love science.

As a former science instructor, I have appreciated the useful television programs that he hosted and produced, especially when he practiced operational science in front of his audience.

He and I both recognize the wonderful benefits that observational, operational science has brought us, from cell phones to space shuttles. But operational science, which builds today’s technology, is not the same as presenting beliefs about the past, which cannot be tested in the laboratory.

For students, the evolution-creation discussion can be a useful exercise, for it can help develop their critical thinking skills.

MORE ON CNN: Bill Nye: Why I'm Debating Ken Ham 

Most students are presented only with the evolutionary belief system in their schools, and they are censored from hearing challenges to it. Let our young people understand science correctly and hear both sides of the origins issue and then evaluate them.

Our public schools arbitrarily define science as explaining the world by natural processes alone. In essence, a religion of naturalism is being imposed on millions of students. They need to be taught the real nature of science, including its limitations.

Nye, the host of a popular TV program for children, should welcome a scrutiny of evolution in the classrooms.

As evolution-creation issues continue to be in the news - whether it relates to textbook controversies or our debate - there is an increasingly bright spotlight on the research activities of thousands of scientists and engineers worldwide who have earned doctorates and are creationists.

On our full-time staff at Answers in Genesis, we have Ph.D.s in astronomy, geology, biology, molecular genetics, the history of science, and medicine. Yes, creationists are still a small minority in the scientific community, but they hold impressive credentials and have made valuable contributions in science and engineering.

I remember the time I spoke at a lunchtime Bible study at the Goddard Space Flight Center near Washington. I was thrilled to meet several scientists and engineers who accept the book of Genesis as historical and reject Darwinian evolution. They shared with me that a belief in evolution had nothing to do with their work on the Hubble Space Telescope. Why should our perspective about origins be censored?

Our young people and adults should be aware that considerable dissent exists in the scientific world regarding the validity of molecules-to-man evolution.

It’s an important debate, for what you think about your origins will largely form your worldview. If you believe in a universe that was created by accident, then there is ultimately no meaning and purpose in life, and you can establish any belief system you want with no regard to an absolute authority.

Ultimately, I have decided to accept an authority our infallible creator and his word, the Bible over the words of fallible humans.

Ken Ham is founder and CEO of Answers in Genesis (USA) and founder of the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. The views expressed in this column belong to Ham.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Belief • Bible • Creationism • Culture wars • Evolution • Opinion • Science

soundoff (4,336 Responses)
  1. Solon

    Creationism is abject dishonesty; Nye and his ilk do not have the honesty or integrity to admit their beliefs are based on faith and faith alone as they have the conclusion reached in advance then try to align "discoveries" with their pre-configured conclusion. Unfortunately, for the dishonest creationists, there is absolutely nothing scientific about creationism unless the ground rules of science are altered to allow supernatural causation.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:28 am |
    • ME II

      @Solon,
      Wrong guy. Nye is Bill Nye the *science" guy.
      Ken Ham is the Creationist.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:33 am |
      • Solon

        Sorry, I meant Ham...the dishonest goofy guy with the creationist museum where Jesus rides a dinosaur.

        February 4, 2014 at 12:10 pm |
    • Dyslexic doG

      solon g

      February 4, 2014 at 11:34 am |
    • geckopelli

      Don't be ignorant.
      Science has nothing to do with "belief" or "faith".

      It is a rigorous process that includes peer review and confrontation.

      EVERYTHING evolves– accept the understanding of believers.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:37 am |
    • rpavich

      I can tell by your comment that you have no idea of the argument that the Creationists forward in this debate. I encourage you to watch it so that you at least are familiar with their arguments.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:38 am |
      • Solon

        The creationist argument is supernatural causation which is not scientific. If you're going to claim that your imaginary god created something you should first prove that your god exists outside of your imagination.

        February 4, 2014 at 12:14 pm |
  2. Scott

    Debates are rare because there is nothing left to debate.

    Science and rational people do not believe in Creationism. Those of faith believe in it, regardless of fact. You can't debate someone who is willfully ignorant.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:28 am |
  3. Rich

    This guy claims to be a scientist? LOL

    February 4, 2014 at 11:25 am |
    • ME II

      Who?

      February 4, 2014 at 11:30 am |
  4. Another battle of wits between those who are unarmed

    The Bible tells us what God did, Science tells us how he did it. I don't get why this is so hard.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:25 am |
    • @Qcity

      “Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light‐years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.” – Carl Sagan

      February 4, 2014 at 11:27 am |
    • Lou

      No, the bible tells us what one tribe in Palestine about 5000 years ago thought THIER god did....

      February 4, 2014 at 11:32 am |
    • tony

      I think this is better put as:

      Science doesn't know what existed, or as what, before (in our universe time) the so-called big bang.
      Scienc, not god, is some of the way along explaining what has happened since.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:33 am |
    • Sorting mixed nuts

      "Science tells us how he did it."

      Sexist comment

      February 4, 2014 at 11:38 am |
    • Shaped

      Science and Religion can exist together. It's the people that want to teach creation happened word-for-word as told in Genesis that are the problem. Maybe those people didn't have a religion teacher that taught them not to take the bible literally.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:59 am |
  5. Theo

    I would be surprised if 10% of catholic priests believe in God.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:24 am |
    • Lou

      I can say that about all the people that go to church....

      February 4, 2014 at 11:33 am |
  6. Jack Sonberg

    "Our public schools arbitrarily define science as explaining the world by natural processes alone." - Nonsense, they explain the world by discovering the laws by which it works. Nothing says who created the laws. If you want to believe they were created by G-d, that's fine. Just don't dispute what His laws are.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:24 am |
  7. Al J Cat

    "Evolutionary 'belief' system"?. Hey Creation guy, what about the 'general relativity' belief system, or how about the 'gravity' belief system?Prepare to be schooled, something that should have happened to you decades ago

    February 4, 2014 at 11:23 am |
  8. Scott

    On one hand, I applaud Nye for helping teach science here. On the other hand, even having the debate gives an air of legitimacy to the Creationist point of view, which is entirely fabricated nonsense.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:22 am |
  9. pcg

    I personally believe evolution is on the right track but this subject is definately unsolved. There's no way to create even the simplest lifeforms in the lab from scratch let alone one so complex as to be pondering it's own creation. Close minded pro-science people are almost as annoying as the bible thumpers. I believe that good science requires out of the box thinking and you can't have that if anyone that strays from current dogma is censored and mocked. While I don't think this creationist guy is right he may have some well thought out points especially about the flaws in current evolutionary theory which would be constructive.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:20 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      In the mid 20th century, Dr. Sidney Fox synthesized amino acids, the basic building blocks of organic life, from inorganic compounds and thermal energy. What he made have been dubbed "protobionts". Protobionts exhibit some of the properties associated with life, including simple reproduction, metabolism, and excitability, as well as the maintenance of an internal chemical environment different from that of their surroundings.

      Can you give examples of flaws in current evolutionary synthesis?

      February 4, 2014 at 11:26 am |
      • pcg

        synthesizing amino acids is pretty far away from creating a self replicating lifeform. Generally what we describe as life.

        February 4, 2014 at 12:08 pm |
    • ME II

      @pcg,
      "While I don't think this creationist guy is right he may have some well thought out points especially about the flaws in current evolutionary theory which would be constructive."

      While new ideas are welcomed in science, provided the evidence backs it up. Ken Ham and AIG are notorious for using bad science to promote their version of Christianity and should not be given the time of day, unless he has some peer-reviewed data/research to back it up (and no, the "Answers Research Journal" does not qualify as a peer-reviewed science journal).

      February 4, 2014 at 11:43 am |
      • pcg

        Why does an idea have to be backed up by proof. Bill Nye can't conclusively prove that atoms and molecules can randomly join into a self replicating lifeform. Maybe in a hundred years we can do this but not today. The theory comes first then the proof.

        February 4, 2014 at 12:19 pm |
    • Dave

      The belief that if something cannot be created in a lab, it is too complex and therefore doesn't fit evolutionary models is called intelligent design. It's a belief not a theory (it cannot be tested) and carries about as much scientific merit as a Transformers movie. It's precisely this kind of mentality that Nye is claiming is killing science education, and he is right. The rational mind would say "we cannot do this at the moment, but we will strive to learn how we can." The irrational mind says "We cannot do this at the moment, therefore it proves our theory is flawed and a higher being must be involved." If we ever fall into the latter line of thinking, there will never be a major scientific breakthrough again.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:49 am |
    • igaftr

      pcg
      "There's no way to create even the simplest lifeforms in the lab from scratch "

      Really...no way? SO all of the steps we are taking that are getting us closer...a complete waste of time...OR is it more likley that we haven't been able to do it yet, and you just decided to show your ignorance in that if we can't do it now, then it can't be done. There may be a way, and we are trying to get there.

      February 4, 2014 at 12:16 pm |
  10. panthrotheist

    the simplest but most inspirational ,logical and scientific future solution for our conflicting faith in God is Panthrotheism,the belief that we are one and part of God

    February 4, 2014 at 11:19 am |
    • Dyslexic doG

      the father, the son, the holy spirit and me

      oh yes, that makes about as much sense as Thor throwing the lightning bolts

      February 4, 2014 at 11:24 am |
    • igaftr

      Panthrotheist means you think Panthro is god...Thundercats HO!.
      But otherwiase, your assumption there is a god is why it has nothing to do with science, as you have previously supposed.

      February 4, 2014 at 12:12 pm |
  11. Tim

    Nothing good can come of this. This is just another example of media wanting to create us versus them "news" that encourage us to be intolerant of people who don't think and view society like we do. It's rubbish and it's contributing to the incivility and political/social polarization that is hurting our republic.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:17 am |
    • Brian

      It could be. Or, it could be an attempt to have two people, respected in their particular areas, prove that people with differing opinions can still have a civil debate without comparisons to fascist dictators or personal attacks. As for the viewers, I'm not so sure.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:35 am |
  12. K-switch

    Funny that the same people who constantly accuse athiests of failing to disprove God are trying to disprove evolution.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:15 am |
    • Science Works

      The NTSB/gov. is moving forward all new cars will be required to talk to each other .

      February 4, 2014 at 11:19 am |
  13. Dave Godfrey

    This is the usual nonsense that Ken Ham repeats ad nauseum on his ludicrous website. Hopefully, when his Ark Project hits the financial skids in a few days' time, Ken and his band of merry fools will disappear from public view.

    February 4, 2014 at 11:14 am |
  14. Great Dogs

    I am a geologist and a secular humanist. I don't call myself an atheist, due to the connotations that word has, but I am a-theist, meaning I do not believe in any supernatural beings, including Zeus, Thor, Yahweh, God, Allah, Zoroaster, etc. I do not disparage religious people, but I do secretly feel sorry for them. Being who I am gives me total freedom to choose to do the right thing because it is the right thing, with no expectation of reward or punishment after I die. When I die, I no longer exist in any place except in the memories of those whose lives I had touched. What an incredible challenge, to know that I am in control of how I am remembered. But, on to the subject, evolution is the way we got here, and that's that.

    February 4, 2014 at 10:56 am |
    • Prom

      Most likely nobody will ever know you existed in 100 years.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:04 am |
      • Great Dogs

        And that's okay.

        February 4, 2014 at 11:04 am |
        • Prom

          If you theory is right. Which it probably isn't.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:06 am |
        • Dyslexic doG

          at least Great Dogs will be remembered as a sane an intelligent member of the human race. Prom will be remembered ad a gullible cultist who talks to an imaginary friend in the sky.

          I know which legacy I would rather leave.

          Thanks for your words BD.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:28 am |
        • Beth

          Thank you for sharing, Great Dogs, and know that you are not alone by a long shot. I think there are a goodly percentage of rational humanists like us out there, who are probably less vocal than the radical religious types due to persecution. Its a shame these things typically devolve into nasty posts, and that people can't respect each others right to believe (or not believe) as they see fit.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:30 am |
        • Prom

          I'm not religious, you dumb dog. Major fail on your part.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:31 am |
        • News

          Great Dogs is religious, actually. Secular Humanism is a religion. And dyslexic Dog just pretty much called him a cult member. 🙂

          February 4, 2014 at 11:36 am |
    • pcg

      I'm not religious either but it's funny you feel sorry for religious people because I'm pretty sure they would say they feel sorry for someone like yourself.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:07 am |
      • Tim

        I feel sorry for him. He sounds like an arrogant d-bag.

        February 4, 2014 at 11:08 am |
        • Great Dogs

          How am I arrogant? I should be allowed to profess my set of world truths just as anyone else can. I am not arguing faith, I just have none. And, yes, I am considered a good person by those who know me.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:16 am |
        • Tim

          That is arrogance. Why don't you demonstrate you are a good person? Instead of trash talking religious people and insisting you are so much better?
          Thanks for popping in to let everyone know how great you think you are.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:18 am |
      • Great Dogs

        I shouldn't have made such a broad statement, I feel sorry for some religious people. I know religious people who only do the right thing because of a fear of punishment in the afterlife. Would these people not be better off if they chose to do the right thing because if benefits others around them? I have known "religious" people who do the wrong thing, and it amazes me, their complete hypocrisy.

        February 4, 2014 at 11:13 am |
        • Meowsers

          I feel sorry for some a-theist people. I know a-theist people who only do the right thing so they can tell others they do the right thing and then imagine that makes them better than religious people.. Would these people not be better off if they chose to do the right thing because if benefits others around them? I have known "a-theist" people who do the wrong thing, and it amazes me, their complete hypocrisy.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:16 am |
    • small cat

      great dogs are more powerfull than cats,same with the way animals think. but if the dog is raised in violent environment it will be a big problem for the owner than a small cat in the same environment, a similar analogy but in an intellectual level,you have to consider the dispositons of the faithfulls in impoverised economies and societes where they dont have the privilege of religious freedom and liberation as you have,in poor countries ,physical survival is paramount and to find solace in religion is the easyiest way for phsycological hope,where you in oppulent countries does not need

      February 4, 2014 at 11:10 am |
    • Trying for a happy life

      Very we'll put 🙂

      February 4, 2014 at 11:26 am |
    • hondroid

      Atheism is an absolute statement which you can onlky make if you declare yourself to be God. If noyt then you default to agnosticism, meaning y9u are ignorant and cannot declare a true statement of purpose regarding the being nor non being of God. Choose your poison

      February 4, 2014 at 6:25 pm |
  15. Almighty3201

    I doubt very much this debate will be fair or equal! If it is fair Bill Nye is going to look like the complete fool he is!!! I give him much respect for making himself look stupid. Look for Mr. Nye to not give direct answers or none at all to many basic questions. Look for him to try to outwit Ken with his big words and "passing the shell" or buck from various science disciplines. But all the non-believers will come out still as "lost" as ever.

    February 4, 2014 at 10:43 am |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Post by 'Almight3201' consists mainly of multiple instances of the ad hominem fallacy.

      http://fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html

      February 4, 2014 at 10:47 am |
      • Almighty3201

        Blah, blah, blah...blahh... blah

        February 4, 2014 at 10:48 am |
        • Gary

          The lack of substance in your reply seals the deal, Alstupid one. You don't have a case, so you attacked the person.

          Keep blah-thering if you like, but your delusion's time has passed and your religion will die out.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:51 am |
        • Almighty3201

          I have so much substance that the moderator of the Noahs ark blog deleted almost all my blogs, because I quoted so much scripture to back my argument that the evil world we live in wouldn't even let my opinion stand! Typical prejudicial hate mongering against us Christians. Christians now are persecuted in this country when we used to be revered.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:56 am |
        • Creation Unknown

          Really, that's silly. Nye is not trying to force his beliefs onto you but you are onto him. I myself am a Catholic but I don't believe that the Pope and the Church are infallible. Genesis is more of a parable guiding my moral compass than a definite proof.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:57 am |
        • Carolyn

          Given the tone of your posts, sounds like you specifically deserve to be not only persecuted, but locked up. FWIW, I'm not an atheist, and I still think you're being a jerk.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:59 am |
        • Jahtez

          Everyone here has had their posts deleted, Almighty. It's nothing personal.

          If it makes you feel better to think you're being persecuted, okay. It's not true, but, whatever.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:06 am |
        • Almighty3201

          Carolyn – no offense, but it's time we took a stand for Jesus Christ! Do you believe in GOD? Well quit trying to be politically correct and take a stand!!! People are dying and going to hell every second and as Christians it's ourt job to help the lost. Obviously in our society today no one wants to be held by the hand, they need to be hit hard!

          February 4, 2014 at 11:23 am |
        • Billy

          "it's time we took a stand for Jesus Christ! "

          No problem, just take your stand on that side of the wall of separation.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:42 am |
        • Bob

          Al-not-mighty, 'nuff about the Jeebus nonsense already. It is foundational to your supersti.tions, and it is nonsense. Think about this: how is it that your omnipotent being couldn't do his saving bit without the whole silly Jesus hoopla? And how was Jesus' death a "sacrifice", when an omnipotent being could just pop up a replacement son any time with less than a snap of his fingers? Pretty pathetic "god" that you've made for yourself there.

          Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
          Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
          http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

          February 4, 2014 at 11:46 am |
        • igaftr

          a3201
          " because I quoted so much scripture to back my argument "

          As if "scripture" backs an argument.
          Scipture only means that a MAN wrote it down. This too is scripture, since you can read it.
          Quoting from what other men wrote down, with nothing to verify it, is a fools errand.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:53 am |
        • Almighty3201

          Jahtez – you have no idea, I refuse to start quoting scripture to prove my point anymore. All my sound arguments were deleted! people just cannot hear TRUTH anymore in this world....

          February 4, 2014 at 12:44 pm |
      • Topher

        An atheist complaining about ad hominems? Well, now I've seen everything.

        February 4, 2014 at 10:50 am |
        • Jahtez

          Why would you assume that Fallacy is an atheist?

          February 4, 2014 at 10:52 am |
        • Topher

          Because this isn't my first day on this blog.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:56 am |
        • Jahtez

          I've seen him call out both sides on their fallacies. A fallacy is a fallacy, no matter who is committing it.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:59 am |
        • Charm Quark

          Topher for you from Thomas Jefferson
          Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reasons can act upon them, and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of jesus.
          As true today as it was then. You are a walking ad hominem target and so justly deserve the attacks.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:08 am |
      • Almighty3201

        FYI creationist believe in science and chemistry and all the other various disciplines therein we just don't accept your scientific dogma! Further the word Science means knowledge, and it therefore has nothing to do with what you think "science" is!

        February 4, 2014 at 10:52 am |
        • Jahtez

          How would you teach creationism in school without using the word God and the Bible?

          I'm genuinely curious.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:55 am |
        • Sungrazer

          Translated: "We creationists believe in science when it doesn't contradict our religious beliefs. If it doesn't – man, these guys are smart and do well supported work! If it does – man, these guys are such fools, their work is not up to standard, and worse yet, it is a lie! We are quite happy to enjoy all the benefits of science but it is honorable to pick and choose what we accept or don't accept."

          February 4, 2014 at 10:58 am |
        • Jahtez

          I still haven't had an answer to my question. If they want it taught in public schools, I'd like to know how.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:01 am |
        • Almighty3201

          Jahtez – interestingly, I would teach both options and let the child or student decide. I would simply offer that there are two schools of thought on the origin of man and our overall existence. No matter how much evidence we gather, evolution still leaves many things unanswered, and some of these things will never be answered. Now arguably one might say the same about creation, and I actually totally agree. Leave it to the individual. We will NEVER see a monkey turn into a man. Before any hate mongers jump on this post, I know I know it takes millions of years... precisely my point...not ever observable or provable!

          February 4, 2014 at 11:16 am |
        • Doc Vestibule

          @Almighty3201
          But there are more than 2 sides.
          Virtually every religion has a creation myth.
          Should children be taught each and every one of them?
          Creation mythology is a subject for a comparative religion class, not biology.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:29 am |
        • igaftr

          " I would teach both options "
          And since there are more than two options , instant fail.
          Evolution has NOTHING to do with creation. Also, since there are SO many creation stories, would you teach them all?

          February 4, 2014 at 11:39 am |
        • Almighty3201

          @Doc – It's simple, firstly it's not a myth any more than evolution is to you. 1 account 1 story God created everything.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:40 am |
        • Jane

          No, it (Christianity) is a myth. And not even internally consistent with itself. It's on its way out. Get used to that. Your religion is on its way down and out. Evolutionary science won. Now there are just a fading number of clingers to the old Christian fables.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:49 am |
        • Doc Vestibule

          @Almighty
          You failed to address the salient point.
          What about the myriad other creation stories?

          February 4, 2014 at 11:50 am |
      • Topher

        Better flag Gary for the ad hominems.

        February 4, 2014 at 10:53 am |
        • Sungrazer

          Yes, it is ironic, and regrettable.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:59 am |
    • Sungrazer

      I don't know much about Nye, but I don't have much faith in him either. So what? Debates don't decide truth, and truth is not the only factor in winning or losing a debate. It sometimes plays little to no factor. We could set YOU up in a debate with say, Richard Dawkins, and you would get smoked, and it would be unanimous. What would that prove?

      February 4, 2014 at 10:53 am |
      • Good point, and

        then there are those who throw the word "truth" around like it's the sand on the beach that they can feel under their feet. Some people are awfully certain about some "truth", but when asked for evidence of a "truth", they are usually lost for words.

        February 4, 2014 at 11:00 am |
      • Almighty3201

        I guarantee I could smoke any evolutionist if given fair and equal opportunity! I mean ANY one!

        February 4, 2014 at 11:17 am |
        • Doc Vestibule

          If all of mankind came from 3 breeding pairs of humans in which all the males were 1st order relatives a mere 4,000 years ago – how can you account for all the ethnic diversity in our species?
          How did those 6 people manage to avoid the pitfalls of inbreeding, the founder effect, and genetic drift?

          February 4, 2014 at 11:21 am |
        • igaftr

          Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....the only way you could smoke the science backing evolution is to roll it up. Are you sure your name isn't Don Quixote, because you are sure tilting at a huge windmill there...thanks for the laugh.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:22 am |
        • Almighty3201

          I'm serious as a heart attack!

          February 4, 2014 at 11:37 am |
        • Sorting mixed nuts

          "I'm serious as a heart attack!"

          Sounds very Austintatious...

          February 4, 2014 at 11:45 am |
        • Doc Vestibule

          I too am serious.
          Please address the question I posed, Mr. Omnipotent Myocardial Infarction.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:52 am |
        • Almightydebater

          Seeing your last few posts make me a little unsure on whether you'd be able to successfully debate an evolutionist. First, you'd have to avoid referencing your scriptures, as that source of information has no bearing on scientific knowledge. If you wanted a debate on the authenticity and relevance of your scriptures, that would be a whole other topic. Next, you would need to take the emotion out of your posts. There's no way to tell how calm you are behind the computer, but with your generous use of exclamation marks and caps lock, it's hard to believe that you're in a sound emotional state. And finally, you'll have a hard time not using fallacies such as the burden of truth and straw man arguments without being able to use your scriptures as a source. Give us empirical evidence, take emotion out of it, and don't rely on a shaky source, and maybe, just maybe, you'll be able to debate with the big boys.

          February 4, 2014 at 12:05 pm |
  16. Dyslexic doG

    there is no god.

    all the rest that we argue about is just noise.

    the noise enables christians to duck and weave and dodge and obfuscate and lie and pout and whine and threaten and flee

    when all we need to know is that there is NO evidence for any god. not one iota. never has been, never will be. zero. nada. nothing!

    all the rest of the arguing about the stories in the Christian story book is just noise.

    February 4, 2014 at 10:40 am |
    • Alias

      Have I used this one yet today?

      1SA 31:4-6 Saul killed himself by falling on his sword.
      2SA 1:2-10 Saul, at his own request, was slain by an Amalekite.
      2SA 21:12 Saul was killed by the Philistines on Gilboa.
      1CH 10:13-14 Saul was slain by God.

      As often as things are inappropriately reported as abuse I've started saving a text file so I can report.

      February 4, 2014 at 10:43 am |
      • Phinehas Phog

        Alias have you read the verses you quoted? I don't think so or you would that what you are trying to prove a inconsistency in the Bible that doesn't exist.

        February 4, 2014 at 10:54 am |
        • Alias

          Do you think I read these?

          2SA 24:1 The Lord inspired David to take the census.
          1CH 21:1 Satan inspired the census.

          2SA 24:9 The census count was: Israel 800,000 and Judah 500,000.
          1CH 21:5 The census count was: Israel 1,100,000 and Judah 470,000.

          February 4, 2014 at 10:58 am |
    • Almighty3201

      That's why it's called faith Einstein! Evolution is faith too, but you cannot see that because you choose to not think for yourself. If you examined evolution to it's fullest capacity not only would you render it a "religion" in and of itself, but you would totally disagree with it.

      February 4, 2014 at 10:47 am |
      • Fallacy Spotting 101

        Post by 'Almighty3201' presents a form of the Secret Decoder Ring fallacy.

        And that should have been "its", not "it's", stupid!

        http://fallacyfiles.org/glossary.html

        February 4, 2014 at 10:56 am |
      • Dyslexic doG

        "faith": believing something without a single shred of proof.

        it amazes me that religious folk see this word as a badge of honor while any logical thinking person sees it as a mark of foolishness or insanity.

        quite a disconnect.

        February 4, 2014 at 11:06 am |
        • Almighty3201

          It amazes me how you cannot see how faith is required in evolution!

          February 4, 2014 at 11:18 am |
        • Meowsers

          I'm not amazed. Most atheist trolls on religious blogs are not that intelligent. doG probably uses more faith than average men and women, yet doesn't even realize it.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:21 am |
        • Madtown

          ...are not that intelligent
          ---
          Exceedingly-high irony alert.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:26 am |
        • Meowsers

          What is so ironic? Do you think atheist trolls are intelligent? Or like most people, do you think they are idiots?

          February 4, 2014 at 11:28 am |
        • Dyslexic doG

          LOLOLOL

          February 4, 2014 at 11:30 am |
        • Shelia

          God Created science it is clear you have no understanding what religious people believe but what the Media would have you believe...

          February 4, 2014 at 12:19 pm |
    • L

      "There is no God" is your opinion and belief. Sorry doggy.

      February 4, 2014 at 10:54 am |
    • Horus

      "There is no God"

      Prove it.

      February 4, 2014 at 11:10 am |
      • Dyslexic doG

        Unprovable theories:

        Zeus doesn't exist.
        Vishnu doesn't exist.
        Thor doesn't exist.
        Osiris doesn't exist.
        Adad doesn't exist.
        Tezcatlipoca doesn't exist.
        Apistotookii doesn't exist.
        Your god doesn't exist.

        – bostontola

        February 4, 2014 at 11:32 am |
        • Horus

          Right, you have no evidence. Just a big opinion.

          February 4, 2014 at 11:37 am |
  17. x1plus1x

    Evolutions VS. Creationism? Um.. Ya.. It's the Chicago Bulls VS. The Green Bay Packers in the World Series!

    Creationism attempts to explain how everything got here (god made the universe, basically in it's current form ~10k yrs ago). Evolution explains the diversity of life, it does not attempt to explain the origins of life. Darwin's book was The Origin of Species, not origins of life.

    How these two things are even able to be debated is a bit tough to understand, if I assume the debaters actually understand the topics. Ken Ham seems to think that evolution attempts to explain the origins of life, which it doesn't. Ken Ham seems to think that evolution is something that you believe in, or don't believe in. It isn't. It's something that you accept or don't accept. Ken Ham seems to think that "considerable dissent exists in the scientific world regarding the validity of molecules-to-man evolution". It doesn't.

    Ken Ham said: "Our public schools arbitrarily define science as explaining the world by natural processes alone." – um.. hello? We also "arbitrarily" define the number 2 as 1+1......

    February 4, 2014 at 10:38 am |
    • Bob

      Great post, x1plus1x. Many good points. Right on. I hope a lot of people read and appreciate what you said.

      February 4, 2014 at 10:43 am |
    • Sungrazer

      Ham is probably a liar. He is not unintelligent. He knows these things. But deliberate disinformation serves his purposes.

      It's true that evolution says nothing about abiogenesis. But evolution and creationism CAN be debated together because they clearly conflict. Creationism says all humans are descended from two people and that those two people had no other ancestors. Evolution says something quite different.

      February 4, 2014 at 10:49 am |
  18. CNN PLEASE !!!

    Get the L out of here.

    February 4, 2014 at 10:36 am |
  19. Dyslexic doG

    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people!

    – House

    February 4, 2014 at 10:29 am |
    • L

      Looks like doggie got out of his cage again. Bad dog! Bad!

      February 4, 2014 at 10:33 am |
      • Dyslexic doG

        go to L

        February 4, 2014 at 10:34 am |
        • Alias

          LOL

          Wait ...

          February 4, 2014 at 10:35 am |
      • Nelly

        Didn't I smoke you in the back of my Benz?

        February 4, 2014 at 10:41 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.