Last night in classy performance, Bill Nye debated Ken Ham over the viability of the creation account. Both relied heavily upon their assumptions of the past in the debate, however Ken Ham admitted to this fact many times. Bill Nye provided some very good arguments against the creation account [most however, can be explained]; some arguments however, were ridiculous and beneath him. Ken Ham presented many arguments that could be problematic for the scientific community who accept evolution; however, many of these arguments will never be accepted by a scientist who assumes a human is no more than an animal.
I encourage you to watch the entire debate, however, you may not be willing to watch a 2 1/2 hr debate. If not, watch the first hour for a synopsis of the Christian view of interpreting science and the Secular Humanist view of interpreting science. The last hour and a half is true debate in which each debater is able to counter the other’s arguments.