WEBVTT 00:12:43.881 --> 00:12:46.111 Oh, hi kids! I have an incredible message for you. 00:12:46.111 --> 00:12:48.715 Hey, can someone take Germa back to the petting zoo? 00:12:48.715 --> 00:12:50.670 Wow! That looks like fun. 00:12:50.670 --> 00:12:52.456 Now, where was I? Oh, yes. 00:12:52.456 --> 00:12:55.315 In 2014, kids 12 and under come free. 00:12:55.315 --> 00:12:57.785 Hey! Shouldn't the comets be in the Planetarium? 00:12:57.785 --> 00:13:01.042 For the entire year, kids 12 and under come free. 00:13:01.042 --> 00:13:04.123 Hey, T-Rex! You'd better get back to the dinosaur den. 00:13:04.123 --> 00:13:06.819 As you can see, it's a very exciting place. 00:13:06.819 --> 00:13:07.982 Now tell your parents! 00:13:07.982 --> 00:13:11.650 Kids 12 and under free in 2014 when accompanied by a paying adult. 00:13:11.650 --> 00:13:13.259 We hope to see you soon! 00:13:14.474 --> 00:13:17.511 Good evening. I'm pleased to welcome you to Legacy Hall 00:13:17.511 --> 00:13:20.252 of the Creation Museum in Northern Kentucky 00:13:20.252 --> 00:13:23.083 in the metropolitan area of Cincinnati. 00:13:23.083 --> 00:13:26.013 I'm Tom Foreman from CNN and I'm pleased to be tonight's 00:13:26.013 --> 00:13:30.201 moderator for this Evolution versus Creation debate. 00:13:30.201 --> 00:13:32.989 This is a very old question! Where did we come from? 00:13:34.219 --> 00:13:36.758 My answer is from Washington this morning by airplane. 00:13:36.758 --> 00:13:38.988 (laughter from audience) 00:13:38.988 --> 00:13:42.797 But there is a much more profound, longer answer 00:13:42.797 --> 00:13:44.979 that people have sought after for a long time. 00:13:44.979 --> 00:13:47.882 So tonight's question to be debated is the following: 00:13:47.882 --> 00:13:55.171 Is Creation a viable model of origins in today's modern, scientific era? 00:13:55.171 --> 00:13:58.009 Our welcome extends to hundreds of thousands of people 00:13:58.009 --> 00:14:01.841 who are watching on the internet at debatelive.org. 00:14:01.841 --> 00:14:02.938 We're glad you have joined us. 00:14:02.938 --> 00:14:05.047 Of course, your auditorium here, 00:14:05.047 --> 00:14:06.418 all of the folks who've joined us as well. 00:14:06.418 --> 00:14:09.988 We're joined by 70 media representatives from many 00:14:09.988 --> 00:14:11.668 of the world's great news organizations. 00:14:11.668 --> 00:14:13.589 We're glad to have them here as well. 00:14:13.589 --> 00:14:17.980 And now let's welcome our debaters: Mr. Bill Nye and Mr. Ken Ham. 00:14:17.980 --> 00:14:20.885 (audience applauds) 00:14:48.031 --> 00:14:50.199 We had a coin toss earlier to determine 00:14:50.199 --> 00:14:52.241 who would go first of these two men. 00:14:52.241 --> 00:14:54.372 The only thing missing was Joe Namath in a fur coat. 00:14:54.372 --> 00:14:59.112 But it went very well. Mr. Ham won the coin toss 00:14:59.112 --> 00:15:04.032 and he opted to speak first. But first, let me tell you 00:15:04.032 --> 00:15:05.695 a little bit about both of these gentlemen. 00:15:05.695 --> 00:15:08.178 Mr. Nye's website describes him as a scientist, 00:15:08.178 --> 00:15:10.480 engineer, comedian, author, and inventor. 00:15:10.480 --> 00:15:14.154 Mr Nye, as you may know, produced a number of award-winning TV shows, 00:15:14.154 --> 00:15:16.752 including a program he became so well-known for: 00:15:16.752 --> 00:15:19.148 Bill Nye the Science Guy. 00:15:19.148 --> 00:15:21.920 While working on the Science Guy show, Mr. Nye won 00:15:21.920 --> 00:15:24.694 seven national Emmy awards for writing, performing, 00:15:24.694 --> 00:15:28.647 and producing the show. Won 18 Emmys in five years! 00:15:28.647 --> 00:15:32.752 In between creating the shows, he wrote five kids books about science, 00:15:32.752 --> 00:15:36.918 including his latest title, Bill Nye's Great Big Book of Tiny Germs. 00:15:36.918 --> 00:15:40.449 Billy Nye is the host of three television series: 00:15:40.449 --> 00:15:42.748 his program, "The 100 Greatest Discoveries"-- 00:15:42.748 --> 00:15:44.916 it airs on the Science Channel. "The Eyes of Nye"-- 00:15:44.916 --> 00:15:48.278 airs on PBS stations across the country. He frequenly appears 00:15:48.278 --> 00:15:51.281 on interview programs to discuss a variety of science topics. 00:15:51.281 --> 00:15:55.280 Mr. Nye serves as Executive Director of the Planetary Society, 00:15:55.280 --> 00:15:57.700 the world's largest space interest group. 00:15:57.700 --> 00:16:00.528 He is a graduate of Cornell, with a Bachelors 00:16:00.528 --> 00:16:03.189 of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering. 00:16:03.189 --> 00:16:07.852 Mr. Ken Ham is the president and co-founder of Answers in Genesis, 00:16:07.852 --> 00:16:10.982 a bible-defending organization that upholds the authority 00:16:10.982 --> 00:16:12.858 of the scriptures from the very first verse. 00:16:12.858 --> 00:16:16.778 Mr. Ham is the man behind the popular, high-tech 00:16:16.778 --> 00:16:18.833 Creation Museum, where we're holding this debate. 00:16:18.833 --> 00:16:21.329 The museum has had 2 million visitors in six years 00:16:21.329 --> 00:16:23.293 and has attracted much of the world's media. 00:16:23.293 --> 00:16:26.054 The Answers in Genesis website, as well, trafficked 00:16:26.054 --> 00:16:29.165 with 2 million visitors alone last month. Mr. Ham is also 00:16:29.165 --> 00:16:32.578 a best-selling author, a much in-demand speaker, 00:16:32.578 --> 00:16:36.949 and the host of a daily radio feature carried on 700 plus stations. 00:16:36.949 --> 00:16:40.891 This is his second public debate on Evolution and Creation. 00:16:40.891 --> 00:16:43.852 The first was at Harvard, in the 1990s. 00:16:43.852 --> 00:16:46.521 Mr. Ham is a native of Australia. He earned 00:16:46.521 --> 00:16:48.993 a Bachelors degree in Applied Science, with an emphasis in 00:16:48.993 --> 00:16:52.613 Environmental Biology, from the Queensland's Institute of Technology, 00:16:52.613 --> 00:16:55.833 as well as a Diploma of Education at the University 00:16:55.833 --> 00:16:59.240 of Queensland in Brisbon, Australia. 00:16:59.240 --> 00:17:02.621 And now...Mr. Ham, you opted to go first, so you will 00:17:02.621 --> 00:17:05.575 be first with your five minute opening statement. 00:17:08.882 --> 00:17:11.120 Well, good evening. I know that not everyone watching 00:17:11.120 --> 00:17:14.442 this debate will necessarily agree with what I have to say, 00:17:14.442 --> 00:17:17.610 but I'm an Aussie and live over here in America 00:17:17.610 --> 00:17:20.120 and they tell me I have an accent and so it doesn't matter 00:17:20.120 --> 00:17:23.614 what I say, some people tell me. We just like to hear you saying it. (laughter) 00:17:23.614 --> 00:17:26.671 So...um...I hope you enjoy me saying it anyway. 00:17:26.671 --> 00:17:29.082 Well, the debate topic is this: Is Creation 00:17:29.082 --> 00:17:32.956 a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era? 00:17:32.956 --> 00:17:35.583 You know, when this was first announced on the internet, 00:17:35.583 --> 00:17:37.550 there were lots of statements-- like this one 00:17:37.550 --> 00:17:39.503 from the Richard Dawkins Foundation. 00:17:39.503 --> 00:17:42.088 "Scientists should not debate Creationists. Period." 00:17:42.088 --> 00:17:45.666 And this one from one of the Discovery.com websites. 00:17:45.666 --> 00:17:47.955 "Should Scientists Debate Creationists?" 00:17:47.955 --> 00:17:50.390 You know, right here I believe there's a gross misrepresentation 00:17:50.390 --> 00:17:55.001 in our culture. We're seeing people being indoctrinated 00:17:55.001 --> 00:17:57.620 to believe that Creationists can't be Scientists. 00:17:57.620 --> 00:18:01.503 I believe it's all a part of secularists hi-jacking the word "Science". 00:18:01.503 --> 00:18:05.497 I want you to meet a modern-day scientist who's a Biblical Creationist. 00:18:05.497 --> 00:18:07.377 My name is Stuart Burgess. 00:18:07.377 --> 00:18:11.613 I'm a professor of Engineering Design at Bristol University in the U.K. 00:18:20.471 --> 00:18:24.042 I have published over 130 scientific papers on 00:18:24.042 --> 00:18:28.046 the science of design in Engineering and Biological systems. 00:18:28.209 --> 00:18:31.772 From my research work, I have found that the scientific evidence 00:18:31.772 --> 00:18:35.974 fully supports Creationism as the best explanation to origins. 00:18:37.235 --> 00:18:39.938 I've also designed major parts of spacecrafts, 00:18:39.938 --> 00:18:41.829 launched by ESA and NASA. 00:18:41.829 --> 00:18:43.796 So here's a biblical Creationist, 00:18:43.796 --> 00:18:46.206 who's a scientist, who's also an inventor. 00:18:46.206 --> 00:18:48.672 And I want young people to understand that. 00:18:48.672 --> 00:18:51.932 You know, the problem, I believe, is this: we need to define terms correctly. 00:18:51.932 --> 00:18:55.999 We need to define Creation/Evolution in regard to origins 00:18:55.999 --> 00:18:58.884 and we need to define science. And in this opening statement, 00:18:58.884 --> 00:19:01.598 I want to concentrate on dealing with the word "science". 00:19:01.598 --> 00:19:05.216 I believe the word "science" has been hijacked by secularists. 00:19:05.216 --> 00:19:06.553 Now, what is science? 00:19:06.553 --> 00:19:09.942 Well, the origin of the word comes from the Classical Latin "scientia", 00:19:09.942 --> 00:19:12.387 which means "to know". And if you look up a dictionary, 00:19:12.387 --> 00:19:14.906 it'll say science means "the state of knowing, knowledge". 00:19:14.906 --> 00:19:17.002 But there's different types of knowledge and I believe 00:19:17.002 --> 00:19:18.459 this is where the confusion lies. 00:19:18.459 --> 00:19:21.699 There's experimental or observational sciences, as we call it. 00:19:21.699 --> 00:19:24.396 That's using the scientific method, observation, 00:19:24.396 --> 00:19:27.498 measurement, experiment, testing. That's what produces 00:19:27.498 --> 00:19:30.065 our technology, computers, spacecraft, jet planes, 00:19:30.065 --> 00:19:35.190 smoke detectors, looking at DNA, antibiotics, medicines and vaccines. 00:19:35.190 --> 00:19:39.161 You see, all scientists, whether Creationists or Evolutionists, 00:19:39.161 --> 00:19:43.608 actually have the same observational or experimental science. 00:19:43.608 --> 00:19:46.228 And it doesn't matter whether you're a Creationist or an Evolutionist, 00:19:46.228 --> 00:19:47.507 you can be a great scientist. 00:19:47.507 --> 00:19:49.694 For instance, here's an atheist, who is a great scientist-- 00:19:49.694 --> 00:19:52.700 Craig Venter, one of the first researchers to sequence the human genome. 00:19:52.700 --> 00:19:57.118 Or Dr. Raymond Damadian. He is a man who invented 00:19:57.118 --> 00:20:01.232 the MRI scan and revolutionized medicine. He's a biblical Creationist. 00:20:01.232 --> 00:20:03.668 But I want us to also understand molecules-to-man 00:20:03.668 --> 00:20:07.062 evolution belief has nothing to do with developing technology. 00:20:07.062 --> 00:20:11.168 You see, when we're talking about origins, we're talking about the past. 00:20:11.168 --> 00:20:13.669 We're talking about our origins. We weren't there. 00:20:13.669 --> 00:20:16.719 You can't observe that, whether it's molecules-to-man evolution, 00:20:16.719 --> 00:20:18.497 or whether it's a creation account. 00:20:18.497 --> 00:20:20.307 I mean, you're talking about the past. 00:20:20.307 --> 00:20:23.137 We'd like to call that Origins or Historical Science, 00:20:23.137 --> 00:20:25.338 knowledge concerning the past. Here at the Creation Museum, 00:20:25.338 --> 00:20:29.639 we make no apology about the fact that our Origins or Historical science 00:20:29.639 --> 00:20:33.218 actually is based upon the biblical account of origins. 00:20:33.218 --> 00:20:36.551 Now, when you research science textbooks being used 00:20:36.551 --> 00:20:39.000 in public schools, what we found is this: 00:20:39.000 --> 00:20:42.226 by and large, the Origins or Historical Science 00:20:42.226 --> 00:20:46.059 is based upon man's ideas about the past--for instance, the ideas of Darwin. 00:20:46.059 --> 00:20:49.310 And our research has found that public school textbooks 00:20:49.310 --> 00:20:53.267 are using the same word "science" for Observational Science 00:20:53.267 --> 00:20:56.504 and Historical Science. They arbitrarily define science 00:20:56.504 --> 00:20:59.197 as naturalism and outlaw the supernatural. 00:20:59.197 --> 00:21:01.975 They present molecules-to-man evolution as fact. 00:21:01.975 --> 00:21:04.004 They are imposing, I believe, the religion 00:21:04.004 --> 00:21:06.507 of naturalism or atheism on generations of students. 00:21:06.507 --> 00:21:09.888 You see, I assert that the word "science" has been hijacked 00:21:09.888 --> 00:21:13.140 by secularists in teaching evolution to force the religion 00:21:13.140 --> 00:21:15.432 of naturalism on generations of kids. 00:21:15.432 --> 00:21:18.600 Secular evolutionists teach that all life developed 00:21:18.600 --> 00:21:20.656 by natural processes from some primordial form. 00:21:20.656 --> 00:21:23.805 That man is just an evolved animal, which has great bearing 00:21:23.805 --> 00:21:25.413 on how we view life and death. 00:21:25.413 --> 00:21:28.600 For instance, as Bill states, "It's very hard to accept, 00:21:28.600 --> 00:21:31.727 for many of us, that when you die, it's over." 00:21:31.727 --> 00:21:34.835 But, you see, the Bible gives a totally different account of origins, 00:21:34.835 --> 00:21:38.242 of who we are, where we came from, the meaning of life, and our future. 00:21:38.242 --> 00:21:41.750 That through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin. 00:21:41.750 --> 00:21:44.872 But that God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son. 00:21:44.872 --> 00:21:48.704 Whoever believes in Him should not perish and have everlasting life. 00:21:48.704 --> 00:21:53.571 So is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era? 00:21:53.571 --> 00:21:56.253 I say the creation/evolution debate is a conflict 00:21:56.253 --> 00:21:59.417 between two philosophical worldviews based on two different accounts 00:21:59.417 --> 00:22:02.322 of origins or science beliefs and creation 00:22:02.322 --> 00:22:05.572 is the only viable model of historical science confirmed 00:22:05.572 --> 00:22:09.239 by observational science in today's modern scientific era. 00:22:10.239 --> 00:22:14.409 And that is time. I had the unenviable job of being the time-keeper here. 00:22:15.393 --> 00:22:17.240 So I'm like the referee in football that you don't like, 00:22:17.240 --> 00:22:20.129 but I will periodically, if either one of our debaters 00:22:20.129 --> 00:22:24.275 runs over on anything, I will stop them in the name of keeping it fair for all. 00:22:24.275 --> 00:22:26.905 Uh, Mr. Ham, thank you for your comments. Now it's Mr. Nye's 00:22:26.905 --> 00:22:29.329 turn for a five minute opening statement. Mr. Nye. 00:22:29.329 --> 00:22:32.016 Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here. 00:22:32.016 --> 00:22:36.129 I very much appreciate you including me in your, uh, facility here. 00:22:36.129 --> 00:22:40.069 Now, looking around the room I think I see just one bow tie. 00:22:40.069 --> 00:22:43.743 Is that right? Just one. And I'm telling you, once you try it-- 00:22:43.743 --> 00:22:47.339 oh, there's yes, two! That's great. I started wearing bow ties 00:22:47.339 --> 00:22:49.921 when I was young, in high school. 00:22:49.921 --> 00:22:52.361 My father showed me how. His father showed him. 00:22:52.361 --> 00:22:58.343 And there's a story associated with this, which I find remarkable. 00:22:58.343 --> 00:23:03.725 My grandfather was in the rotary, and he attended 00:23:03.725 --> 00:23:07.062 a convention in Philadelphia, and even in those days, 00:23:07.062 --> 00:23:10.698 at the turn of the last century, people rented tuxedos. 00:23:10.698 --> 00:23:14.643 And the tuxedo came with a bow tie--untied bow tie. 00:23:14.643 --> 00:23:16.725 So he didn't know how to tie it. 00:23:16.725 --> 00:23:19.934 So...wasn't sure what to do, but he just took a chance. 00:23:19.934 --> 00:23:23.708 He went to the hotel room next door, knocked on the door, 00:23:23.708 --> 00:23:25.864 "Excuse me? Can you help me tie my tie?" 00:23:25.864 --> 00:23:28.931 And the guy said, "Sure. Lie down on the bed." 00:23:31.315 --> 00:23:34.899 So...my grandfather wanted to have the tie on, 00:23:34.899 --> 00:23:38.426 wasn't sure what he was getting into, so he's said 00:23:38.426 --> 00:23:42.497 to have lain on the bed and the guy tied a perfect bow tie knot and, 00:23:42.497 --> 00:23:44.372 quite reasonably, my grandfather said, 00:23:44.372 --> 00:23:48.036 "Thank you. Why'd I have to lie down on the bed?" 00:23:48.036 --> 00:23:49.702 The guy said, "I'm an undertaker." 00:23:49.702 --> 00:23:51.699 (audience laughs) 00:23:51.699 --> 00:23:54.035 "It's the only way I know how to do it." 00:23:54.035 --> 00:23:57.475 Now that story was presented to me as a true story. 00:23:58.598 --> 00:24:01.499 It may or may not be. But it gives you something to think about. 00:24:01.499 --> 00:24:04.115 And it's certainly something to remember. 00:24:04.115 --> 00:24:06.830 So, here tonight, we're gonna have two stories 00:24:06.830 --> 00:24:12.397 and we can compare Mr. Ham's story to the story 00:24:12.397 --> 00:24:16.035 from what I will call the outside, from mainstream science. 00:24:16.035 --> 00:24:20.897 The question tonight is: Does Ken Ham's Creation Model hold up? 00:24:20.897 --> 00:24:22.637 Is it "viable"? 00:24:22.637 --> 00:24:26.209 So let me ask you all: what would you be doing if you weren't here tonight? 00:24:27.301 --> 00:24:29.718 That's right, you'd be home watching CSI. 00:24:30.887 --> 00:24:35.237 CSI Petersburg. Is that coming--I think it's coming. 00:24:36.959 --> 00:24:40.897 And on CSI, there is no distinction made between 00:24:40.897 --> 00:24:43.687 historical science and observational science. 00:24:43.687 --> 00:24:46.769 These are constructs unique to Mr. Ham. 00:24:46.769 --> 00:24:50.019 We don't normally have these anywhere in the world except here. 00:24:50.019 --> 00:24:53.685 Natural laws that applied in the past apply now. 00:24:53.685 --> 00:24:56.600 That's why they're natural laws. That's why we embrace them. 00:24:56.600 --> 00:24:58.906 That's how we made all these discoveries 00:24:58.906 --> 00:25:01.431 that enabled all this remarkable technology. 00:25:01.431 --> 00:25:05.174 So CSI is a fictional show, but it's based absolutely 00:25:05.174 --> 00:25:07.152 on real people doing real work. 00:25:07.152 --> 00:25:09.771 When you go to a crime scene and find evidence, 00:25:09.771 --> 00:25:13.133 you have clues about the past. And you trust those clues 00:25:13.133 --> 00:25:16.342 and you embrace them and you move forward to convict somebody. 00:25:16.342 --> 00:25:20.129 Mr. Ham and his followers have this remarkable view 00:25:20.129 --> 00:25:26.565 of a worldwide flood that somehow influenced everything that we observe in nature. 00:25:26.565 --> 00:25:32.931 A 500 foot wooden boat, eight zookeepers for 14,000 individual animals, 00:25:32.931 --> 00:25:37.124 every land plant in the world underwater for a full year? 00:25:37.124 --> 00:25:40.066 I ask us all: is that really reasonable? 00:25:40.835 --> 00:25:43.433 You'll hear a lot about the Grand Canyon, I imagine, also, 00:25:43.433 --> 00:25:46.396 which is a remarkable place and it has fossils. 00:25:46.396 --> 00:25:50.473 And the fossils in the Grand Canyon are found in layers. 00:25:51.134 --> 00:25:53.807 There's not a single place in the Grand Canyon 00:25:53.807 --> 00:25:56.731 where the fossils of one type of animal cross over 00:25:56.731 --> 00:25:59.196 into the fossils of another. In other words, 00:25:59.196 --> 00:26:02.565 when there was a big flood on the earth, you would expect 00:26:02.565 --> 00:26:05.833 drowning animals to swim up to a higher level. 00:26:05.833 --> 00:26:09.362 Not any one of them did. Not a single one. 00:26:09.362 --> 00:26:13.400 If you could find evidence of that, my friends, you could change the world. 00:26:14.600 --> 00:26:16.762 Now, I just wanna remind us all: 00:26:17.608 --> 00:26:22.045 there are billions of people in the world who are deeply religious, 00:26:22.045 --> 00:26:27.000 who get enriched, who have a wonderful sense of community from their religion. 00:26:27.000 --> 00:26:31.250 They worship together, they eat together, they live 00:26:31.250 --> 00:26:34.586 in their communities and enjoy each others company. Billions of people. 00:26:34.586 --> 00:26:39.001 But these same people do not embrace the extraordinary view 00:26:39.001 --> 00:26:43.667 that the earth is somehow only 6,000 years old. That is unique. 00:26:43.667 --> 00:26:48.756 And here's my concern: what keeps the United States ahead, 00:26:48.756 --> 00:26:53.251 what makes the United States a world leader, is our technology, 00:26:53.251 --> 00:26:58.669 our new ideas, our innovations. If we continue to eschew science, 00:26:58.669 --> 00:27:02.587 eschew the process and try to divide science 00:27:02.587 --> 00:27:05.800 into observational science and historic science, 00:27:05.800 --> 00:27:09.419 we are not gonna move forward. We will not embrace natural laws. 00:27:09.419 --> 00:27:14.667 We will not make discoveries. We will not invent and innovate and stay ahead. 00:27:14.667 --> 00:27:19.940 So if you ask me if Ken Ham's Creation model is viable, I say no. 00:27:19.940 --> 00:27:24.533 It is absolutely not viable. So stay with us over the next period 00:27:24.533 --> 00:27:28.337 and you can compare my evidence to his. Thank you all very much. 00:27:28.337 --> 00:27:30.385 (audience applauds) 00:27:30.385 --> 00:27:31.785 (moderator) All right. 00:27:33.900 --> 00:27:35.099 Very nice start by both of our debaters here. 00:27:35.099 --> 00:27:37.706 And now each of one will offer a thirty minute, 00:27:37.706 --> 00:27:43.904 illustrated presentation to fully offer their case for us to consider. 00:27:43.904 --> 00:27:44.924 Mr. Ham, you're up. 00:27:57.377 --> 00:28:00.260 Well, the debate topic was "Is creation a viable model 00:28:00.260 --> 00:28:02.994 of origins in today's modern scientific era?" 00:28:02.994 --> 00:28:06.789 And I made the statement at the end of my opening statement: 00:28:06.789 --> 00:28:09.456 creation is the only viable model of historical science 00:28:09.456 --> 00:28:13.271 confirmed by observational science in today's modern scientific era. 00:28:13.271 --> 00:28:16.714 And I said what we need to be doing is actually defining 00:28:16.714 --> 00:28:22.133 our terms and, particularly three terms: science, creation, and evolution. 00:28:22.133 --> 00:28:25.008 Now, I discussed the meaning of the word "science" 00:28:25.008 --> 00:28:28.494 and what is meant by experimental and observational science briefly. 00:28:28.494 --> 00:28:30.631 And that both Creationists and Evolutionists 00:28:30.631 --> 00:28:35.964 can be great scientists, for instance. I mentioned Craig Venter, a biologist. 00:28:35.964 --> 00:28:37.830 He's an atheist and he's a great scientist. 00:28:37.830 --> 00:28:41.025 He was one of the first researchers to sequence the human genome. 00:28:41.025 --> 00:28:46.531 I also mentioned Dr. Raymond Damadian, who actually invented the MRI scanner. 00:28:46.531 --> 00:28:52.140 I want you to meet a biblical creationist who is a scientist and an inventor. 00:28:52.140 --> 00:28:54.874 Hi, my name is Dr. Raymond Damadian. 00:28:54.874 --> 00:28:58.045 I am a Young Earth Creation Scientist and believe that God 00:28:58.045 --> 00:29:01.214 created the world in six 24 hour days, 00:29:01.214 --> 00:29:03.833 just as recorded in the book of Genesis. 00:29:03.833 --> 00:29:07.547 By God's grace and the devoted prayers of my Godly mother-in-law, 00:29:07.547 --> 00:29:11.010 I invented the MRI scanner in 1969. 00:29:11.010 --> 00:29:14.463 The idea that scientists who believe the earth 00:29:14.463 --> 00:29:19.329 is 6,000 years old cannot do real science is simply wrong. 00:29:19.329 --> 00:29:21.194 Well, he's most adamant about that. 00:29:21.194 --> 00:29:24.796 And, actually, he revolutionized medicine! He's a biblical Creationist. 00:29:24.796 --> 00:29:29.426 And I encourage children to follow people like that, make them their heroes. 00:29:29.426 --> 00:29:33.196 Let me introduce you to another biblical Creation Scientist. 00:29:33.196 --> 00:29:34.998 My name is Danny Faulkner. 00:29:34.998 --> 00:29:38.714 I received my PhD in astronomy from Indiana University. 00:29:38.714 --> 00:29:41.604 For 26 and a half years, I was a professor 00:29:41.604 --> 00:29:43.792 at the University of South Carolina, Lancaster, 00:29:43.792 --> 00:29:47.295 where I hold the rank of distinguished professor emeritus. 00:29:47.295 --> 00:29:51.207 Upon my retirement from the university in January of 2013, 00:29:51.207 --> 00:29:56.428 I joined the research staff at Answers in Genesis. I'm a stellar astronomer. 00:29:56.428 --> 00:30:00.272 That means my primary interests is stars, but I'm particularly 00:30:00.272 --> 00:30:02.714 interested in the study of eclipsing binary stars. 00:30:02.714 --> 00:30:05.830 And I've published many articles in the astronomy literature, 00:30:05.830 --> 00:30:07.497 places such as the the Astrophysical Journal, 00:30:07.497 --> 00:30:10.445 the Astronomical Journal, and the Observatory. 00:30:10.445 --> 00:30:16.570 There is nothing in observational astronomy that contradicts a recent creation. 00:30:16.570 --> 00:30:19.626 I also mentioned Dr. Stuart Burgess, 00:30:19.626 --> 00:30:24.299 professor of Engineering Design at Bristol University in England. 00:30:24.299 --> 00:30:28.882 Now he invented and designed a double-action worm gear set 00:30:28.882 --> 00:30:33.129 for the three hinges of the robotic arm on a very expensive satellite. 00:30:33.129 --> 00:30:36.294 And if that had not worked, if that gear set had not worked, 00:30:36.294 --> 00:30:38.541 that whole satellite would've been useless. 00:30:38.541 --> 00:30:43.209 Yet, Dr. Burgess is a biblical Creationist. He believes, just as I believe. 00:30:43.209 --> 00:30:45.714 Now, think about this for a moment. 00:30:45.714 --> 00:30:47.600 A scientist like Dr. Burgess, 00:30:47.600 --> 00:30:49.874 who believe in Creation, just as I do, 00:30:49.874 --> 00:30:51.859 a small minority in this scientific world. 00:30:51.859 --> 00:30:55.457 But let's see what he says about scientists believing in Creation. 00:30:55.457 --> 00:30:58.796 I find that many of my colleagues in academia are sympathetic 00:30:58.796 --> 00:31:02.093 to the creationist viewpoint, including biologists. 00:31:02.093 --> 00:31:06.208 However, there are often afraid to speak out because of the criticisms 00:31:06.208 --> 00:31:09.045 they would get from the media and atheists lobby. 00:31:09.045 --> 00:31:11.008 Now, I agree. That's a real problem today. 00:31:11.008 --> 00:31:14.464 We need to have freedom to be able to speak on these topics. 00:31:14.464 --> 00:31:18.128 You know, I just want to say, by the way, that Creationists, 00:31:18.128 --> 00:31:21.574 non-Christian scientists, I should say, 00:31:21.574 --> 00:31:23.743 non-Christian scientists are really borrowing 00:31:23.743 --> 00:31:26.863 from the Christian worldview anyway to carry out their experimental, 00:31:26.863 --> 00:31:30.209 observational science. Think about it. When they're doing 00:31:30.209 --> 00:31:32.827 observational science, using the scientific method, 00:31:32.827 --> 00:31:34.366 they have to assume the laws of logic, 00:31:34.366 --> 00:31:35.830 they have to assume the laws of nature, 00:31:35.830 --> 00:31:37.997 they have to assume the uniformity of nature. 00:31:37.997 --> 00:31:41.107 I mean, think about it. If the universe came about by natural processes, 00:31:41.107 --> 00:31:43.915 where'd the laws of logic come from? Did they just pop into existence? 00:31:43.915 --> 00:31:46.827 Are we in a stage now where we only have half-logic? 00:31:46.827 --> 00:31:49.604 So, you see, I have a question for Bill Nye. 00:31:49.604 --> 00:31:52.998 How do you account for the laws of logic and the laws of nature 00:31:52.998 --> 00:31:57.039 from a naturalistic worldview that excludes the existence of God? 00:31:57.039 --> 00:32:00.829 Now, in my opening statement I also discussed 00:32:00.829 --> 00:32:04.628 a different type of science or knowledge, origins or historical science. 00:32:04.628 --> 00:32:08.658 See again, there's a confusion here. There's a misunderstanding here. 00:32:08.658 --> 00:32:13.180 People, by and large, have not been taught to look at 00:32:13.180 --> 00:32:17.507 what you believe about the past as different to what you're observing in the present. 00:32:17.507 --> 00:32:20.350 You don't observe the past directly. 00:32:20.350 --> 00:32:24.685 Even when you think about the creation account. 00:32:24.685 --> 00:32:26.745 I mean, we can't observe God creating. 00:32:26.745 --> 00:32:29.561 We can't observe the creation of Adam and Eve. We admit that. 00:32:29.561 --> 00:32:32.137 We're willing to admit our beliefs about the past. 00:32:32.137 --> 00:32:35.339 But, see, what you see in the present is very different. 00:32:35.339 --> 00:32:39.620 Even some public school textbooks actually sort of acknowledge 00:32:39.620 --> 00:32:41.960 the difference between historical and observational science. 00:32:41.960 --> 00:32:45.556 Here is an Earth Science textbook that's used in public schools. 00:32:45.556 --> 00:32:48.599 And we read this. In contrast to physical geology, 00:32:48.599 --> 00:32:52.809 the aim of historical geology is to understand Earth's long history. 00:32:52.809 --> 00:32:54.310 Then they make this statement. 00:32:54.310 --> 00:32:57.094 Historical geology--so we're talking historical science-- 00:32:57.094 --> 00:33:00.897 tries to establish a timeline of the vast number of physical 00:33:00.897 --> 00:33:03.207 and biological changes that have occurred in the past. 00:33:03.207 --> 00:33:06.812 We study physical geology before historical geology 00:33:06.812 --> 00:33:11.368 because we first must understand how Earth works before we try to unravel its past. 00:33:11.368 --> 00:33:14.558 In other words, we observe things in the present and then, 00:33:14.558 --> 00:33:18.161 okay, we're assuming that that's always happened in the past 00:33:18.161 --> 00:33:20.441 and we're gonna try and figure out how this happened. 00:33:20.441 --> 00:33:22.252 See, there is a difference between what you observe 00:33:22.252 --> 00:33:26.230 and what happened in the past. Let me illustrate it this way: 00:33:27.337 --> 00:33:29.203 If Bill Nye and I went to the Grand Canyon, 00:33:29.203 --> 00:33:32.598 we could agree that that's a Coconino sandstone in the Hermit shale. 00:33:32.598 --> 00:33:35.156 There's the boundary. They're sitting one on top of the other. 00:33:35.156 --> 00:33:38.570 We could agree on that. But you know what we would disagree on? 00:33:38.570 --> 00:33:40.777 I mean, we could even analyse the minerals and agree on that. 00:33:40.777 --> 00:33:43.602 But we would disagree on how long it took to get there. 00:33:43.998 --> 00:33:47.190 But see, none of us saw the sandstone or the shale being laid down. 00:33:47.190 --> 00:33:49.499 There's a supposed 10 million year gap there. 00:33:49.499 --> 00:33:50.893 But I don't see a gap. 00:33:50.893 --> 00:33:53.477 But that might be different to what Bill Nye would see. 00:33:53.477 --> 00:33:57.292 But there's a difference between what you actually observe 00:33:57.292 --> 00:34:00.320 directly and then your interpretation regarding the past. 00:34:00.320 --> 00:34:04.663 When I was at the Goddard Space Center a number of years ago 00:34:04.663 --> 00:34:06.688 I met Creationists and Evolutionists who were 00:34:06.688 --> 00:34:08.291 both working on the Hubble telescope. 00:34:08.291 --> 00:34:10.153 They agreed on how to build the Hubble telescope. 00:34:10.153 --> 00:34:13.189 You know what they disagreed on? Well, they disagreed on 00:34:13.189 --> 00:34:16.630 how to interpret the data the telescope obtained 00:34:16.630 --> 00:34:18.131 in regard to the age of the universe. 00:34:18.131 --> 00:34:21.123 And, you know, we could on and talk about lots 00:34:21.123 --> 00:34:23.033 of other similar sorts of things. For instance, 00:34:23.033 --> 00:34:26.376 I've heard Bill Nye talk about how a smoke detector works, 00:34:26.376 --> 00:34:30.667 using the radioactive element Americium. And, you know what? 00:34:30.667 --> 00:34:32.879 I totally agree with him on that. We agree how it works. 00:34:32.879 --> 00:34:35.691 We agree how radioactivity enables that to work. 00:34:35.691 --> 00:34:37.544 But if you're then gonna use radioactive elements 00:34:37.544 --> 00:34:39.330 and talk about the age of the Earth, 00:34:39.330 --> 00:34:41.131 you've got a problem cause you weren't there. 00:34:41.131 --> 00:34:44.530 We gotta understand parent elements, daughter elements and so on. 00:34:44.530 --> 00:34:47.423 We could agree whether you're Creationist or Evolutionist 00:34:47.423 --> 00:34:50.890 on the technology to put the rover on Mars, but we're gonna 00:34:50.890 --> 00:34:54.156 disagree on how to interpret the origin of Mars. 00:34:54.156 --> 00:34:55.876 I mean, there are some people that believed it 00:34:55.876 --> 00:34:58.891 was even a global flood on Mars, and there's no liquid water on Mars. 00:35:01.152 --> 00:35:03.927 We're gonna disagree maybe on our interpretation of origins 00:35:03.927 --> 00:35:07.057 and you can't prove either way because, not from 00:35:07.057 --> 00:35:10.290 an observational science perspective, because we've only got the present. 00:35:11.336 --> 00:35:16.125 Creationists and Evolutionists both work on medicines and vaccines. 00:35:16.125 --> 00:35:19.330 You see? It doesn't matter whether you're a Creationist or an Evolutionist, 00:35:19.330 --> 00:35:22.664 all scientists have the same experimental observational science. 00:35:22.664 --> 00:35:26.134 So I have a question for Bill Nye: Can you name one piece 00:35:26.134 --> 00:35:28.887 of technology that could only have been developed 00:35:28.887 --> 00:35:32.356 starting with the belief in molecules-to-man evolution? 00:35:33.217 --> 00:35:34.892 Now, here's another important fact. 00:35:35.553 --> 00:35:38.762 Creationists and Evolutionists all have the same evidence. 00:35:38.762 --> 00:35:42.897 Bill Nye and I have the same Grand Canyon. We don't disagree on that. 00:35:42.897 --> 00:35:46.457 We all have the same fish fossils. This is one from the Creation Museum. 00:35:46.457 --> 00:35:50.235 The same dinosaur skeleton, the same animals, the same humans, 00:35:50.235 --> 00:35:54.456 the same DNA, the same radioactive decay elements that we see. 00:35:54.456 --> 00:35:59.092 We have the same universe...actually, we all have the same evidences. 00:35:59.784 --> 00:36:01.332 It's not the evidences that are different. 00:36:01.332 --> 00:36:06.115 It's a battle over the same evidence in regard to how we interpret the past. 00:36:06.115 --> 00:36:07.250 And you know why that is? 00:36:07.250 --> 00:36:09.731 Cause it's really a battle over worldviews and starting points. 00:36:09.731 --> 00:36:11.922 It's a battle over philosophical worldviews 00:36:11.922 --> 00:36:14.721 and starting points, but the same evidence. Now, I admit, 00:36:14.721 --> 00:36:17.389 my starting point is that God is the ultimate authority. 00:36:17.389 --> 00:36:21.427 But if someone doesn't accept that, then man has to be the ultimate authority. 00:36:21.427 --> 00:36:23.762 And that's really the difference when it comes down to it. 00:36:23.762 --> 00:36:26.587 You see, I've been emphasizing the difference 00:36:26.587 --> 00:36:29.364 between historical origin science, knowledge about 00:36:29.364 --> 00:36:30.620 the past when you weren't there, 00:36:30.620 --> 00:36:33.133 and we need to understand that we weren't there. 00:36:33.133 --> 00:36:36.244 Or experimental observational science, using 00:36:36.244 --> 00:36:38.412 your five senses in the present, the scientific method, 00:36:38.412 --> 00:36:41.021 what you can directly observe, test, repeat. 00:36:42.666 --> 00:36:44.120 There's a big difference between those two. 00:36:44.120 --> 00:36:46.727 And that's not what's being taught in our public schools 00:36:46.727 --> 00:36:48.566 and that's why kids aren't being taught to think 00:36:48.566 --> 00:36:51.600 critically and correctly about the origins issue. 00:36:51.600 --> 00:36:53.644 But you know, it's also important to understand, 00:36:53.644 --> 00:36:56.692 when talking about Creation and Evolution, both involve 00:36:56.692 --> 00:36:59.231 historical science and observational science. 00:36:59.231 --> 00:37:02.225 You see, the role of observational science is this: 00:37:02.225 --> 00:37:03.816 it can be used to confirm or otherwise 00:37:03.816 --> 00:37:07.375 one's historical science based on one's starting point. 00:37:07.627 --> 00:37:10.889 Now, when you think about the debate topic and what I have 00:37:10.889 --> 00:37:14.296 learned concerning creation, if our origins 00:37:14.296 --> 00:37:17.757 or historical science based on the bible, the bible's account 00:37:17.757 --> 00:37:21.073 of origins is true, then there should be predictions 00:37:21.073 --> 00:37:24.342 from this that we can test, using observational science. 00:37:24.342 --> 00:37:26.839 And there are. For instance, based on the bible, 00:37:26.839 --> 00:37:29.557 we'd expect to find evidence concerning an intelligence, 00:37:29.557 --> 00:37:31.918 confirming an intelligence produced life. 00:37:31.918 --> 00:37:35.093 We'd expect to find evidence confirming after their kind. 00:37:35.093 --> 00:37:38.056 The bible says God made kinds of animals and plants 00:37:38.056 --> 00:37:41.088 after their kind, implying each kind produces it's own, 00:37:41.088 --> 00:37:43.304 not that one kind changes into another. 00:37:43.304 --> 00:37:47.156 You'd expect to find evidence confirming a global flood of Noah's day. 00:37:47.156 --> 00:37:50.891 Evidence confirming one race of humans because we 00:37:50.891 --> 00:37:54.500 all go back to Adam and Eve, biologically, that would mean there's one race. 00:37:54.500 --> 00:37:57.627 Evidence confirming the Tower of Babel, that God gave different languages. 00:37:57.627 --> 00:38:00.166 Evidence confirming a young universe. 00:38:00.166 --> 00:38:04.095 Now, I can't go through all of those, but a couple of them we'll look at briefly. 00:38:04.095 --> 00:38:07.557 After their kind, evidence confirming that-- 00:38:07.557 --> 00:38:12.969 in the Creation Museum, we have a display featuring replicas, 00:38:12.969 --> 00:38:15.593 actually, of Darwin's finches. They're called Darwin's finches. 00:38:15.593 --> 00:38:18.260 Darwin collected finches from the Galapagos 00:38:18.260 --> 00:38:21.628 and took them back to England and we see the different species, 00:38:21.628 --> 00:38:24.494 the different beak sizes here. And, you know, 00:38:24.494 --> 00:38:27.187 from the specimens Darwin obtained in the Galapagos, 00:38:27.187 --> 00:38:31.180 he actually pondered these things and how do you explain this. 00:38:31.180 --> 00:38:36.562 And in his notes, actually, he came up with this diagram here, a tree. 00:38:36.562 --> 00:38:42.004 And he actually said, "I think." So he was talking about 00:38:42.004 --> 00:38:46.533 different species and maybe those species came from some common ancestor, 00:38:46.533 --> 00:38:49.504 but, actually, when it comes to finches, we actually would agree, 00:38:49.504 --> 00:38:54.160 as Creationists, that different finch species came from a common ancestor, but a finch. 00:38:54.160 --> 00:38:56.382 That's what they would have to come from. 00:38:56.382 --> 00:39:00.460 And see, Darwin wasn't just thinking about species. 00:39:01.244 --> 00:39:03.490 Darwin had a much bigger picture in mind. 00:39:03.490 --> 00:39:07.360 When you look at the Origins of Species and read that book, 00:39:07.360 --> 00:39:10.870 you'll find he made this statement: from such low and intermediate form, 00:39:10.870 --> 00:39:12.970 both animals and plants may have been developed; 00:39:12.970 --> 00:39:16.126 and, if we admit this, we must likewise admit that 00:39:16.126 --> 00:39:18.966 all organic beings which have ever lived on this Earth 00:39:18.966 --> 00:39:22.037 may be descended from some one primordial form. 00:39:22.037 --> 00:39:27.534 So he had in mind what we today know as an evolutionary tree of life, 00:39:27.534 --> 00:39:31.323 that all life has arisen from some primordial form. 00:39:31.323 --> 00:39:34.992 Now, when you consider the classifications system, 00:39:34.992 --> 00:39:37.570 kingdom phylum class or the family genus species, 00:39:37.570 --> 00:39:41.690 we would say, as Creationists, we have many creation scientists 00:39:41.690 --> 00:39:43.464 that research this and, for lots of reasons, 00:39:43.464 --> 00:39:47.057 I would say, the kind in Genesis 1 is really more at 00:39:47.057 --> 00:39:50.591 the family level of classification. For instance, there's one dog kind. 00:39:50.591 --> 00:39:53.405 There's one cat kind. Even though you have different 00:39:53.405 --> 00:39:55.567 generative species, that would mean, by the way, 00:39:55.567 --> 00:39:57.891 you didn't need anywhere near the number of animals 00:39:57.891 --> 00:39:59.236 on the ark as people think. 00:39:59.236 --> 00:40:00.826 You wouldn't need all the species of dogs, just two. 00:40:00.826 --> 00:40:02.501 Not all the species of cats--just two. 00:40:02.501 --> 00:40:06.788 And, you see, based on the biblical account there in Genesis One, 00:40:06.788 --> 00:40:10.257 Creationists have drawn up what they believe is a creation origin. 00:40:10.257 --> 00:40:13.130 In other words, they're saying, "Look. There's great variation 00:40:13.130 --> 00:40:16.212 in the genetics of dogs and finches and so on." 00:40:16.212 --> 00:40:19.436 And so, over time, particularly after Noah's flood, 00:40:19.436 --> 00:40:21.502 you'd expect if there were two dogs, for instance, 00:40:21.502 --> 00:40:24.671 you could end up with different species of dogs because 00:40:24.671 --> 00:40:28.714 there's an incredible amount of variability in the genes of any creature. 00:40:28.714 --> 00:40:33.170 And so you'd expect these different species up here, but there's limits. 00:40:33.170 --> 00:40:36.270 Dogs will always be dogs, finches will always be finches. 00:40:36.270 --> 00:40:41.856 Now, as a Creationist, I maintain that observational science 00:40:41.856 --> 00:40:45.714 actually confirms this model, based on the bible. 00:40:45.714 --> 00:40:49.236 For instance, take dogs. Okay? 00:40:49.236 --> 00:40:53.524 In a scientific paper dated January 2014--that's this year-- 00:40:53.524 --> 00:40:57.658 scientists working at the University of California stated this: 00:40:57.658 --> 00:41:00.544 We provide several lines of evidence supporting 00:41:00.544 --> 00:41:04.377 a single origin for dogs, and disfavoring alternative models 00:41:04.377 --> 00:41:06.836 in which dog lineages arise separately 00:41:06.836 --> 00:41:09.324 from geographically distinct wolf populations. 00:41:09.324 --> 00:41:11.546 And they put this diagram in the paper. 00:41:11.546 --> 00:41:14.203 By the way, that diagram is very, very similar 00:41:14.203 --> 00:41:17.827 to this diagram that Creationists proposed based upon 00:41:17.827 --> 00:41:20.715 the creation account in Genesis. In other words, 00:41:20.715 --> 00:41:22.934 you have a common dog ancestor that gives rise 00:41:22.934 --> 00:41:25.325 to the different species of dogs, and that's exactly 00:41:25.325 --> 00:41:28.134 what we're saying here. Now, in the Creation Museum, 00:41:28.134 --> 00:41:31.259 we actually show the finches here and you see the finches 00:41:31.259 --> 00:41:34.792 with their different beaks, beside dogs skulls, different species of dogs. 00:41:34.792 --> 00:41:37.547 By the way, there's more variation in the dog skeleton 00:41:37.547 --> 00:41:40.427 here than there are in these finches. Yet, the dogs, 00:41:40.427 --> 00:41:42.876 wow, that's never used as an example of evolution, 00:41:42.876 --> 00:41:45.789 but the finches are, particularly in the public school textbooks. 00:41:45.789 --> 00:41:48.963 Students are taught, "Ah! See the changes that are occurring here?" 00:41:48.963 --> 00:41:51.093 And here's another problem that we've got. 00:41:51.093 --> 00:41:55.624 Not only has the word "science" been hijacked by secularists, 00:41:55.624 --> 00:41:59.791 I believe the word "evolution" has been hijacked by secularists. 00:41:59.791 --> 00:42:03.860 The word "evolution" has been hijacked using what I call a bait and switch. 00:42:03.860 --> 00:42:05.161 Let me explain to you. 00:42:06.130 --> 00:42:09.766 The word "evolution" is being used in public school textbooks, 00:42:09.766 --> 00:42:11.826 and we often see it in documentaries and so on, 00:42:11.826 --> 00:42:15.265 is used for observable changes that we would agree with, 00:42:15.265 --> 00:42:19.244 and then used for unobservable changes, such as molecules-to-man. 00:42:19.244 --> 00:42:21.724 Let me explain to you what's really going on because 00:42:21.724 --> 00:42:23.410 I was a science teacher in the public schools 00:42:23.410 --> 00:42:26.125 and I know what the students were taught and I checked 00:42:26.125 --> 00:42:28.134 the public school textbooks anyway to know what they're taught. 00:42:28.379 --> 00:42:30.790 See, students are taught today, look, there's all 00:42:30.790 --> 00:42:33.595 these different animals, plants, but they're all part 00:42:33.595 --> 00:42:37.450 of this great, big tree of life that goes back to some primordial form. 00:42:37.450 --> 00:42:39.572 And, look, we see changes. Changes in finches, 00:42:39.572 --> 00:42:42.572 changes in dogs and so on. Now, we don't deny the changes. 00:42:42.572 --> 00:42:45.566 You see that. You see different species of finches, different species of dogs. 00:42:45.566 --> 00:42:48.274 But then they put it all together in this evolutionary tree-- 00:42:48.274 --> 00:42:50.499 but that's what you don't observe. You don't observe that. 00:42:50.499 --> 00:42:54.330 That's belief there. That's the historical science 00:42:54.330 --> 00:42:57.994 that I would say is wrong. But, you know, what you do observe, 00:42:57.994 --> 00:43:02.607 you do observe different species of dogs, different species of finches, 00:43:02.607 --> 00:43:06.708 but then there are limits. You don't see one kind changing into another. 00:43:06.708 --> 00:43:12.124 Actually, we're told that if you teach creation 00:43:12.124 --> 00:43:14.238 in the public schools as teaching religion, 00:43:14.238 --> 00:43:17.099 if you teach evolution as science, I'm gonna say, "Wait a minute!" 00:43:17.099 --> 00:43:21.283 Actually, the creation model here, based upon the Bible, 00:43:21.283 --> 00:43:24.404 observational science confirms this. This is what you're observe! 00:43:24.404 --> 00:43:25.787 You don't observe this tree. 00:43:25.787 --> 00:43:29.499 Actually, it's the public school textbooks that are teaching a belief, 00:43:29.499 --> 00:43:32.213 imposing it on students, and they need to be teaching them 00:43:32.213 --> 00:43:36.124 observational science to understand the reality of what's happening. 00:43:36.877 --> 00:43:40.660 Now, what we found is that public school textbooks present 00:43:40.660 --> 00:43:44.674 the evolutionary "tree" as science, but reject the creation "orchard" as religion. 00:43:44.674 --> 00:43:47.459 But observational science confirms the creation orchard-- 00:43:47.459 --> 00:43:50.796 so public school textbooks are rejecting observational science 00:43:50.796 --> 00:43:53.878 and imposing a naturalistic religion on students. 00:43:53.878 --> 00:43:56.938 The word "evolution" has been hijacked using a bait and switch 00:43:56.938 --> 00:44:00.403 to indoctrinate students to accept evolutionary belief 00:44:00.403 --> 00:44:02.341 as observational science. 00:44:02.341 --> 00:44:05.918 Let me introduce you to another scientist, Richard Lenski, 00:44:05.918 --> 00:44:08.675 from Michigan State University. He's a great scientist, 00:44:08.675 --> 00:44:11.161 he's known for culturing e-coli in the lab... 00:44:11.161 --> 00:44:15.431 and he found there was some e-coli that actually seemed 00:44:15.431 --> 00:44:22.939 to develop the ability to grow on cistrate on substrate. 00:44:23.400 --> 00:44:28.241 But Richard Lenski is here, mentioned in this book, 00:44:28.241 --> 00:44:30.908 and it's called "Evolution in the Lab". 00:44:30.908 --> 00:44:35.500 So the ability to grow on citrate is said to be evolution. 00:44:35.500 --> 00:44:39.842 And there are those that say, "Hey! This is against the Creationist." 00:44:39.842 --> 00:44:42.895 For instance, Jerry Coin from University of Chicago says, 00:44:42.895 --> 00:44:45.587 "Lenski's experiment is also yet another poke in the eye 00:44:45.587 --> 00:44:47.228 for anti-evolutionists." 00:44:47.228 --> 00:44:50.589 He says, "The thing I like most is it says you can get 00:44:50.589 --> 00:44:53.705 these complex traits evolving by a combination of unlikely events." 00:44:53.705 --> 00:44:57.167 But is it a poke in the eye for anti-evolutionists? 00:44:57.167 --> 00:45:01.371 Is it really seeing complex traits evolving? 00:45:01.371 --> 00:45:06.198 What does it mean that some of these bacteria are able to grow on citrate? 00:45:06.198 --> 00:45:10.240 Let me introduce you to another biblical Creationist, who is a scientist. 00:45:10.240 --> 00:45:12.761 Hi, my name's Dr. Andrew Fabich. 00:45:12.761 --> 00:45:16.450 I got my PhD from University of Oklahoma in Microbiology. 00:45:16.450 --> 00:45:20.075 I teach at Liberty University and I do research on e-coli in the intestine. 00:45:20.075 --> 00:45:25.660 I've published it in secular journals from the American Society for Microbiology, 00:45:25.660 --> 00:45:30.971 including infection immunity and applied environmental microbiology 00:45:30.971 --> 00:45:32.361 as well as several others. 00:45:32.361 --> 00:45:35.320 My work has been cited even in the past year in the journals Nature, 00:45:35.320 --> 00:45:38.700 Science Translational Medicine, Public Library of Science, 00:45:38.700 --> 00:45:41.660 Public Library of Science Genetics. It's cited regularly 00:45:41.660 --> 00:45:45.905 in those journals and while I was taught nothing but evolution, 00:45:45.905 --> 00:45:48.142 I don't accept that position. 00:45:48.142 --> 00:45:50.263 I do my research from a creation perspective. 00:45:50.263 --> 00:45:54.365 When I look at the evidence that people cite as e-coli, 00:45:54.365 --> 00:46:00.657 supposedly, evolving over 30 years, over 30,000 generations in the lab, 00:46:00.657 --> 00:46:04.410 and people say that it is now able to grow on citrate, 00:46:04.410 --> 00:46:06.199 I don't deny that it grows on citrate, 00:46:06.199 --> 00:46:08.761 but it's not any kind of new information. 00:46:08.761 --> 00:46:12.042 The information's already there and it's just a switch 00:46:12.042 --> 00:46:15.578 that gets turned on and off and that's what they reported in there. 00:46:15.578 --> 00:46:17.238 There's nothing new. 00:46:17.238 --> 00:46:20.341 See, students need to be told what's really going on here. 00:46:20.341 --> 00:46:24.372 Certainly there's change, but it's not change necessary for molecules-to-man. 00:46:24.372 --> 00:46:27.130 Now, we could look at other predictions. 00:46:27.130 --> 00:46:29.264 What about evidence confirming one race? 00:46:29.264 --> 00:46:32.394 Well, when we look at the human population we see lots of differences. 00:46:32.394 --> 00:46:35.298 But based on Darwin's ideas of human evolution, 00:46:35.298 --> 00:46:37.629 as presented in The Descent of Man, I mean, 00:46:37.629 --> 00:46:39.588 Darwin did teach in The Descent of Man there were 00:46:39.588 --> 00:46:41.461 lower races and higher races. 00:46:41.461 --> 00:46:44.542 Would you believe, that back in the 1900s, one of the most 00:46:44.542 --> 00:46:49.433 popular biology textbooks used in the public schools in America taught this: 00:46:49.433 --> 00:46:51.808 At the present time there exists upon Earth 00:46:51.808 --> 00:46:55.060 five races or varieties of man...and finally, 00:46:55.060 --> 00:46:58.195 the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented 00:46:58.195 --> 00:47:01.107 by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America. 00:47:01.107 --> 00:47:03.098 Can you imagine if that was in the public schools today? 00:47:03.098 --> 00:47:06.500 And, yet, that's what was taught, but it was based on 00:47:06.500 --> 00:47:11.204 Darwin's ideas that are wrong. You have a wrong foundation. 00:47:11.204 --> 00:47:12.558 You're gonna have a wrong worldview. 00:47:12.558 --> 00:47:15.765 Now, had they started from the Bible, and from 00:47:15.765 --> 00:47:18.251 the creation account in the Bible, what does it teach? 00:47:19.153 --> 00:47:21.251 Well, we're all descendants of Adam and Eve. 00:47:21.251 --> 00:47:24.152 We go through the Tower of Babel, different languages, 00:47:24.152 --> 00:47:26.275 so different people groups formed distinct characteristics. 00:47:26.275 --> 00:47:29.217 But we'd expect, we'd say, you know what, 00:47:29.217 --> 00:47:31.187 that means there's biologically only one race of humans. 00:47:31.187 --> 00:47:33.696 Well, I mentioned Dr. Venter before. 00:47:33.696 --> 00:47:36.819 And he was a researcher with the human genome project. 00:47:36.819 --> 00:47:39.464 And you'll remember, in the year 2000, this was headline news, 00:47:39.464 --> 00:47:42.053 and what we read was this: they had put together 00:47:42.053 --> 00:47:44.219 a draft of the entire sequence of the human genome 00:47:44.219 --> 00:47:48.356 and unanimously declared, there is only one race - the human race. 00:47:48.356 --> 00:47:49.700 Wow! Who would have guessed? 00:47:49.700 --> 00:47:52.539 But you see there we have observational science 00:47:52.539 --> 00:47:54.709 confirming the Creation account, 00:47:54.709 --> 00:47:58.028 not confirming at all Darwin's ideas. 00:47:58.444 --> 00:48:00.090 Now, there's much more that can be said 00:48:00.090 --> 00:48:01.215 on each of these topics. 00:48:01.215 --> 00:48:04.446 Obviously, you can't do that in a short time like this. 00:48:04.723 --> 00:48:06.286 And you could do a lot more research. 00:48:06.286 --> 00:48:09.372 I suggest you visit our website at Answers in Genesis 00:48:09.372 --> 00:48:10.853 for a lot more information. 00:48:10.853 --> 00:48:14.658 So, the debate topic: Is creation a viable model 00:48:14.658 --> 00:48:16.677 of origins in today's scientific era? 00:48:17.169 --> 00:48:19.637 I said, we need to define the terms, 00:48:19.637 --> 00:48:21.304 and particularly, the term science 00:48:21.304 --> 00:48:23.945 and the term evolution. And I believe we need 00:48:23.945 --> 00:48:25.932 to understand how they are being used to impose 00:48:25.932 --> 00:48:29.565 an anti-God religion on generations of unsuspecting students. 00:48:29.934 --> 00:48:32.082 You see, I keep emphasizing we do need to 00:48:32.082 --> 00:48:34.166 understand the difference between experimental or 00:48:34.166 --> 00:48:36.943 observational science and historical science. 00:48:36.943 --> 00:48:37.909 And you know what? 00:48:38.185 --> 00:48:39.991 The secularists don't like me doing this 00:48:39.991 --> 00:48:41.523 because they don't want to admit 00:48:41.523 --> 00:48:43.687 that there's a belief aspect to what they're saying. 00:48:43.687 --> 00:48:45.989 And there is. And they can't get away from it. 00:48:46.235 --> 00:48:48.750 Let me illustrate this with a statement from Bill Nye. 00:48:49.058 --> 00:48:50.741 "You can show the Earth is not flat. 00:48:50.741 --> 00:48:52.942 You can show the Earth is not 10,000 years old." 00:48:52.942 --> 00:48:55.574 By the way, I agree. You can show the Earth is not flat. 00:48:55.574 --> 00:48:58.638 There's a video from the Galileo spacecraft showing 00:48:58.638 --> 00:49:00.688 the Earth, and speeded up of course, but spinning. 00:49:00.688 --> 00:49:02.784 You can see it's a sphere. You can observe that. 00:49:03.076 --> 00:49:05.227 You can't observe the age of the Earth. 00:49:05.519 --> 00:49:08.249 You don't see that. You see again, I emphasize, 00:49:08.249 --> 00:49:10.358 there's a big difference between historical science, 00:49:10.512 --> 00:49:13.558 talking about the past, and observational science, 00:49:13.558 --> 00:49:15.308 talking about the present. 00:49:15.738 --> 00:49:18.196 And I believe what's happening is this, that students are being 00:49:18.196 --> 00:49:20.384 indoctrinated by the confusion of terms: 00:49:20.384 --> 00:49:22.884 the hijacking of the word science and the hijacking 00:49:22.884 --> 00:49:25.571 of the word evolution in a bait-and-switch. 00:49:26.140 --> 00:49:29.267 Let me illustrate further with this video clip. 00:49:29.267 --> 00:49:31.945 Because here I assert that Bill Nye is equating 00:49:31.945 --> 00:49:34.561 observational science with historical science. 00:49:34.561 --> 00:49:37.697 And I also say it's not a mystery when you understand the difference. 00:49:37.697 --> 00:49:41.590 Howie, people with these deeply held religious beliefs, 00:49:41.590 --> 00:49:45.293 they embrace that whole literal interpretation 00:49:45.293 --> 00:49:49.492 of the Bible as written in English, as a worldview. 00:49:49.492 --> 00:49:53.945 And, at the same time, they accept aspirin, 00:49:53.945 --> 00:49:58.988 antibiotic drugs, airplanes, but they're able 00:49:58.988 --> 00:50:01.496 to hold these two worldviews. And this is a mystery. 00:50:01.496 --> 00:50:04.496 Actually, I suggest to you it's not a mystery. 00:50:04.496 --> 00:50:06.557 You see, when I'm talking about antibiotics, 00:50:06.557 --> 00:50:09.230 aspirin, smoke detectors, jet planes, 00:50:09.230 --> 00:50:11.858 that's Ken Ham the Observational Science Bloke. 00:50:11.858 --> 00:50:15.403 I'm an Australian. We call guy's "blokes", okay? 00:50:15.403 --> 00:50:18.394 But when you're talking about creation and thousands of years 00:50:18.394 --> 00:50:19.559 of the age of the Earth, 00:50:19.559 --> 00:50:21.238 that's Ken Ham the Historical Science Bloke. 00:50:21.238 --> 00:50:22.159 I'm willing to admit that. 00:50:22.159 --> 00:50:24.523 Now, when Bill Nye's talking about aspirin, 00:50:24.523 --> 00:50:26.519 antibiotics, jet planes, smoke detectors, 00:50:26.519 --> 00:50:27.811 he does a great job at that. 00:50:27.811 --> 00:50:29.695 I used to enjoy watching him on TV too. 00:50:29.695 --> 00:50:32.892 That's Bill Nye the Observational Science Guy. 00:50:32.892 --> 00:50:34.858 But when he's talking about evolution and millions of years, 00:50:34.858 --> 00:50:39.157 I'm challenging him that that's Bill Nye the Historical Science Guy. 00:50:39.157 --> 00:50:42.688 And I challenge the evolutionist to admit the belief 00:50:42.688 --> 00:50:46.405 aspects of their particular worldview. 00:50:46.405 --> 00:50:49.635 Now, at the Creation Museum, we're only too willing 00:50:49.635 --> 00:50:51.469 to admit our beliefs based upon the Bible, 00:50:51.469 --> 00:50:53.778 but we also teach people the difference between 00:50:53.778 --> 00:50:55.932 beliefs and what one can actually observe 00:50:55.932 --> 00:50:57.445 and experiment with in the present. 00:50:57.445 --> 00:50:59.613 I believe we're teaching people to think critically 00:50:59.613 --> 00:51:03.210 and to think in the right terms about science. 00:51:03.210 --> 00:51:05.190 I believe it's the creationists that should be 00:51:05.190 --> 00:51:08.438 educating the kids out there because we're teaching 00:51:08.438 --> 00:51:11.604 them the right way to think. You know, we admit it. 00:51:11.604 --> 00:51:13.856 Our origins of historical science is based upon the Bible, 00:51:13.856 --> 00:51:16.157 but I'm just challenging evolutionists to admit 00:51:16.157 --> 00:51:17.693 the belief aspects of evolution 00:51:17.693 --> 00:51:20.188 and be upfront about the difference here. 00:51:20.188 --> 00:51:22.405 As I said, I'm only too willing to admit 00:51:22.405 --> 00:51:24.827 my historical science based on the Bible. 00:51:24.827 --> 00:51:30.027 And let me further go on to define the term "creation" as we use it. 00:51:30.027 --> 00:51:34.137 By creation, we mean, here at Answers in Genesis 00:51:34.137 --> 00:51:37.780 and the Creation Museum, we mean the account based on the Bible. 00:51:37.780 --> 00:51:41.135 Yes, I take Genesis as literal history, as Jesus did. 00:51:41.135 --> 00:51:44.775 And, here at the Creation Museum, we walk people through that history. 00:51:44.775 --> 00:51:47.635 We walk them through creation, the perfect creation. 00:51:47.635 --> 00:51:51.738 That God made Adam and Eve, land animal kinds, sea-creatures and so on. 00:51:51.738 --> 00:51:54.436 And then sin and death entered the world. 00:51:54.436 --> 00:51:56.499 There was no death before sin. 00:51:56.499 --> 00:52:00.590 That means how can you have billions of dead things before man sinned? 00:52:04.834 --> 00:52:06.760 And then, the catastrophe of Noah's flood. If there was a global flood, 00:52:06.760 --> 00:52:08.918 you'd expect to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. 00:52:08.918 --> 00:52:12.843 Had to say that because a lot of our supporters would want me to. 00:52:12.843 --> 00:52:17.925 And what do you find?--Billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. 00:52:17.925 --> 00:52:22.338 Confusion, the tower of Babel. God gave different languages so you get different people groups. 00:52:22.338 --> 00:52:28.222 So this is the geological, astronomical, anthropological, biological history as recorded in the Bible. 00:52:28.222 --> 00:52:31.344 So this is concerning what happened in the past that explains the present. 00:52:31.344 --> 00:52:36.865 And then, of course, that God's Son stepped into history to be Jesus Christ, the God-Man 00:52:36.865 --> 00:52:39.331 to die on the cross, be raised from the dead. And one day there's going to be 00:52:39.331 --> 00:52:42.336 a new heavens and a new earth to come. And, you know, not only 00:52:42.336 --> 00:52:47.389 is this an understanding of history to explain the 00:52:47.389 --> 00:52:50.251 geology, biology, astronomy, and so on to connect the present to the past. 00:52:50.251 --> 00:52:53.901 But it's also a foundation for our whole world view. 00:52:53.901 --> 00:52:58.233 For instance, in Matthew 19, when Jesus was asked about marriage, he said, 00:52:58.233 --> 00:53:02.660 "Have you not read He who made them at the beginning made them male and female?" 00:53:02.660 --> 00:53:06.398 And said, "For this cause shall a man leave his mother and father and be joined to his wife. And they'll be one flesh." 00:53:06.398 --> 00:53:12.055 He quoted from Genesis as literal history--Genesis 1 and 2. God invented marriage, by the way. 00:53:12.055 --> 00:53:15.467 That's where marriage comes from. And it's to be a man and a woman. 00:53:15.467 --> 00:53:19.557 And not only marriage. Ultimately, every single Biblical doctrine of theology 00:53:19.557 --> 00:53:22.166 directly or indirectly, is founded in Genesis. 00:53:22.166 --> 00:53:25.175 Why is there sin in the world? Genesis. 00:53:25.175 --> 00:53:26.844 Why is there death? Genesis. 00:53:26.844 --> 00:53:28.802 Why do we wear clothes? Genesis. 00:53:28.802 --> 00:53:30.563 Why did Jesus die on the cross? Genesis. 00:53:30.563 --> 00:53:33.188 It's a very important book. It's foundational to all Christian doctrine. 00:53:33.188 --> 00:53:36.505 And you see, when we look at that, what I call the seven C's of History 00:53:36.505 --> 00:53:38.458 that we walk people through here at the museum, 00:53:38.458 --> 00:53:40.927 think about how it all connects together--a perfect creation. 00:53:40.927 --> 00:53:43.135 It'll be perfect again in the future. 00:53:43.135 --> 00:53:46.923 Sin and death--end of the world. That's why God's son died on the cross 00:53:46.923 --> 00:53:50.003 to conquer death and offer a free gift of salvation. 00:53:50.003 --> 00:53:53.900 The flood of Noah's day, a reminder that the flood was a 00:53:53.900 --> 00:53:56.177 judgement because of man's wickedness but at the same time 00:53:56.177 --> 00:53:58.238 a message of God's grace and salvation. 00:53:58.238 --> 00:54:00.918 As Noah and his family had to go through a door to be saved, 00:54:00.918 --> 00:54:03.123 so we need to go through a door to be saved. 00:54:03.123 --> 00:54:05.867 Jesus Christ said, "I am the door. By me, if any man 00:54:05.867 --> 00:54:08.633 enter in, he'll be saved. And we make no apology 00:54:08.633 --> 00:54:11.059 about the fact that what we're on about is this: 00:54:11.059 --> 00:54:13.465 "If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and 00:54:13.465 --> 00:54:15.584 believe in your heart God has raised him from the dead, 00:54:15.584 --> 00:54:17.925 you'll be saved. Now, as soon as I said that, 00:54:17.925 --> 00:54:21.003 see if people say, "See, if you allow creation in schools, 00:54:21.003 --> 00:54:23.005 for instance, if you'll ask students to even hear about it, 00:54:23.005 --> 00:54:24.668 ah, this is religion." 00:54:24.668 --> 00:54:27.170 You know, let me illustrate this, 00:54:27.170 --> 00:54:30.458 talking about a recent battle in Texas over textbooks 00:54:30.458 --> 00:54:35.468 in the public school. A newspaper report said this: 00:54:35.468 --> 00:54:37.760 "Textbook and classroom curriculum battles have long 00:54:37.760 --> 00:54:40.233 raged in Texas pitting creationists - those who see 00:54:40.233 --> 00:54:42.094 God's hand in the creation of the universe- 00:54:42.094 --> 00:54:43.927 against academics..." 00:54:43.927 --> 00:54:46.258 Stop right there. Notice creationists... academics. 00:54:46.258 --> 00:54:48.557 Creationists can't be academics. Creationists can't be scientists. 00:54:48.557 --> 00:54:50.420 See, it's the way things are worded out there. 00:54:50.420 --> 00:54:53.365 It's an indoctrination that's going on. 00:54:53.365 --> 00:54:55.898 We worry about religious and political ideology 00:54:55.898 --> 00:54:58.171 trumping scientific fact. Wait a minute. 00:54:58.171 --> 00:54:59.958 What do I mean by science? You're talking about 00:54:59.958 --> 00:55:03.365 what you observe, or are you talking about your beliefs about the past? 00:55:03.365 --> 00:55:07.522 Now, Kathy Miller is the president of the Texas Freedom Network and 00:55:07.522 --> 00:55:14.098 she has vocally spoken out. She's spoken out about this textbook battle there in Texas. 00:55:14.098 --> 00:55:21.925 And the mission statement of the organization she's president of says, "The Texas Freedom Network 00:55:21.925 --> 00:55:24.818 advances a mainstream agenda of religious freedom and individual liberties 00:55:24.818 --> 00:55:28.486 to counter the religious right." Religious freedom... individual liberties. Hmm. 00:55:28.486 --> 00:55:34.220 And then she makes this statement: "Science education..." What does she mean by science? 00:55:34.220 --> 00:55:37.298 "should be based on mainstream science education, not on personal idealogical beliefs 00:55:37.298 --> 00:55:42.220 of unqualified reviewers." Wait a minute. They want religious liberty and not personal 00:55:42.220 --> 00:55:48.697 ideological beliefs? I assert this: public school textbooks are using the same word "science" 00:55:48.697 --> 00:55:53.130 for observational and historical science. They arbitrarily define science as naturalism 00:55:53.130 --> 00:55:57.472 and outlaw the supernatural. They present molecules-to-man evolution as as fact. 00:55:57.472 --> 00:56:01.472 And they are imposing the religion of naturalism on generations of students.