0:12:43.881,0:12:46.111 Oh, hi kids! I have an incredible message for you. 0:12:46.111,0:12:48.715 Hey, can someone take Germa back to the petting zoo? 0:12:48.715,0:12:50.670 Wow! That looks like fun. 0:12:50.670,0:12:52.456 Now, where was I? Oh, yes. 0:12:52.456,0:12:55.315 In 2014, kids 12 and under come free. 0:12:55.315,0:12:57.785 Hey! Shouldn't the comets be in the Planetarium? 0:12:57.785,0:13:01.042 For the entire year, kids 12 and under come free. 0:13:01.042,0:13:04.123 Hey, T-Rex! You better get back to the dinosaur den. 0:13:04.123,0:13:06.819 As you can see, it's a very exciting place. 0:13:06.819,0:13:07.982 Now tell your parents! 0:13:07.982,0:13:11.650 Kids 12 and under free in 2014 when accompanied by a paying adult. 0:13:11.650,0:13:13.259 We hope to see you soon! 0:13:14.474,0:13:17.511 Good evening. I'm pleased to welcome you to Legacy Hall 0:13:17.511,0:13:20.252 of the Creation Museum in Northern Kentucky 0:13:20.252,0:13:23.083 in the metropolitan area of Cincinnati. 0:13:23.083,0:13:26.013 I'm Tom Foreman from CNN and I'm pleased to be tonight's 0:13:26.013,0:13:30.201 moderator for this Evolution versus Creation debate. 0:13:30.201,0:13:32.989 This is a very old question! Where did we come from? 0:13:34.219,0:13:36.758 My answer is from Washington this morning by airplane. 0:13:36.758,0:13:38.988 (laughter from audience) 0:13:38.988,0:13:42.797 But there is a much more profound, longer answer 0:13:42.797,0:13:44.979 that people have sought after for a long time. 0:13:44.979,0:13:47.882 So tonight's question to be debated is the following: 0:13:47.882,0:13:55.171 Is Creation a viable model of origins in today's modern, scientific era? 0:13:55.171,0:13:58.009 Our welcome extends to hundreds of thousands of people 0:13:58.009,0:14:01.841 who are watching on the internet at debatelive.org. 0:14:01.841,0:14:02.938 We're glad you have joined us. 0:14:02.938,0:14:05.047 Of course, you are auditory and here, 0:14:05.047,0:14:06.418 all the folks who've joined us as well. 0:14:06.418,0:14:09.988 We're joined by 70 media representatives from many 0:14:09.988,0:14:11.668 of the world's great news organizations. 0:14:11.668,0:14:13.589 We're glad to have them here as well. 0:14:13.589,0:14:17.980 And now let's welcome our debaters: Mr. Bill Nye and Mr. Ken Ham. 0:14:17.980,0:14:20.885 (audience applauds) 0:14:48.031,0:14:50.199 We had a coin toss earlier to determine 0:14:50.199,0:14:52.241 who would go first of these two men. 0:14:52.241,0:14:54.372 The only thing missing was Joe Namath in a fur coat. 0:14:54.372,0:14:59.112 But it went very well. Mr. Ham won the coin toss 0:14:59.112,0:15:04.032 and he opted to speak first. But first, let me tell you 0:15:04.032,0:15:05.695 a little bit about both of these gentlemen. 0:15:05.695,0:15:08.178 Mr. Nye's website describes him as a scientist, 0:15:08.178,0:15:10.480 engineer, comedian, author, and inventor. 0:15:10.480,0:15:14.154 Mr Nye, as you may know, produced a number of award-winning TV shows, 0:15:14.154,0:15:16.752 including a program he became so well-known for: 0:15:16.752,0:15:19.148 Bill Nye the Science Guy. 0:15:19.148,0:15:21.920 While working on the Science Guy show, Mr. Nye won 0:15:21.920,0:15:24.694 seven national Emmy awards for writing, performing, 0:15:24.694,0:15:28.647 and producing the show. Won 18 Emmys in five years! 0:15:28.647,0:15:32.752 In between creating the shows, he wrote five kids books about science, 0:15:32.752,0:15:36.918 including his latest title, Bill Nye's Great Big Book of Tiny Germs. 0:15:36.918,0:15:40.449 Billy Nye is the host of three television series: 0:15:40.449,0:15:42.748 his program, "The 100 Greatest Discoveries"-- 0:15:42.748,0:15:44.916 it airs on the Science Channel. "The Eyes of Nye"-- 0:15:44.916,0:15:48.278 airs on PBS stations across the country. He frequenly appears 0:15:48.278,0:15:51.281 on interview programs to discuss a variety of science topics. 0:15:51.281,0:15:55.280 Mr. Nye serves as Executive Director of the Planetary Society, 0:15:55.280,0:15:57.700 the world's largest space interest group. 0:15:57.700,0:16:00.528 He is a graduate of Cornell, with a Bachelors 0:16:00.528,0:16:03.189 of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering. 0:16:03.189,0:16:07.852 Mr. Ken Ham is the president and co-founder of Answers of Genesis, 0:16:07.852,0:16:10.982 a bible-defending organization that upholds the authority 0:16:10.982,0:16:12.858 of the scriptures from the very first verse. 0:16:12.858,0:16:16.778 Mr. Ham is the man behind the popular, high-tech 0:16:16.778,0:16:18.833 Creation Museum, where we're holding this debate. 0:16:18.833,0:16:21.329 The museum has had 2 million visitors in six years 0:16:21.329,0:16:23.293 and has attracted much of the world's media. 0:16:23.293,0:16:26.054 The Answers in Genesis website, as well, trafficked 0:16:26.054,0:16:29.165 with 2 million visitors alone last month. Mr. Ham is also 0:16:29.165,0:16:32.578 a best-selling author, a much in-demand speaker, 0:16:32.578,0:16:36.949 and the host of a daily radio feature carried on 700 plus stations. 0:16:36.949,0:16:40.891 This is his second public debate on Evolution and Creation. 0:16:40.891,0:16:43.852 The first was at Harvard, in the 1990s. 0:16:43.852,0:16:46.521 Mr. Ham is a native of Australia. He earned 0:16:46.521,0:16:48.993 a Bachelors degree in Applied Science, with an emphasis in 0:16:48.993,0:16:52.613 Environmental Biology, from the Queensland's Institute of Technology, 0:16:52.613,0:16:55.833 as well as a Diploma of Education at the University 0:16:55.833,0:16:59.240 of Queensland in Brisbon, Australia. 0:16:59.240,0:17:02.621 And now...Mr. Ham, you opted to go first, so you will 0:17:02.621,0:17:05.575 be first with your five minute opening statement. 0:17:08.882,0:17:11.120 Well, good evening. I know that not everyone watching 0:17:11.120,0:17:14.442 this debate will necessarily agree with what I have to say, 0:17:14.442,0:17:17.610 but I'm an Aussie and live over here in America 0:17:17.610,0:17:20.120 and they tell me I have an accent and so it doesn't matter 0:17:20.120,0:17:23.614 what I say, some people tell me. We just like to hear you saying it. 0:17:23.614,0:17:26.671 So...um...I hope you enjoy me saying it anyway. 0:17:26.671,0:17:29.082 Well, the debate topic is this: Is Creation 0:17:29.082,0:17:32.956 a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era? 0:17:32.956,0:17:35.583 You know, when this was first announced on the internet, 0:17:35.583,0:17:37.550 there were lots of statements-- like this one 0:17:37.550,0:17:39.503 from the Richard Dawkins Foundation. 0:17:39.503,0:17:42.088 "Scientists should not debate Creationists. Period." 0:17:42.088,0:17:45.666 And this one from one of the Discovery.com websites. 0:17:45.666,0:17:47.955 "Should Scientists Debate Creationists?" 0:17:47.955,0:17:50.390 You know, right here I believe there's a gross misrepresentation 0:17:50.390,0:17:55.001 in our culture. We're seeing people being indoctrinated 0:17:55.001,0:17:57.620 to believe that Creationists can't be Scientists. 0:17:57.620,0:18:01.503 I believe it's all a part of secularists hi-jacking the word "Science". 0:18:01.503,0:18:05.497 I want you to meet a modern-day scientist who's a Biblical Creationist. 0:18:05.497,0:18:07.377 My name is Stuart Burgess. 0:18:07.377,0:18:11.613 I'm a professor of Engineering Design at Bristol University in the U.K. 0:18:20.471,0:18:24.042 I have published over a 130 scientific papers on 0:18:24.042,0:18:28.046 the scientific design in Engineering and Biological systems. 0:18:28.209,0:18:31.772 From my research work, I find that the scientific evidence 0:18:31.772,0:18:35.974 fully supports Creationism as the best explanation to origins. 0:18:37.235,0:18:39.938 I've also designed major parts of space crafts, 0:18:39.938,0:18:41.829 launched by ESA and NASA. 0:18:41.829,0:18:43.796 So here's a biblical Creationist, 0:18:43.796,0:18:46.206 who's a scientist, who's also an inventor. 0:18:46.206,0:18:48.672 And I want young people to understand that. 0:18:48.672,0:18:51.932 You know, the problem, I believe, is this: we need to define terms correctly. 0:18:51.932,0:18:55.999 We need to define Creation/Evolution in regard to origins 0:18:55.999,0:18:58.884 and we need to define science. And in this opening statement, 0:18:58.884,0:19:01.598 I want to concentrate on dealing with the word "science". 0:19:01.598,0:19:05.216 I believe the word "science" has been hijacked by secularists. 0:19:05.216,0:19:06.553 Now, what is science? 0:19:06.553,0:19:09.942 Well, the origin of the word comes from the Classical Latin "scientia", 0:19:09.942,0:19:12.387 which means "to know". And if you look up a dictionary, 0:19:12.387,0:19:14.906 it'll say science means "the state of knowing, knowledge". 0:19:14.906,0:19:17.002 But there's different types of knowledge and I believe 0:19:17.002,0:19:18.459 this is where the confusion lies. 0:19:18.459,0:19:21.699 There's experimental or observational sciences, as we call it. 0:19:21.699,0:19:24.396 That's using the scientific method, observation, 0:19:24.396,0:19:27.498 measurement, experiment, testing. That's what produces 0:19:27.498,0:19:30.065 our technology, computers, space craft, jet planes, 0:19:30.065,0:19:35.190 smoke detectors, looking at DNA, antibiotics, medicines and vaccines. 0:19:35.190,0:19:39.161 You see, all scientists, whether Creationists or Evolutionists, 0:19:39.161,0:19:43.608 actually have the same observational or experimental science. 0:19:43.608,0:19:46.228 And it doesn't matter whether you're a Creationist or an Evolutionist, 0:19:46.228,0:19:47.507 you can be a great scientist. 0:19:47.507,0:19:49.694 For instance, he's an atheist, who is a great scientist-- 0:19:49.694,0:19:52.700 Craig Venter, one of the first researchers to sequence the human genome. 0:19:52.700,0:19:57.118 Or Dr. Raymond Damadian. He is a man who invented 0:19:57.118,0:20:01.232 the MRI scan and revolutionized medicine. He's a biblical Creationist. 0:20:01.232,0:20:03.668 But I want us to also understand molecules-to-man 0:20:03.668,0:20:07.062 evolution belief has nothing to do with developing technology. 0:20:07.062,0:20:11.168 You see, when we're talking about origins, we're talking about the past. 0:20:11.168,0:20:13.669 We're talking about our origins. We weren't there. 0:20:13.669,0:20:16.719 We can't observe that, whether it's molecules-to-man evolution, 0:20:16.719,0:20:18.497 or whether it's a creation account. 0:20:18.497,0:20:20.307 I mean, you're talking about the past. 0:20:20.307,0:20:23.137 We'd like to call that Origins or Historical Science, 0:20:23.137,0:20:25.338 knowledge concerning the past. Here at the Creation Museum, 0:20:25.338,0:20:29.639 we make no apology about the fact that our Origins or Historical science 0:20:29.639,0:20:33.218 actually is based upon the biblical account of origins. 0:20:33.218,0:20:36.551 Now, when you research science textbooks being used 0:20:36.551,0:20:39.000 in public schools, what we found is this: 0:20:39.000,0:20:42.226 by and large, they are Origins or Historical Science 0:20:42.226,0:20:46.059 based upon man's ideas about the past--for instance, the ideas of Darwin. 0:20:46.059,0:20:49.310 And our research has found that public school textbooks 0:20:49.310,0:20:53.267 are using the same word "science" for Observational Science 0:20:53.267,0:20:56.504 and Historical Science. They arbitrarily define science 0:20:56.504,0:20:59.197 as naturalism and outlaw the supernatural. 0:20:59.197,0:21:01.975 They present molecules-to-man evolution as fact. 0:21:01.975,0:21:04.004 They are imposing, I believe, the religion 0:21:04.004,0:21:06.507 of naturalism or atheism on generations of students. 0:21:06.507,0:21:09.888 You see, I assert that the word "science" has been hijacked 0:21:09.888,0:21:13.140 by secularists in teaching evolution to force the religion 0:21:13.140,0:21:15.432 of naturalism on generations of kids. 0:21:15.432,0:21:18.600 Secular evolutionists teach that all life developed 0:21:18.600,0:21:20.656 by natural processes from some primordial form. 0:21:20.656,0:21:23.805 That man is just an evolved animal, which has great bearing 0:21:23.805,0:21:25.413 on how we view life and death. 0:21:25.413,0:21:28.600 For instance, as Bill states, "It's very hard to accept, 0:21:28.600,0:21:31.727 for many of us, that when you die, it's over." 0:21:31.727,0:21:34.835 But, you see, the Bible gives us a totally different account of origins, 0:21:34.835,0:21:38.242 of who we are, where we came from, the meaning of life, and our future. 0:21:38.242,0:21:41.750 That through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin. 0:21:41.750,0:21:44.872 But that God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son. 0:21:44.872,0:21:48.704 Whoever believes in Him should not perish and have everlasting life. 0:21:48.704,0:21:53.571 So is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era? 0:21:53.571,0:21:56.253 I say the creation/evolution debate is a conflict 0:21:56.253,0:21:59.417 between two philosophical worldviews based on two different accounts 0:21:59.417,0:22:02.322 of origins or science beliefs and creation 0:22:02.322,0:22:05.572 is the only viable model of historical science confirmed 0:22:05.572,0:22:09.239 by observational science in today's modern scientific era. 0:22:10.239,0:22:14.409 And that is time. I had the unenviable job of being the time-keeper here. 0:22:15.393,0:22:17.240 So I'm like the referee of football they don't like, 0:22:17.240,0:22:20.129 but I will periodically, if either one of our debaters 0:22:20.129,0:22:24.275 runs over on anything, I will stop them in the name of keeping it fair for all. 0:22:24.275,0:22:26.905 Mr. Ham, thank you for your comments. Now it's Mr. Nye's 0:22:26.905,0:22:29.329 turn for a five minute opening statement. Mr. Nye. 0:22:29.329,0:22:32.016 Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here. 0:22:32.016,0:22:36.129 I very much appreciate you including me in your facility here. 0:22:36.129,0:22:40.069 Now, looking around the room I think I see just one bow tie. 0:22:40.069,0:22:43.743 Is that right? Just one. I'm telling you, once you try it-- 0:22:43.743,0:22:47.339 oh, there's two! That's great. I started wearing bow ties 0:22:47.339,0:22:49.921 when I was young, in high school. 0:22:49.921,0:22:52.361 My father showed me how. His father showed him. 0:22:52.361,0:22:58.343 And there's a story associated with this, which I find remarkable. 0:22:58.343,0:23:03.725 My grandfather was in the rotary, and he attended 0:23:03.725,0:23:07.062 a convention in Philadelphia, and even in those days, 0:23:07.062,0:23:10.698 at the turn of the last century, people rented tuxedos. 0:23:10.698,0:23:14.643 And the tuxedo came with a bow tie--untied bow tie. 0:23:14.643,0:23:16.725 So he didn't know how to tie it. 0:23:16.725,0:23:19.934 So...wasn't sure what to do, but he just took a chance. 0:23:19.934,0:23:23.708 He went to the hotel room next door, knocked on the door, 0:23:23.708,0:23:25.864 "Excuse me? Can you help me tie my tie?" 0:23:25.864,0:23:28.931 And the guy said, "Sure. Lie down on the bed." 0:23:31.315,0:23:34.899 So...my grandfather wanted to have the tie on, 0:23:34.899,0:23:38.426 wasn't sure what he was getting into, so he's said 0:23:38.426,0:23:42.497 to have lain on the bed and the guy tied a perfect bow tie knot and, 0:23:42.497,0:23:44.372 quite reasonably, my grandfather said, 0:23:44.372,0:23:48.036 "Thank you. Why'd I have to lie down on the bed?" 0:23:48.036,0:23:49.702 The guy said, "I'm an undertaker." 0:23:49.702,0:23:51.699 (audience laughs) 0:23:51.699,0:23:54.035 It's the only way I know how to do it. 0:23:54.035,0:23:57.475 Now that story was presented to me as a true story. 0:23:58.598,0:24:01.499 It may or may not be. But it gives you something to think about. 0:24:01.499,0:24:04.115 And it's certainly something to remember. 0:24:04.115,0:24:06.830 So, here tonight, we're gonna have two stories 0:24:06.830,0:24:12.397 and we can compare Mr. Ham's story to the story 0:24:12.397,0:24:16.035 from what I will call the outside, from mainstream science. 0:24:16.035,0:24:20.897 The question tonight is: Does Ken Ham's Creation Model hold up? 0:24:20.897,0:24:22.637 Is it "viable"? 0:24:22.637,0:24:26.209 So let me ask you: what would you be doing if you weren't here tonight? 0:24:27.301,0:24:29.718 That's right, you'd be home watching CSI. 0:24:30.887,0:24:35.237 CSI Petersburg. Is that coming--I think it's coming. 0:24:36.959,0:24:40.897 And on CSI, there is no distinction made between 0:24:40.897,0:24:43.687 historical science and observational science. 0:24:43.687,0:24:46.769 These are construct unique to Mr. Ham. 0:24:46.769,0:24:50.019 We don't normally have these anywhere in the world except here. 0:24:50.019,0:24:53.685 Natural laws that applied in the past apply now. 0:24:53.685,0:24:56.600 That's why they're natural laws. That's why we embrace them. 0:24:56.600,0:24:58.906 That's how we made all these discoveries 0:24:58.906,0:25:01.431 that enabled all this remarkable technology. 0:25:01.431,0:25:05.174 So CSI is a fictional show, but it's based absolutely 0:25:05.174,0:25:07.152 on real people doing real work. 0:25:07.152,0:25:09.771 When you go to a crime scene and find evidence, 0:25:09.771,0:25:13.133 you have clues about the past. And you trust those clues 0:25:13.133,0:25:16.342 and you embrace them and you move forward to convict somebody. 0:25:16.342,0:25:20.129 Mr. Ham and his followers have this remarkable view 0:25:20.129,0:25:26.565 of a worldwide flood that somehow influenced everything that we observe in nature. 0:25:26.565,0:25:32.931 A 500 foot wooden boat, eight zookeepers for 14,000 individual animals, 0:25:32.931,0:25:37.124 every land, plant in the world under water for a full year? 0:25:37.124,0:25:40.066 I ask us all: is that really reasonable? 0:25:40.835,0:25:43.433 You'll hear a lot about the Grand Canyon, I imagine, also, 0:25:43.433,0:25:46.396 which is a remarkable place and it has fossils. 0:25:46.396,0:25:50.473 And the fossils in the Grand Canyon are found in layers. 0:25:51.134,0:25:53.807 There's not a single place in the Grand Canyon 0:25:53.807,0:25:56.731 where the fossils of one type of animal cross over 0:25:56.731,0:25:59.196 into the fossils of another. In other words, 0:25:59.196,0:26:02.565 when there was a big flood on the earth, you would expect 0:26:02.565,0:26:05.833 drowning animals to swim up to a higher level. 0:26:05.833,0:26:09.362 Not any one of them did. Not a single one. 0:26:09.362,0:26:13.400 If you could find evidence of that, my friends, you could change the world. 0:26:14.600,0:26:16.762 Now, I just wanna remind us all: 0:26:17.608,0:26:22.045 there are billions of people in the world who are deeply religious, 0:26:22.045,0:26:27.000 who get enriched, who have a wonderful sense of community from their religion. 0:26:27.000,0:26:31.250 They worship together, they eat together, they live 0:26:31.250,0:26:34.586 in their communities and enjoy each others company. Billions of people. 0:26:34.586,0:26:39.001 But these same people do not embrace the extraordinary view 0:26:39.001,0:26:43.667 that the earth is somehow only 6,000 years old. That is unique. 0:26:43.667,0:26:48.756 And here's my concern: what keeps the United States ahead, 0:26:48.756,0:26:53.251 what makes the United States a world leader, is our technology, 0:26:53.251,0:26:58.669 our new ideas, our innovations. If we continue to eschew science, 0:26:58.669,0:27:02.587 eschew the process and try to divide science 0:27:02.587,0:27:05.800 into observational science and historic science, 0:27:05.800,0:27:09.419 we are not gonna move forward. We will not embrace natural laws. 0:27:09.419,0:27:14.667 We will not make discoveries. We will not invent and innovate and stay ahead. 0:27:14.667,0:27:19.940 So if you ask me if Ken Ham's Creation model is viable, I say no. 0:27:19.940,0:27:24.533 It is absolutely not viable. So stay with us over the next period 0:27:24.533,0:27:28.337 and you can compare my evidence to his. Thank you all very much. 0:27:28.337,0:27:30.385 (audience applauds) 0:27:30.385,0:27:31.785 (moderator) All right. 0:27:33.900,0:27:35.099 Very nice start by both of our debaters here. 0:27:35.099,0:27:37.706 And now each of one will offer a thirty minute, 0:27:37.706,0:27:43.904 illustrated presentation to fully offer their case for us to consider. 0:27:43.904,0:27:44.924 Mr. Ham, you're up. 0:27:57.377,0:28:00.260 Well, the debate topic was "Is creation a viable model 0:28:00.260,0:28:02.994 of origins in today's modern scientific era?" 0:28:02.994,0:28:06.789 And I made the statement at the end of my opening statement: 0:28:06.789,0:28:09.456 creation is the only viable model of historical science 0:28:09.456,0:28:13.271 confirmed by observational science in today's modern scientific era. 0:28:13.271,0:28:16.714 And I said what we need to be doing is actually defining 0:28:16.714,0:28:22.133 our terms and, particularly three terms: science, creation, and evolution. 0:28:22.133,0:28:25.008 Now, I discussed the meaning of the word "science" 0:28:25.008,0:28:28.494 and what is meant by experimental and observational science briefly. 0:28:28.494,0:28:30.631 And that both Creationists and Evolutionists 0:28:30.631,0:28:35.964 can be great scientists, for instance. I mentioned Craig Venter, a biologist. 0:28:35.964,0:28:37.830 He's an atheist and he's a great scientist. 0:28:37.830,0:28:41.025 He was one of the first researchers to sequence the human genome. 0:28:41.025,0:28:46.531 I also mentioned Dr. Raymond Damadian, who actually invented the MRI scanner. 0:28:46.531,0:28:52.140 I want you to meet a biblical creationist who is a scientist and an inventor. 0:28:52.140,0:28:54.874 Hi, my name is Dr. Raymond Damadian. 0:28:54.874,0:28:58.045 I am a Young Earth Creation Scientist and believe that God 0:28:58.045,0:29:01.214 created the world in six 24 hour days, 0:29:01.214,0:29:03.833 just as recorded in the book of Genesis. 0:29:03.833,0:29:07.547 By God's grace and the devoted prayers of my Godly mother-in-law, 0:29:07.547,0:29:11.010 I invented the MRI scanner in 1969. 0:29:11.010,0:29:14.463 The idea that scientists who believe the earth 0:29:14.463,0:29:19.329 is 6,000 years old cannot do real science is simply wrong. 0:29:19.329,0:29:21.194 Well, he's most adamant about that. 0:29:21.194,0:29:24.796 And, actually, he revolutionized medicine! He's a biblical Creationist. 0:29:24.796,0:29:29.426 And I encourage children to follow people like that, make them their heroes. 0:29:29.426,0:29:33.196 Let me introduce you to another biblical Creation Scientist. 0:29:33.196,0:29:34.998 My name is Danny Faulkner. 0:29:34.998,0:29:38.714 I received my PhD in astronomy from Indiana University. 0:29:38.714,0:29:41.604 For 26 and a half years, I was a professor 0:29:41.604,0:29:43.792 at the University of South Carolina, Lancaster, 0:29:43.792,0:29:47.295 where I hold the rank of distinguished professor emeritus. 0:29:47.295,0:29:51.207 Upon my retirement from the university in January of 2013, 0:29:51.207,0:29:56.428 I joined the research staff at Answers in Genesis. I'm a stellar astronomer. 0:29:56.428,0:30:00.272 That means my primary interests is stars, but I'm particularly 0:30:00.272,0:30:02.714 interested in the study of eclipsing binary stars. 0:30:02.714,0:30:05.830 And I've published many articles in the astronomy literature, 0:30:05.830,0:30:07.497 places such as the the Astrophysical Journal, 0:30:07.497,0:30:10.445 the Astronomical Journal, and the Observatory. 0:30:10.445,0:30:16.570 There is nothing in observational astronomy that contradicts a recent creation. 0:30:16.570,0:30:19.626 I also mentioned Dr. Stuart Burgess, 0:30:19.626,0:30:24.299 professor of Engineering Design at Bristol University in England. 0:30:24.299,0:30:28.882 Now he invented and designed a double-action worm gear set 0:30:28.882,0:30:33.129 for the three hinges of the robotic arm on a very expensive satellite. 0:30:33.129,0:30:36.294 And if that had not worked, if that gear set had not worked, 0:30:36.294,0:30:38.541 that whole satellite would've been useless. 0:30:38.541,0:30:43.209 Yet, Dr. Burgess is a biblical Creationist. He believes, just as I believe. 0:30:43.209,0:30:45.714 Now, think about this for a moment. 0:30:45.714,0:30:47.600 A scientist like Dr. Burgess, 0:30:47.600,0:30:49.874 who believe in Creation, just as I do, 0:30:49.874,0:30:51.859 a small minority in this scientific world. 0:30:51.859,0:30:55.457 But let's see what he says about scientists believing in Creation. 0:30:55.457,0:30:58.796 I find that many of my colleagues in academia are sympathetic 0:30:58.796,0:31:02.093 to the creationist viewpoint, including biologists. 0:31:02.093,0:31:06.208 However, there are often afraid to speak out because of the criticisms 0:31:06.208,0:31:09.045 they would get from the media and atheists lobby. 0:31:09.045,0:31:11.008 Now, I agree. That's a real problem today. 0:31:11.008,0:31:14.464 We need to have freedom to be able to speak on these topics. 0:31:14.464,0:31:18.128 You know, I just want to say, by the way, that Creationists, 0:31:18.128,0:31:21.574 non-Christian scientists, I should say, 0:31:21.574,0:31:23.743 non-Christian scientists are really borrowing 0:31:23.743,0:31:26.863 from the Christian worldview anyway to carry out their experimental, 0:31:26.863,0:31:30.209 observational science. Think about it. When they're doing 0:31:30.209,0:31:32.827 observational science, using the scientific method, 0:31:32.827,0:31:34.366 they have to assume the laws of logic, 0:31:34.366,0:31:35.830 they have to assume the laws of nature, 0:31:35.830,0:31:37.997 they have to assume the uniformity of nature. 0:31:37.997,0:31:41.107 I mean, think about it. If the universe came about by natural processes, 0:31:41.107,0:31:43.915 where'd the laws of logic come from? Did they just pop into existence? 0:31:43.915,0:31:46.827 Are we in a stage now where we only have half-logic? 0:31:46.827,0:31:49.604 So, you see, I have a question for Bill Nye. 0:31:49.604,0:31:52.998 How do you account for the laws of logic and the laws of nature 0:31:52.998,0:31:57.039 from a naturalistic worldview that excludes the existence of God? 0:31:57.039,0:32:00.829 Now, in my opening statement I also discussed 0:32:00.829,0:32:04.628 a different type of science or knowledge, origins or historical science. 0:32:04.628,0:32:08.658 See again, there's a confusion here. There's a misunderstanding here. 0:32:08.658,0:32:13.180 People, by and large, have not been taught to look at 0:32:13.180,0:32:17.507 what you believe about the past as different to what you're observing in the present. 0:32:17.507,0:32:20.350 You don't observe the past directly. 0:32:20.350,0:32:24.685 Even when you think about the creation account. 0:32:24.685,0:32:26.745 I mean, we can't observe God creating. 0:32:26.745,0:32:29.561 We can't observe the creation of Adam and Eve. We admit that. 0:32:29.561,0:32:32.137 We're willing to admit our beliefs about the past. 0:32:32.137,0:32:35.339 But, see, what you see in the present is very different. 0:32:35.339,0:32:39.620 Even some public school textbooks actually sort of acknowledge 0:32:39.620,0:32:41.960 the difference between historical and observational science. 0:32:41.960,0:32:45.556 Here is an Earth Science textbook that's used in public schools. 0:32:45.556,0:32:48.599 And we read this. In contrast to physical geology, 0:32:48.599,0:32:52.809 the aim of historical geology is to understand Earth's long history. 0:32:52.809,0:32:54.310 Then they make this statement. 0:32:54.310,0:32:57.094 Historical geology--so we're talking historical science-- 0:32:57.094,0:33:00.897 tries to establish a timeline of the vast number of physical 0:33:00.897,0:33:03.207 and biological changes that have occurred in the past. 0:33:03.207,0:33:06.812 We study physical geology before historical geology 0:33:06.812,0:33:11.368 because we first must understand how Earth works before we try to unravel its past. 0:33:11.368,0:33:14.558 In other words, we observe things in the present and then, 0:33:14.558,0:33:18.161 okay, we're assuming that that's always happened in the past 0:33:18.161,0:33:20.441 and we're gonna try and figure out how this happened. 0:33:20.441,0:33:22.252 See, there is a difference between what you observe 0:33:22.252,0:33:26.230 and what happened in the past. Let me illustrate it this way: 0:33:27.337,0:33:29.203 If Bill Nye and I went to the Grand Canyon, 0:33:29.203,0:33:32.598 we could agree that that's a Coconino sandstone in the Hermit shale. 0:33:32.598,0:33:35.156 There's the boundary. They're sitting one on top of the other. 0:33:35.156,0:33:38.570 We could agree on that. But you know what we would disagree on? 0:33:38.570,0:33:40.777 I mean, we could even analyse the minerals and agree on that. 0:33:40.777,0:33:43.602 But we would disagree on how long it took to get there. 0:33:43.998,0:33:47.190 But see, none of us saw the sandstone or the shale being laid down. 0:33:47.190,0:33:49.499 There's a supposed 10 million year gap there. 0:33:49.499,0:33:50.893 But I don't see a gap. 0:33:50.893,0:33:53.477 But that might be different to what Bill Nye would see. 0:33:53.477,0:33:57.292 But there's a difference between what you actually observe 0:33:57.292,0:34:00.320 directly and then your interpretation regarding the past. 0:34:00.320,0:34:04.663 When I was at the Goddard Space Center a number of years ago 0:34:04.663,0:34:06.688 I met Creationists and Evolutionists who were 0:34:06.688,0:34:08.291 both working on the Hubble telescope. 0:34:08.291,0:34:10.153 They agreed on how to build the Hubble telescope. 0:34:10.153,0:34:13.189 You know what they disagreed on? Well, they disagreed on 0:34:13.189,0:34:16.630 how to interpret the data the telescope obtained 0:34:16.630,0:34:18.131 in regard to the age of the universe. 0:34:18.131,0:34:21.123 And, you know, we could on and talk about lots 0:34:21.123,0:34:23.033 of other similar sorts of things. For instance, 0:34:23.033,0:34:26.376 I've heard Bill Nye talk about how a smoke detector works, 0:34:26.376,0:34:30.667 using the radioactive element Americium. And, you know what? 0:34:30.667,0:34:32.879 I totally agree with him on that. We agree how it works. 0:34:32.879,0:34:35.691 We agree how radioactivity enables that to work. 0:34:35.691,0:34:37.544 But if you're then gonna use radioactive elements 0:34:37.544,0:34:39.330 and talk about the age of the Earth, 0:34:39.330,0:34:41.131 you've got a problem cause you weren't there. 0:34:41.131,0:34:44.530 We gotta understand parent elements, daughter elements and so on. 0:34:44.530,0:34:47.423 We could agree whether you're Creationist or Evolutionist 0:34:47.423,0:34:50.890 on the technology to put the rover on Mars, but we're gonna 0:34:50.890,0:34:54.156 disagree on how to interpret the origin of Mars. 0:34:54.156,0:34:55.876 I mean, there are some people that believed it 0:34:55.876,0:34:58.891 was even a global flood on Mars, and there's no liquid water on Mars. 0:35:01.152,0:35:03.927 We're gonna disagree maybe on our interpretation of origins 0:35:03.927,0:35:07.057 and you can't prove either way because, not from 0:35:07.057,0:35:10.290 an observational science perspective, because we've only got the present. 0:35:11.336,0:35:16.125 Creationists and Evolutionists both work on medicines and vaccines. 0:35:16.125,0:35:19.330 You see? It doesn't matter whether you're a Creationist or an Evolutionist, 0:35:19.330,0:35:22.664 all scientists have the same experimental observational science. 0:35:22.664,0:35:26.134 So I have a question for Bill Nye: Can you name one piece 0:35:26.134,0:35:28.887 of technology that could only have been developed 0:35:28.887,0:35:32.356 starting with the belief in molecules-to-man evolution? 0:35:33.217,0:35:34.892 Now, here's another important fact. 0:35:35.553,0:35:38.762 Creationists and Evolutionists all have the same evidence. 0:35:38.762,0:35:42.897 Bill Nye and I have the same Grand Canyon. We don't disagree on that. 0:35:42.897,0:35:46.457 We all have the same fish fossils. This is one from the Creation Museum. 0:35:46.457,0:35:50.235 The same dinosaur skeleton, the same animals, the same humans, 0:35:50.235,0:35:54.456 the same DNA, the same radioactive decay elements that we see. 0:35:54.456,0:35:59.092 We have the same universe...actually, we all have the same evidences. 0:35:59.784,0:36:01.332 It's not the evidences that are different. 0:36:01.332,0:36:06.115 It's a battle over the same evidence in regard to how we interpret the past. 0:36:06.115,0:36:07.250 And you know why that is? 0:36:07.250,0:36:09.731 Cause it's really a battle over worldviews and starting points. 0:36:09.731,0:36:11.922 It's a battle over philosophical worldviews 0:36:11.922,0:36:14.721 and starting points, but the same evidence. Now, I admit, 0:36:14.721,0:36:17.389 my starting point is that God is the ultimate authority. 0:36:17.389,0:36:21.427 But if someone doesn't accept that, then man has to be the ultimate authority. 0:36:21.427,0:36:23.762 And that's really the difference when it comes down to it. 0:36:23.762,0:36:26.587 You see, I've been emphasizing the difference 0:36:26.587,0:36:29.364 between historical origin science, knowledge about 0:36:29.364,0:36:30.620 the past when you weren't there, 0:36:30.620,0:36:33.133 and we need to understand that we weren't there. 0:36:33.133,0:36:36.244 Or experimental observational science, using 0:36:36.244,0:36:38.412 your five senses in the present, the scientific method, 0:36:38.412,0:36:41.021 what you can directly observe, test, repeat. 0:36:42.666,0:36:44.120 There's a big difference between those two. 0:36:44.120,0:36:46.727 And that's not what's being taught in our public schools 0:36:46.727,0:36:48.566 and that's why kids aren't being taught to think 0:36:48.566,0:36:51.600 critically and correctly about the origins issue. 0:36:51.600,0:36:53.644 But you know, it's also important to understand, 0:36:53.644,0:36:56.692 when talking about Creation and Evolution, both involve 0:36:56.692,0:36:59.231 historical science and observational science. 0:36:59.231,0:37:02.225 You see, the role of observational science is this: 0:37:02.225,0:37:03.816 it can be used to confirm or otherwise 0:37:03.816,0:37:07.375 one's historical science based on one's starting point. 0:37:07.627,0:37:10.889 Now, when you think about the debate topic and what I have 0:37:10.889,0:37:14.296 learned concerning creation, if our origins 0:37:14.296,0:37:17.757 or historical science based on the bible, the bible's account 0:37:17.757,0:37:21.073 of origins is true, then there should be predictions 0:37:21.073,0:37:24.342 from this that we can test, using observational science. 0:37:24.342,0:37:26.839 And there are. For instance, based on the bible, 0:37:26.839,0:37:29.557 we'd expect to find evidence concerning an intelligence, 0:37:29.557,0:37:31.918 confirming an intelligence produced life. 0:37:31.918,0:37:35.093 We'd expect to find evidence confirming after their kind. 0:37:35.093,0:37:38.056 The bible says God made kinds of animals and plants 0:37:38.056,0:37:41.088 after their kind, implying each kind produces it's own, 0:37:41.088,0:37:43.304 not that one kind changes into another. 0:37:43.304,0:37:47.156 You'd expect to find evidence confirming a global flood of Noah's day. 0:37:47.156,0:37:50.891 Evidence confirming one race of humans because we 0:37:50.891,0:37:54.005 all go back to Adam and Eve, biologically, that would mean there's one race. 0:37:54.005,0:37:57.627 Evidence confirming the Tower of Babel, that God gave different languages. 0:37:57.627,0:38:00.166 Evidence confirming a young universe. 0:38:00.166,0:38:04.095 Now, I can't go through all of those, but a couple of them we'll look at briefly. 0:38:04.095,0:38:07.557 After their kind, evidence confirming that-- 0:38:07.557,0:38:12.969 in the Creation Museum, we have a display featuring replicas, 0:38:12.969,0:38:15.593 actually, of Darwin's finches. They're called Darwin's finches. 0:38:15.593,0:38:18.260 Darwin collected finches from the Galapagos 0:38:18.260,0:38:21.628 and took them back to England and we see the different species, 0:38:21.628,0:38:24.494 the different beak sizes here. And, you know, 0:38:24.494,0:38:27.187 from the specimens Darwin obtained in the Galapagos, 0:38:27.187,0:38:31.180 he actually pondered these things and how do you explain this. 0:38:31.180,0:38:36.562 And in his notes, actually, he came up with this diagram here, a tree. 0:38:36.562,0:38:42.004 And he actually said, "I think." So he was talking about 0:38:42.004,0:38:46.533 different species and maybe those species came from some common ancestor, 0:38:46.533,0:38:49.504 but, actually, when it comes to finches, we actually would agree, 0:38:49.504,0:38:54.160 as Creationists, that different finch species came from a common ancestor, but a finch. 0:38:54.160,0:38:56.382 That's what they would have to come from. 0:38:56.382,0:39:00.460 And see, Darwin wasn't just thinking about species. 0:39:01.244,0:39:03.490 Darwin had a much bigger picture in mind. 0:39:03.490,0:39:07.360 When you look at the Origins of Species and read that book, 0:39:07.360,0:39:10.870 you'll find he made this statement: from such low and intermediate form, 0:39:10.870,0:39:12.970 both animals and plants may have been developed; 0:39:12.970,0:39:16.126 and, if we admit this, we must likewise admit that 0:39:16.126,0:39:18.966 all organic beings which have ever lived on this Earth 0:39:18.966,0:39:22.037 may be descended from some one primordial form. 0:39:22.037,0:39:27.534 So he had in mind what we today know as an evolutionary tree of life, 0:39:27.534,0:39:31.323 that all life has arisen from some primordial form. 0:39:31.323,0:39:34.992 Now, when you consider the classifications system, 0:39:34.992,0:39:37.570 kingdom phylum class or the family genus species, 0:39:37.570,0:39:41.690 we would say, as Creationists, we have many creation scientists 0:39:41.690,0:39:43.464 that research this and, for lots of reasons, 0:39:43.464,0:39:47.057 I would say, the kind in Genesis 1 is really more at 0:39:47.057,0:39:50.591 the family level of classification. For instance, there's one dog kind. 0:39:50.591,0:39:53.405 There's one cat kind. Even though you have different 0:39:53.405,0:39:55.567 generative species, that would mean, by the way, 0:39:55.567,0:39:57.891 you didn't need anywhere near the number of animals 0:39:57.891,0:39:59.236 on the ark as people think. 0:39:59.236,0:40:00.826 You wouldn't need all the species of dogs, just two. 0:40:00.826,0:40:02.501 Not all the species of cats--just two. 0:40:02.501,0:40:06.788 And, you see, based on the biblical account there in Genesis One, 0:40:06.788,0:40:10.257 Creationists have drawn up what they believe is a creation origin. 0:40:10.257,0:40:13.130 In other words, they're saying, "Look. There's great variation 0:40:13.130,0:40:16.212 in the genetics of dogs and finches and so on." 0:40:16.212,0:40:19.436 And so, over time, particularly after Noah's flood, 0:40:19.436,0:40:21.502 you'd expect if there were two dogs, for instance, 0:40:21.502,0:40:24.671 you could end up with different species of dogs because 0:40:24.671,0:40:28.714 there's an incredible amount of variability in the genes of any creature. 0:40:28.714,0:40:33.170 And so you'd expect these different species up here, but there's limits. 0:40:33.170,0:40:36.270 Dogs will always be dogs, finches will always be finches. 0:40:36.270,0:40:41.856 Now, as a Creationist, I maintain that observational science 0:40:41.856,0:40:45.714 actually confirms this model, based on the bible. 0:40:45.714,0:40:49.236 For instance, take dogs. Okay? 0:40:49.236,0:40:53.524 In a scientific paper dated January 2014--that's this year-- 0:40:53.524,0:40:57.658 scientists working at the University of California stated this: 0:40:57.658,0:41:00.544 We provide several lines of evidence supporting 0:41:00.544,0:41:04.377 a single origin for dogs, and disfavoring alternative models 0:41:04.377,0:41:06.836 in which dog lineages arise separately 0:41:06.836,0:41:09.324 from geographically distinct wolf populations. 0:41:09.324,0:41:11.546 And they put this diagram in the paper. 0:41:11.546,0:41:14.203 By the way, that diagram is very, very similar 0:41:14.203,0:41:17.827 to this diagram that Creationists proposed based upon 0:41:17.827,0:41:20.715 the creation account in Genesis. In other words, 0:41:20.715,0:41:22.934 you have a common dog ancestor that gives rise 0:41:22.934,0:41:25.325 to the different species of dogs, and that's exactly 0:41:25.325,0:41:28.134 what we're saying here. Now, in the Creation Museum, 0:41:28.134,0:41:31.259 we actually show the finches here and you see the finches 0:41:31.259,0:41:34.792 with their different beaks, beside dogs skulls, different species of dogs. 0:41:34.792,0:41:37.547 By the way, there's more variation in the dog skeleton 0:41:37.547,0:41:40.427 here than there are in these finches. Yet, the dogs, 0:41:40.427,0:41:42.876 wow, that's never used as an example of evolution, 0:41:42.876,0:41:45.789 but the finches are, particularly in the public school textbooks. 0:41:45.789,0:41:48.963 Students are taught, "Ah! See the changes that are occurring here?" 0:41:48.963,0:41:51.093 And here's another problem that we've got. 0:41:51.093,0:41:55.624 Not only has the word "science" been hijacked by secularists, 0:41:55.624,0:41:59.791 I believe the word "evolution" has been hijacked by secularists. 0:41:59.791,0:42:03.860 The word "evolution" has been hijacked using what I call a bait and switch. 0:42:03.860,0:42:05.161 Let me explain to you. 0:42:06.130,0:42:09.766 The word "evolution" is being used in public school textbooks, 0:42:09.766,0:42:11.826 and we often see it in documentaries and so on, 0:42:11.826,0:42:15.265 is used for observable changes that we would agree with, 0:42:15.265,0:42:19.244 and then used for unobservable changes, such as molecules-to-man. 0:42:19.244,0:42:21.724 Let me explain to you what's really going on because 0:42:21.724,0:42:23.410 I was a science teacher in the public schools 0:42:23.410,0:42:26.125 and I know what the students were taught and I checked 0:42:26.125,0:42:28.134 the public school textbooks anyway to know what they're taught.