Ham And Nye: A Case Study

This case study will discuss propaganda techniques and general persuasiveness of two debaters, Ken Ham and Bill Nye. Both men are evenly matched for their views on natural sciences and scientific observations. Ken Ham (b. 1951) a high school teacher and co-founder of Creation Science Ministries, debates Bill Nye (b. 1955) who made training videos for Boeing, and then appeared in numerous television shows, as The Science Guy. Their debate aired on February 4, 2014 at the Creationist Museum. It was a continuation of the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, except the high school teacher, Ham prosecuted a case for Creationism to be included in classroom text books, instead of the high school teacher, Scopes being prosecuted for teaching evolution in classrooms. Although the times have changed, the creation/evolution debate has the

same conflict between two different accounts of the historical origins of life: The first account told in “Genesis” from the Bible and the second account told in 1859 by Charles Darwin, published in The Origin of Species. At the conclusion of this case study, I will evaluate the arguments using scientific theory.
Ham outlines differences between observational science and historical science. He is most persuasive when he explains how Creationism is the only model of historical science confirmed by observation. Ham notes evolutionary links between species are still missing, and the fossil record is without intermediate species; the species we see today are identical to the observable species in the fossil record, and he claims this proves God created all creatures at once in the Garden of Eden. Ham is quite persuasive to connect the 7 ‘Cs’ of his beliefs: Creation – Corruption – Catastrophe – Confusion – Christ – Cross – Consummation.
Ham uses propaganda to say humanist-secularist and atheists have “hijacked” words used to describe observable science. He characterizes Creationists as the outsiders to mainstream science, yet Ham appeals to a sense of fairness, believing that children deserve to be taught Creationism. He uses a gallery of scientists as propaganda to reinforce his persuasive arguments that successful scientists can believe in Creationism, and they are not outsiders, such as Dr. Damadian of medicine, Dr. Faulkner of astronomy, Dr. Burgess of biomimetics engineering, Dr. Fabich of microbiology, and Dr. Venter of genomics. Ham finishes with a powerful bit of persuasion to attack his detractors. He points out how the Texas Freedom Network claims to want science without personal ideological beliefs, yet they promote textbooks that arbitrarily define science as “naturalism” and leave out any notion of super naturalism, and they present molecules-to-man evolution as fact, which he believes imposes a personal ideology, or “religion of naturalism”.
Bill Nye agrees that there are two stories of origin, but he believes scientific observation can yield only one believeable story. His best persuasive arguments are 1) how trees cannot survive underwater, yet trees exist that are older than Ham’s time frame for the Great Flood; 2) Sedimentary rock layers do not show higher animal forms mixed with lower animal forms, which would occur during a worldwide flood, and 3) an ark described in the Bible would not be able to carry as many species as we have in the world today. By contrast, snow layers in the Artic show 680,000 cycles of winter-summer; mathematics can prove the age of the Earth older than Ham’s time line, and many animals are separated by continents, but for example, there is no evidence of kangaroos in Mesopotamia, which one could expect to observe in the fossil record if all the animals were created at once, as described in the Book of Genesis.
Nye uses propaganda when he appeals to a patriotic concept that the United States should be a leader in science.

He promotes an idea that belief in evolution can lead to better predictions. He claims scientists observe the natural world; document sequences from fish to amphibians to reptiles and mammals, and the observation of evolution allowed scientists to predict an intermediary species, such as a fish lizard called Tiktaalik that was found in marsh swamps of Ellsmere Island, Canada. Nye uses propaganda to explain how germs and parasites are the enemy of any species, but sex within a species provides more varied genes and thereby more genetic diversity, which can provide better protection against germs and parasites. Nye also explains how The Big Bang theory of stars—moving apart was concocted from observations by the astronomer, Edwin Hubble. Lastly, Nye describes how Rubidium (Rb-37) quickly changes into Strontium (Sr-38) except when lava covers fossils, and because Rubidium and Strontium are frozen within ancient lava flows, scientists are able to carefully assay pieces of fossils to calculate more accurate dates within the fossil

record.
Using scientific theory to evaluate the arguments, it has to be recognized Ham makes an arresting point to describe how the fossil record is without intermediate species. The fossil record could lead one to believe in the instantaneous creation of all living creatures. There are no observational links between different species, so Ham rationalizes it is the evolutionists who rely on faith to believe in their theory of evolution. Ham believes Creationist are being more observational with their science. By contrast, Nye provides several facts to oppose Ham’s literal interpretation of Creationism, as described in the Book of Genesis from the Bible. Each discredits the other’s theory. However, it is a different matter to ask public school educators to include Creationism based on the prestige of scientists that also believe it to be true. Although Nye merely relies on a supposed “lizard fish”, public school educators want natural science coursework that follows scientific theory, which is only derived from repeated observations and experiments. Thus, Creationism is not proven more real by a lack of intermediate species in the fossil record; any more than one recipe would be proven better tasting because a different recipe lacks certain ingredients.
Speciation is observed science, while acceptance of evolution does rely on faith because transitional forms are not observable in the natural world, or the fossil record, scientists do have fact-supported theory based on physical reality. Theories of genetic diversity and the Big Bang, periodic table of elements along with radioactive dating are repeated observations and experiments that prove predictable results, time and time again. This becomes the definition of our physical reality. With starting points of Darwin’s The Origin of Species or the Bible, there will easily be divergence about the interpretation of the “familia” level. Scientists can agree on their observation, but they will disagree on the origin because the past is not directly observable.