Thirteen point seven billion years ago the universe went from a small and dense state, to an exponentially large state. Big things do come in small packages. However this is not the only story of the creation of the universe and it’s inhabitants. On November fourth two thousand and fifteen two scientists went head to head to prove which creation story would be a “viable model for today's modern science,” creation or evolution. Defending the side of evolution was none other that an old friend from our childhood, Bill Nye, also known as Bill Nye the Science Guy. No doubt wonderful memories are flooding into your brain right now. Defending the side of creation is a man named Ken Ham, also known as the man you have probably never heard of before. …show more content…
Although arguing that schools force children to see science through an evolutionary perspective does make us question the morals of the subject, it does not however construct an argument against evolution. Ken Ham spent more time distinguishing what creationism and evolutionism are, instead of giving specific facts to prove or disprove either side. For Ken Ham to say Bill Nye is wrong because observation science does not allow us to observe the past, “because we were not there,” then he has also thrown a wrench into his own argument. How can Ken Ham believe in God based on a past he has not observed? Ken Ham could have mentioned how the Bible is one of the most historically accurate documents in the world according to Institution for Creation Research, The Trumpet.com, and Rick Warren, but he never does. Ken Ham never mentions how many other cultures have their own version of a flood story, giving evidence to a truth behind the stories.. Instead Ken Ham focuses on the “secularists highjacking the word …show more content…
When Bill Nye spoke about the boulders in Washington, he explained how long ago there was an ice dam that would form in today’s Montana. Bill says that if there was a world wide flood you would think the rocks would have sunk to the bottom and not moved, however these massive boulders are on the surface in washington. He then persist to ask “how could the boulders be there, if the earth is four-thousand years old, how could they be there if just one flood caused that.?” Bill Nye makes a statement, and then asks a question but never answers the question. He does not show us how the boulders got there. He makes his statement unclear. Following this argument, Bill Nye tells a story about people in the 1900s who built a large ship called the Wyoming. A six masted schooner made out of wood, that was the largest boat built at the time. However this boat was so big the frame would bend and break, leaving holes in the ship. The ship itself was sailed by a crew of fourteen, that eventually died from the ship sinking. Bill Nye argues that Eight people could not have built and sailed a ship with no experience, unlike the people who built and sailed the Wyoming. He continues to ask if “this is reasonable, is that possible?” He never answers that question. He never mentions that the Ark was meant to float, and that the Ark did not have an masts on it.
Robert Root-Bernstein and Donald L. McEachron, “Teaching Theories: The Evolution-Creation Controversy,” The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 44, No. 7 (Oct…1982). This article, written by Robert Root-Bernstein and Donald L. McEachron sheds light on the controversy of evolution vs creationism in schools and the validity of each being called a scientific theory. The work was created to answer the questions, “Which of these theories is truly scientific and which is a religious belief? Which should be taught in schools?” The article concluded in favor of evolution as a valid scientific theory that should be taught rather than creationism, but also mentioned the worth of understanding the latter.
For most writers, we must know the different types of argumentation styles along with logical fallacies. There are three main types of argumentation styles including: Aristotelian, Rogerian, and Toulmin. All three styles have their own argumentation spin on arguments. Aristotelian refutes the opposing claim while at the same time promoting its own argument by using supporting evidence. Some of that evidence includes using rhetorical appeals such as ethos, logos, and pathos. A Rogerian arguments are the arguments that find the common ground in order for an effective argument. Last but not least there is the Toulmin argument, the Toulmin argument is similar to the Aristotelian argument yet instead of appealing to the audience Toulmin focuses
The Scopes Trial, formally known as The State of Tennessee vs. Scopes but given the nickname “The Monkey Trial”, has been credited as starting the popular legal dispute between evolution and creationism in the court, and its impact in the 20’s was immeasurable. The interpretation of the case is just as popular, if not more, than the actual result of the case. The worldwide attention and media coverage the case received produced many opinions. Scholar’s opinions range from describing the case as an irrelevancy and a good show to describing it as a “Watershed in American religious history” (Ronald L. Numbers, 1998, p. 76).
Bill had a range of topics to argue against Ham’s. Bill brought in a piece of limestone, and argued that if the “great flood” had happened 4,000 years ago, which was what Ham had stated, the piece of rock he was holding would not exist. Ham defended the age of the earth using Hebrew definitions of the word “day” in the Bible, and that only God would know because he was the only witness of the beginning of the world. Bill Nye also discussed the topic of why Humans aren’t able to reproduce asexually, and that species that reproduce sexually have less parasites than those who do not. Nye
Teaching of evolution has several issues. One of the main issue is that it is unfair to some students with a background of Christianity. Christians believe in Creationism, meaning God created the whole world or if not, most of the world. Darwin's theory of Evolution is complete contradictory of this. In the Bible, it is stated that God made humans in His image while Darwin's theory says that Humans evolved from monkeys. It is basically proving that God, does not exist, violating the first amendment, Freedom of Belief. The first amendment states "..respecting the establishment of religion..." When Christian students listen and are forced to learn the theory of Evolution, it is restricting them to worship without obstacles and is therefore, disrespecting the establishment of religion by defying the existence of God. "If Genesis were interpreted as symbolic, as a myth, fable or fantasy, then the entire role of Jesus would have to be reinterpreted."(http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_school.htm)
The Design Argument For The Existence Of God This argument is also called the teleological argument, it argues that the universe did not come around by mere chance, but some one or something designed it. This thing was God. This argument is a prosteriori because the observation of the natural world is taken into the mind to conclude that there is a designer. The belief that the universe was designed by God was triggered by things like the four seasons; summer, spring, autumn and winter, that change through the year.
The clash between evolutionists and creationists seems to be far from its finale. Both sides come up with potent arguments in favor of their positions. Evolutionists stress the absence of factual evidence in favor of God’s existence, point to fossils as a proof of the evolutionary process, and name the Big Bang as the reason of the universe’s appearance and further development. Creationists, in their turn, stress that there are no intermediate links between species in found fossils, consider complexity and diversity of nature to be an indirect evidence of God’s existence, and refer to the second law of thermodynamics to argue against the Big Bang theory. However, none of the sides seem to see that both points of view can not only co-exist, but be successfully combined. Such a combination could explain everything at once.
In 1859, Charles Darwin published his groundbreaking Origin of Species, which would introduce the seminal theory of evolution to the scientific community. Over 150 years later, the majority of scientists have come to a consensus in agreement with this theory, citing evidence in newer scientific research. In an average high school biology classroom, one may imagine an instructor that has devoted much of his life to science and a predominantly Christian class of about twenty-five students. On the topic of evolution, one of the students might ask, “Why would God have taken the long route by creating us through billion years of evolution?” while another student may claim “The Book of Genesis clearly says that the earth along with all living creatures was created in just six days, and Biblical dating has proven that the earth is only 6000 years old.” Finally a third student interjects with the remark “maybe the Bible really is just a book, and besides, science has basically already proven that evolution happened, and is continuing to happen as we speak.”
Evolution and Intelligent Design being taught in public schools is a growing controversy. Both supporters and augmenters have been clashing over different perspectives on wither intelligent design should replace evolution as part of the scientific curriculum. The controversy has lead to multiple court cases and religious dispute. The main issue when it comes to teaching this idea of science in our schools is the idea of conforming to an idea without solid evidence. Students whom are required to learn intelligent design rather than Darwin’s idea of evolution will be directly confronted on their moral and religious beliefs. In addition, students will develop a less understanding of science.
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
In the uncertainty that the modern world is, there is one law that stays petrified in stone no matter what happens: “Things change with age.” No matter if it is in history, science, or even Pokémon, things change as time passes by and this process is called evolution. The theory formulated by Charles Darwin is the belief that all organisms have come from earliest creatures because of external factors (“NSTA…”). School boards everywhere have accepted the theory of Evolution as fact making it essential to be in the curriculums of science classrooms. However, over the years, controversy has arisen as the fact that is evolution is still only a theory with flaws and setbacks, efficiently making other theories (i.e. intelligent design) a viable alternate in the classroom. The law, on the other hand, had a different idea about these other theories with numerous bans them from schools, claiming them to be against the second amendment. Despite the bitter debate of rather or not it is valid and right for teaching (primarily alone) the theory of evolution lies as being the most reliable and accurate way to teach how the modern world came to be.
There are different viewpoints on the question “what is the universe made of?” I think that both science and religion offer their own explanation to this topic and they sometimes overlap, which creates contradictions. Therefore, I do not agree with Stephen Jay Gould’s non-overlapping magisterial, which claims that there is a fine line separating science from religion. That being said, I think the conflict between science and religion is only in the study of evolution. It is possible for a scientist to be religious if he is not studying evolution, because science is very broad and it has various studies. In this essay, I will talk about the conflict between religion and science by comparing the arguments from Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins. I argue that science and religion do overlap but only in some area concerning evolution and the cosmic design. Furthermore, when these overlaps are present it means that there are conflicts and one must choose between science and religion.
Talking on both sides of the debate, each side feels as though the other has no scientific reasoning come up with their theory. In reading the article written by Shipman, the evolutionists believe that intelligent design has no concrete evidence on how the world was crea...
In today’s society, many topics create a very substantial amount of controversy between different groups of people. From abortion to the healthcare reform, there are countless topics of discussion. One of the major and ongoing controversial topics in the religious society is the Big Bang theory versus Creation. One side of the controversy is, predominately, the scientific community, with the other end obviously being the religious community.
“The greatest mystery of existence is existence itself” (Chopra). Chopra, a world-renowned author, perceives the existence of life as a truly mystifying cerebration. The pending question that many scientist, and even theists, attempt to answer is how life ultimately began. Currently, the mystery is left with two propositions, evolution and creation. While both approaches attempt to answer the origins of life, evolution and creation are two contrasting concepts. Evolution views life to be a process by which organisms diversified from earlier forms whereas creation illustrates that life was created by a supernatural being. Creation and evolution both agree on the existence of microevolution and the resemblance of apes and humans but vary in terms of interpreting the origins of the life through a historical standpoint. A concept known as Faith Vs Fact comprehensively summarizes the tone of this debate, which leads the question of how life began.