Feb 15, 2014

Posted by John Loeffler in Premium | 1 Comment

Damage Control: What Ken Ham Should Have Said

Login to access this full program.

140007 02/15/2014

There has been so much disillusioned commentary about the recent Ken Ham/Bill Nye evolution-versus-creation debate that it’s time to set things straight.

First, John’s boralogue frames the issue by explaining how a debate is supposed to work, and reminds listeners that one debate does not definitively settle a controversy. A successful debate relies on good participants and proper framing of issues.

Then we’ll target specific areas where neo-Darwinism is in serious trouble, namely in the the origin of information contained in living cells. These problems are acknowledged at the theoretical level but denied at the pop science level and in high school classes. Dr. Stephen Meyer, Ph.D., author of Darwin’s Doubt (www.darwinsdoubt.org), returns to the program for incisive commentary on this problem.

Russ Miller from Creation Ministries (www.creationministries.org) guests again for a point-by-point rebuttal of many issues raised by Bill Nye during the debate with Ken Ham.

Want more resources on these topics? Here are some previous programs you might find interesting:
Share this post:
  1. Russell Martin says:

    I understand that most people believe that Ken Ham should have used “silver bullets” to nail Bill Nye to the wall and shoot down his debate points. People are used to traditional debate formats and goals, yet Ken decided to approach the encounter with Bill Nye differently. The following link is to his thoughts about the debate before the event:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *