. .

.

>> it's called evolution in the lab. so the ability to grow on credit trait is said to be evolution, and there are those who say, hey, this is against the creationist. for instance one from chicago says it's yet another poke in the eye for anti-evolutionists. he says the thing i like the

most is you can get these omplex traits by let me introduce you to another biblical creationist who is a scientist. >> hi. y name is dr. andrew >> i am published in micro biology. nd my work has been cited in -- has been published and cited regularly in journals. nd while i was taught not to

accept evolution, i do my research from a creationist's perspective. e. coli evolving over 30 years and 30,000 generations in a lab. and people say it is now able to grow on credit tribut it is not new information. the information is stillthere. it's just stwoich turn it on and off. that's what they have report there had. it's nothing new. >> see students need to be told what's going on. what about evidence confirming one race? well, when we look at the human population, we see a lot of differences. based on darwinism. darwin did teach there were lower and higher races. would you believe back in the 1900's, one of the most popular

text books in america taught that at the present time there exists upon earth five races and finally the highest type of all the caucasians represented by the civilized white inhabitants of europe. can you imagine that in the school systems today? off wrong foundation. you're going to have a wrong world vufmente had they started from the creation account in the bible? descendants of adam and eve and different people groups formed but bye logically there's only one race of humans. i mentioned the doctor that was a research with the human geno project and you remember in 200this was headline news and we read they had put together the entire gene overwhelm and declared there was only one

race. the human race. there we have observational science now, there's much far could be said on each of these topics. obviously you can't do that in short time like this. lahrly the term science and evolution and we need to understand how they are being look o impose an anti-god on students? we need to understand the difference between observation let me e and -- illustrate this with a statement from bill ney.

>> you can show earth is not lat or 10,000 years old. >> you can. you can show it's a sfeer. you can observe that. you cannot observe the age earth. you don't see that. you see a gain. there's a big difference between informational science and observational science and i believe what's happening is the students are being indoctrinated by the use of terms. the highjacking of the words with a bait and switch. here in this video clip i serve bill ney is mixing observational science and it's not a mystery when you tons difference. >> people with these deeply held religious beliefs, they elbow brace the interpretation of the bible written in english

as a world view and at the same time they accept aspirin, anti-by outic drugs, airplanes. but they are able to hold these two world views, and this is a mist enrichment >> i suggest it's not a mystery. when i'm talking about anti-by out i and aspirin that's ken ham the observational science bloke. i'm australian. we call guys blokes. but when you're talking about that, you're talking about ken ham the observational science bloke. bill ney, i used to enjoy watching him the observational science guy but when he is talking about evolution, i'm charging that's bill ney historical science guy and i am now, at g them to -- the creation museum we're only

too willing to admit our beliefs based on the bible but look at what -- i believe we're teaching people to think critically and to think in the right terms about science. i believe the it's the creationist that should be educating the kids out there because we're teaching them the right way to think. we admit it's based phenomenon bible but i'm just challengeing the evolutionists to be up front. i'm only too willing to admit my historical science based on the bible and i wanted to define the word creation as we use it. by creation we mean here at the creation museum we mean the account based on the bible. yes, i take genesis object -- we at the creation museum walk people through a history. we walk them through a perfect

deleags god made adam and eve and sea creachurs and then there was no death before sin. then the catastrophe of the flood. if there was a global flood you would expect to find billions of dead things and what do you mind? billions of dead things laid down and confusion, the tower of able. so this is the geological logical cal and ant pa things as recorded in the bible then of course that god's son stepped into history one and day there's going to be a new heavien and earth to come. not only is this an understanding of hoist the xplain the geology, biology,

astronomy to detective idea of the past. for example when jesus said have you not read it's between a man and sh male and female. he quoted from genesis one and two, god invented marriage by and ay, and as to be a man woman and not just marriage but ultimately every biblical part in geology. why is there sin in the world? genesis, why do we wear clothes? genesis. when we look that the what i history even seas of that we walk people true here at the museum, think of how it all connects together. that's why god's son died on the cross to conquer death and offer a free gift of salvation.

a reminder that that was judgment because of man's wickedness and his family had to go through a door to be saved. jesus christ said time door. by any man enter them. and we make no poll jai that if you confess and believe in your mouth god has raised you from the dead, and if you allow creation in schools, this is eligion. talking about the recent battle in texas over text books in the public school. the newspaper record said textbook in classroom contradict lum battles pit creationists against academics. top right there.

note creationists and academics. creation can't be science. the idea of ideology trumping scientific fact. ry talking about what you observe or beliefs about the past? the president of the texas freedom network and she is advocately spoken out about this textbook battle there. in texas. and the mission statement of the organization she is president of says the texas freedom network advances the main stream of -- to counterthe religious right. the religious freedom and liberty. then she makes this statement. science education. on main be based stream -- not personal beliefs of -- wait a minute, they want eligious liberty and not

ideological beliefs? >> they are using the same -- a by trailerly define that -- and and nt model calls evolution as fact. they are imposing their ideology on students. that's religion. what does she mean by religious freedom? it's more about science and creation and evolution. it's about who is the snort man or zpwhod you start with naturalism and what about morals? who decides right and wrong? it's marriage. get rid of old people. why not? they are just animals. abortion, get rid of spare cats and spare kids. but if you start with marriage, one man, one woman, sanctity of life. we care for old people. life begins at fert lieization

a human compared to being. generations of kids are being taught the religion of naturalism and that the bible cannot be trusted so creation is the only viable model confirmed by -- what you know? i'm a science teacher. i want to see kids taught that. i want to see -- if you know we teach them whole universe is he -- is designed by natural processes. when they are looking at the creation in regard of how you develop -- if you look at random processes, that could totally influence the way they think. it could have a great affect on how you look for overcoming diseases. i want children to be taught the right town dation that there's a god who created them who loves them who died on the

cross for them and that they are special, that they are made in the image of god. > thank you mr. ham. >> and it did occur to me when you had my old friend larry king, you could have just asked him. he's been around a long time and a smart guy. now let's all be atentive to mr. ney as he gives us his 30-minute presentation. >> thank you. around s take it back to the question at hand. does his model hold up? is it viable? for me, take a look. we're here in kentucky on layer

upon layer upon layer of limestone. we are standing on millions of layers of ancient life. how could those animals have lived their speier life and formed these layers in just 4,000 years? there isn't enough time since r. ham's flood for the limestone stand on since we have come into existence. scientific colleagues go to

places like greenland and antarctica and drill into the ice with hollow drill bits. it's not that extraordinary. many of you probably have done that with saws and we pull out long cylinders of ice. long ice rods. d these are made of snow and it's called snow ice. snow ice forms over the winter they are d crushed together and trapping the little bubbles and the little bubbles has ancient atmosphere. there's no one running around with a hypodermic needle squirting them and we find ertain to have 680,000 layers. 680,000 snow, winter/summer cycles. just 4,000 be that

years ago all of this ice formed? let's just run some numbers. this is some scenes from lovely antarctic. let's say we have 680,000 layers of the snow ice and someone have nce the wouldn't that there's been warnte summer 170 times one year? if we go to california, we find bristle cone s of pines. some of them are over 6,000 years old. 6,800 years old. there's a famous tree in sweden. it's t ,550 years old. how could these trees be there if there was an enormous flood

just 4,000 years ago? you can try this yourself, everybody. get, i mean dwrom get b mean to trees but get a sap ling and put it under water for a year. lit not survive in general nor will it seed. they just won't make it. so how could those trees be that old if the earth is only 4,000 years old. atchup to, when we go to the grand canyon which is an astonishing place. you find layer upon layer of ancient rocks. there was this enormous flood that you speak of, wouldn't there have been churning and bubbling and broiling, how would these things have settled out? your claim that they settled out in an extraordinary amount of time for me is not satisfy on the outside do.

the rate at which soil is deposits and we can see that it takes a long, long time for sedments to turn to stone. furthermore you can find places in the grand canyon on that bed on ng to an ancient the other side and the colorado river went through it. and if this flood drained through the grand canyon, wouldn't there have been a grand canyon on every continue sent in if this water drained away in this extraordinarily short amount of time, 4,000

years. now, when you look at these layers carefully, you find these beautiful fossils. when i say beautiful, i am inspired by them. they are remarkable. we are looking at the past. rudimentary sea animals. up above that you will find clams, oysters and then mammals. higher r, ever find a animal mixed in with a lower one. you never find a lower one trying to swim its way to the higher one. if it all happened in the extraordinarily short amount of time, wouldn't we expect to see some you are the but sflens and y the way, anyone here, if you can find one example of that anywhere in the world the science of the world channels you, you would change the world

if you could find one example of that everywhere. people have looked and looked and looked. they have not found a single one. here's an interesting one. these are fossil skulls people have found all around the world. it's by no mean representative of all the fossil skulls that have been found. but these are all over the place. if you were to look at these i assure you not any of them is the gorilla. right? if as mr. ham and his associates claim, there was just man and then everybody else, there were just humans and all other species, where would you put modern humans among these skulls? how did all these skulls get all over the earth in these extraordinary fashions where would you put us?

we are listen to and i encourage you when you go home the look it up. now, one of the extraordinary claims associated with mr. ham's world view is that this giant boat, very large wooden chip went aground safely on a mountain of what we now call middle east. so places like australia are who ated then by animals somehow noong get from the middle east all the way to australia in the last 4,000 years. an hat to me is extraordinary claim. we would expect then somewhere between the middle east and australia we would expect to find evidence of kangaroos, some fossils or bones in the last 4,000 years somebody would have been hopping along there and died along the way and we'd find them and foote more there's a claim of a land

bridge that allowed the animals to get from asiaya to the continent of asia and that's disappeared. no navigator. no diver no u.s. navy submarine has ever detected any evidence of this let alone fossils of kangaroos. so the argument shot? met. so if there are 4,000 years ince ken ham's flood and let's say as he said many times there are 7,000 kinds. today the lowest estimate is that there are 8.7 million species but a much more reasonable estimate is it's 50 million or 100 million when you start counting viruses and bacteria and beetles that must be in the tropical rain noors we have not found so we'll take

a number i think that's very reasonable. 16 million species today. if these came from 7,000 kinds. let's say we have 7,000 subtracted from 15 million that's 15,993,000. we would expect to find 11 new species every day. so you would into out into your yard and you wouldn't just find a different bird, a new bird. you would find a different kind of bird. a whole new species of bird every day. a new species of fish. and things you cannot see. this would be enormous news. the last 4,000 years? people would have seen these changes among us so the cincinnati inquirer would carry a column, today's new species and it would list these 11

every day but we have seen no evidence of that. there's simply not enough time. now, as you may know i was graduated from engineering school and got a job at bowing. i worked on 747's. ok everybody relax. i was very well supervisor -- superviseed. but i traveled the highways of washington state quite a bit. i was a young guy. i had a motorcycle. i used to go mountain climbing washington state, oregon, and you can drive along find these enormous would orse on top of the ground. enormous rocks. huge, sitting on top of the ground. now, out there in the regular academic pursuits, regular geology, people have discovered there used to be a lake in montana which we charmingly

refer to as lake missoula. which is not there now but evidence shows it was there. but an ice dam formed and it would break. and there were multiple floods in my old state of washington state. before i move on let me say, go seahawks! that was very graphing for me. -- gratifying for me. so if the heavier rocks would sink to the bottom during a flood event the big rocks and especially their shape instead of the aerodynamic or water changing shape, you would expect home the to sink to the bottom but here are the normous rocks and there's no shortage of them. if you go driving in the state of oregon, they are readily available. so how could they be there if

the asset just 4,000 years hold? how could they be there if zwhrust one flood caused it? another remarkable thing i to d like for everybody consider is in this world view it's somehow that noah and his family were able to build a wooden ship that would house 1,000 individuals. there were 7,000 kinds and a boy and girl for each one of those, so it's about 14,008 people, and as far as anybody knew they were unskilled and as far as anybody knows ethey had never built a ship and they had to get all these animals on there and feed them and i understand mr. ham has explanations for that and i find it extraordinary but this is the premise of the bit and we can then run a scientific test. the people in the early 1900's

built an extraordinarily large ship the wyominging it was a six-masted scooner, the large est one ever built. it had a motor on it for wenching cables but this boat had a great difficulty. it was not as big as the titanic but a very long ship. it would twist in the sea. it would twist this way, this way and this way. and in all that twisting, it leaked. it leaked like crazy. the crew could not deep ship ry i had an deed it eventually sank the loss of all 14 hams. so there were 14 crew men on a ship built by very skilled ship rights and they couldn't build a boat as big as the arc is claimed to have been. is that reasonable? is that snobble that the best

ship builders in the world couldn't do what eight unskilled people, men and their wives were able to do? if you visit the national zoo, in washington d.c. it's 163 acres and they have 400 species. by the way this picture was taken by space demraft space orbiting the earth. if you told my grandfather let alone my father we had that capability, they would have been amazed. that comes from our fundamental understanding of gravity and material science and of physics. and life science where you go looking. this place as often as any zoo is often concerned and criticized for how it streats its animals. they have -- is it reasonable that noah and his colleagues and family were able to maintain 14,000 animals and themselves and feed them aboard

a ship that was bigger than anyone's ever been able to build. now there's a thing. what we want in science, science is practiced on the outside. is an ability to predict. we want to have a natural law at is so obvious and clear so, well understood that we can make predictions about what happened. we predict we can put a space craft in orbit and take a picture of washington, d.c. we can predict that if we provide this much room for an elephant, it will live healthly for a certain amount of time. so i'll give you an example. in the explanation provided by traditional science of how we came to be, we find as mr. ham alluded to many times in his recent remarks, we find a sequence of animals in what generally is called the fossil

record. we look tat layers that you would find the kentucky. you look at them carefully find a sequence or succession of animals. ads one might expect when you're looking at old records there's pieces that seem to be missing, a gap. so scientists got to thinking about this. nation there are lung jump from pond-to-pond and amphibians and people wondered if there wasn't a fossil or an organism or animal that lived that had characteristics of both. people over the years found that in canada there was clearly a fossil marsh. a place that used to be a swamp. it dried out. and they found all kinds of happy swamp fossils there. ferns, so on. organisms and animals and fish

that were recognized. d people realized with the age of the rock as computered by traditional scientists. with the age of the rocks this would be a reasonable place to look for an animal or fossiled animal that lived there. it. ndeed scientists found this fish lizard guy. and they found several specimens. it wasn't one individual. in other words, they made a prediction that this animal would be found, and it was found. o far mr. ham and his world view, the ken ham creation model does not have this capability. it cannot make predictions and show results. here's an extraordinary one i fish, the top . certain minnows that have the remarkable ability to have sex

with other fish traditional fish sex and they can have sex with themselves. now, one of the old questions in life science, everybody, one of the old sort of chin strokers is why does any organism whether you're an ash squid, a sea jelly, a mar monte. why does anybody have sex? i mean, there are more bacteria in your tummy right now than there are humans on earth. and bacteria doesn't bother with that. they split themselves in half d get new bacteria, like getter done. think about all the stuff a rose bush goes through to make a flower and a thorn and the bees flying around. hy does anybody bother with all that? and the answer seems to be your enemies. and your enemies are not lions nd tigers and bears.

oh, my. your enemies are germs. pair sites. that's what's going to get you. germs and parasites. my first cousin's son died tragically from essentially the flu. it's not a story. t's my first cousin once removed because apparently the virus had genes to attack his genes so when you have sex off new mixture of genes. so people studied these top minnows and found the ones who reproduced secksly had fewer parasites than the ones that reproduced on their own. this black spot disease. wait, there's more, in these populations with flooding and river ponds and isolated and dry up and river flows again, in between some of the fish will have sex with other fish sometimes and sex on their own

with what's called a sexually. hose fish the ones that are in between, they have an inter mediate number of infections. in other words, the explanation provided by evolution made a prediction and the prediction is extraordinary and sutal but there it is. how else would you explain it? and to mr. ham and his followers i say this is something we in science want. we want the ability to predict. and your assertion that there's some ditches between natural laws that i use to tobs world today and the natural laws that existed 4,000 years ago is extraordinary and unsettling. i travel around. off great many family nebs danville, virginia vavement one of the u.s.'s most livable cities. it's lovely. along, and ving there was a sign in front of a church. big bang theory, you got to be

kidding me, god. now, everybody, why would someone at the church, a pastor, for example, put that sign up? didn't believe bang was a real thing. i just want to roux briefly with everybody why we except in the outside world why we expect the big bang. ed win hubbell -- sorry, there you go. you've got to be kidding me, god. edwin hubbell was sitting at mount wilson which is frup pasadena, california, on a clear day you can look down and see where the rose parade goes. that's close to civilization but even in the early 1900's, the people who selected this site picked an exlent site. the cloud and smog are beau you. edwin hubbell sat there with

his big telescope studying the heavens and found stars are moving apart. stars are moving apart. and he wasn't sure why. but it was clear that the stars are moving farther and that are farther apart all the time. o people talked about it for are couple decades and then eventually another astronomer fred loyal rarked it was like there was a big bang, an explosion that is to say since everything is moving apart it's reasonable that at one time they were all together and there was place from weapons these things expanded. and it was a remarkable insight but people were still questioning it for decades. scientists and conventional scientists questioning it for decades. these two researchers wanted to

for radio signals from space. radio astronomy. while we have site with our eyes there's a whole bunch of waves for that are longer. the radar at the airport is about that long. your f.m. radio signal is about like this. a.m. radio signals are kill me, several soccer fields. they went out listening. and there was this hiss. this sthhh result time that wouldn't go away. they thought there's a loose connector. hey plugged in the connector, turned it this way. the hits was still there they thought it was pigeon drop that is affected the reception of this horn. in basking here ridge, new jersey. it's a national historic site this cosmic

background sound that was pre addicted by aastronomers. astronmerps running the umbers, doing the math predicted in the cosmos would be left over this echo or energy from the big bang that would be detectable. and they detected it. we built the cosmic observe tori for background emissions the kobe space craft, and it matched exactly the astronomer 's predictions. u got to respect that. it's a wonderful thing. now, along that line is some interest in the age of the earth. right now it's generally agreed that the big bang happened 13.7 billion years ago. what we can do on earth, these elements that we all know on the periodic table of chemicals. en ones we don't know were created when stars explode, and

i look like negotiation but i attended a lecture by hans baita who won a noble prize by discovering a process by which stars create this element. our good friends row bid yum and stroin yum. it becomes that a new reason to becomes a proton and it goes up the periodic table. when lava comes out of the ground and freezes and turns to rock when the melt solid phase to it locks the row bid yum and stronty yum in place. and so by careful by being ylan intelligent, you can tell when the rock froze. you can tell how told row bid um and other is. you can get an idea how told fossils are. go to nebraska and ash falls state park and see the astonish ing fossils.

it looks like a hollywood movie. there are ry no risses and three-toed horses in nebraska. animals are today. they were buried catastrophically in idaho by lava. by a volcano. as a northwesterner around for mount st. he willens. full disclosure, i'm on the ount st. he willens board. but when it goes off, it pops need cloud of -- they resleeve they go to a watering hole then they wore all kid killed when the ash came down. get cut you would open for something but now --

my kentucky friends, right now there's no place in the commonwealth of kentucky to get a degree in this kind of nuclear medicine or drugs associated with that. i hope you find the troubling. i hope you're concerned about that. you want scientifically literate students in your commonwealth for a better tomorrow for everybody. you cannot get this here. you have to go out of state. now, as far as the distance to stars. that you understand this is very well understood. it's february. we look at a star in february. we measure an angleto it and wait sixen months and look at that same star again and measure the angle. it's the same way carpenters built this building and surveyors survey the land. so by measuring the distance to a star, you can figure out how far away it is to it and then how far to the next star and so on. there's billions of stars.

mr. ham how could there be billions of stars more distant that 6,000 years if the world is only 6,000 years old? sit s another astronomer reasonable that we have ice. older by a factor of 100 than you claim the earth is. that we have tree rings and rocks. and things far, far older than you claim the earth is. could anybody have built an arc that could have sustained an -- so if you're asking me, and i got the impression you were, is ken ham's creation model

viable? i say no. absolutely not. now, one last thing. you may not know that in the u.s. constitution from the founding fathers. is the sentence to promote the progress of science and useful arts. kentucky voters. voters who might be watching online in places like texas, tennessee, ok oh, kansas. please, you don't want to raise a generation of science students who don't understand how we know our place in the cosmos or don't understand natural law. we need innovate to deep united states where it is in the world. thank you very much. [applause] >> that's a lot to take in.

i hope everybody's holding up well. what we're going to have now is a five-minute rebutal time for each gentleman to towards other one's comments then there will be a five-minute counterrebutal after that. things are zpwoinching to start moving more quickly so no applauding or anything that slows it down. so mr. ham if you would like to begin with your five-minute ebutal fist. answer all ll, to the points you brought up, the moderator was going on for millions of years so, i can only deal with some of them and you mentioned the -- let me deal with that, as i said in my presentation, you cannot observe the age of the earth and i would say that comes under what we call of gin

science. so you understand where i'm coming from. yes, we admit we build our origins from the bible. e bible says god created neart six days and adam was made on day six so when you add up the geneologies from toomed abraham, you've got 2000 years from abraham to christ and thrown that's how we get 6,000 years. ow, a lot of people say by the way, the earth's age is 4.5 billion years old. and we have radioactive decay dating methods that found that. we certainly observe radioactive decay. but when you're talking about the past, we have a problem. to give you a perfect example. in australia there were

engineers that were trying to search out about a coalmine found a lava floge that had woody material in it, branches and twigs and so on so when dr. andrews a our ph.d. geologist sent that to a lab in massachusetts in 194, they dated a gone to 45 million years old. he also extent wood to the radio carbon the point is there's a problem. let me give you another example of the problem. ava started to form in the 1980's after mount st. helen's erupted and then other jiogses actually sampled the rock land the took whole rock, crushed it, sent it to the same lab i believe and got a date of .3458 years when he separated

out the mineral levels and 3.9 million, 2.8 million. all these dating methoddings give all sorts of different dates. so different dating methods on these rocks give different dates. so freese a lot of asutchingses, for example the amount of matter, of the isotopes, you have to know them but you twhrrnt. opening are all older statements they mouf -- in other words it's a closed system. but you don't know that and there's a lot of that you don't know. and those are just some of them. the disappoint there's lots of aassumptions so there's no dating method you can used or eff an abc lutely date age. about t you brought up

kins believing in millions of years. yes, but i'd say they have a problem. i'm not saying they are not christians, but salvation is conditional on faith in christ not the time of earth. but if you believe in millions of years you've got death and lots of suffering and disease leading to man. the bible makes it very clear that death is a result of man's sin in fact the fest death was there and the sacrifice pointing towards what would happen with apologies issues christ. now, if you believe in millions of years as a christian in the fossil records there's evidence of animals eath each other. originally it says man was vegetarian and we were not told we could eat meat until after the flood. there's diseases like brain tureps but the bible said there as everything good but the

bible says thorns dame after the curse. be true things can't at the same time. there's hundreds of dating methods and 90% of them contradict billions of years methods are foulible and i claim they was method infoulible which is a witness that was there and told us. that's from the word of god. and that's why i would say there's only 6,000 years and nothing astronomy. to contradict that -- >> mr. ham, now mr. nye, your five-minute rebutal. >> thank you. if you find 45 million-year-old rock on top of 45 million-year-old trees, neighbor rock slid on top. that seems like a much more reasonable explanation than it's impossible. as far as dating goes, the

methods are very reliable. one of the mysteries or interesting things people in my usiness, especially as stroids seem to be so close in age in date. 4357b9 billion and 4.6 billion years. people at first expected a little more of a spread. so i understand that you take the bible as written in english, translated countless times over the last 3 my lennia as to be a more ack rat and reasonable of the natural laws we see around them than what i and anybody in here can observe. that to me is unsettling. troubling. and then about the disease thing. are the fish centers, have they done something wrong to get diseases? that's sort of an extraordinary

claim that takes me past what i'm comfortable with. and as far as you cannot observe the patz. i have to stop you right there. that's what we do in astronomy. all we can do is look at the past. by the way, you're looking at the past right now. because the speed of light bounces off of me and then gets to your eyes. and i'm delighted to see that the people in the back i of the room appear that much younger than the people in the front. so this idea that you can separate the natural laws of past from the natural laws that we have now, i think is at the heart of our disagreement. i don't see how we're ever going to agree with that if you insist that natural laws have changed. for lack of a better word it's magical. and i have appreciated magic since i was a kid, but it's not

really what we want in conventional main stream science. assertion that tall animals were vegetarians before they got on the arc. that's really remarkable. i have not spent a lot of theeth really aren't set up for broccoli. that these an malice until this flood is something that i would ask you to provide a little more proof for. i give you the lions' teeth. you give me versus as translated into english over what, 30 centuries? so that's not enough evidence for me. if you've ever played telephone wrauf kindergarten secret and whisper it to the next person and so on and things gone wrong.

-- and the o you, information that you used to create your world view is not consistent with what i as a reasonable man would expect. so i want everybody to consider the implications of this. if we accept mr. ham's point of view, that -- by mr. ham's point of view that the bible is translated into american english serves as a science text and he and his followers will interpret that for you. just i want you to consider what that means. it means that mr. ham's word or his interpretation of these other words is somehow to be more respected than your what you can observe in nature and what you can find literally in your backyard in kentucky.

t's a troubling and unsettling point of view, and one i would very much like you to address when you come back. as far as the five races that you mentioned, it's kind of the same thing. the five races were claimed by people who were of european descent and said hey, we're the best. check us out. and that turns out to be if you've ever traveled anywhere not to be that way. people are much more alike than they are different. so are we supposed to take your word for the english word translated over the last 30 centuries instead of what we can observe in the universe around us? >> mr. ham, would you like to offer your five-minute counter rebutal? >> first of all, bill, just so unds don't want to mis you which is the supposedly 45,000 was inside bass at the

so it was encased in the bass at the and that's why i was making that particular point and i would also say that natural law habit changed. as i said we have the logic and uniform of mother nature. that -- at least why we can do good experimental science because we assume those laws are true and that will be true tomorrow. i do want to be say this. that you've said a few times, ken ham's view or ken ham's model. it's not just ken ham's model. we have a number of ph.d. on our staff. i quoted and had video quotes from so some scientists. it's dr. in a maid yum's and dr. faulkner's model. it's dr. snellings model and dr. per dumb's model. and you go on that website, and there are lots of creation

science that agree with what we are saying concerning the bible. so it's not just my model in that sense. there's so much they could say i t -- as i listen to you, believe you're confusing terms in regards to species and kinds. because we're not saying god created all those species. we're saying god created kinds and not saying species got on the arc but kinds. in fact there's a number of papers published on our website that says what's your breed of dog? and you can say this one combined with this one and you n lookaround and say one represents one kind but they have predicted less than a 1,000 kinds were on noah's arc and every size of land animal snood big, so there was plenty of room on the arc. there are also those who believe what you were saying

was illustrating my point. you were talking about tree rings and ice layers. but we're talking about the in 1942, weren't for instance. there were some planes that landed on the ice in greenland found them 46 years later miles away from the original location with ice built up on top of them. if you assumed one player a year. -- in regard to lying to have to my teeth, most bears have species that are -- the panda, you can say it is a savage carnivore. it eats mainly bamboo.

has sharp teeth and looks like a savage creature. so just because an animal has sharp teeth doesn't mean it's a meat eater. doesn't like t creationists do believe that was a catastrophic event but then sthains time as well. and again, in regard to science why would you say noah was unskilled? i mean i didn't meet noah and neither did you? and it's a view of origins because you're thinking people before us aren't as good as us. there are civilizations that ook ted in the past and we l at their technology and we can't even understand today how they did some of the things they did. other ay china and

places built complex things. >> we re-built 1% of the arc to scale and showed three interlocking layers. one other thing concerning the that is from a big bang perspective. even the secularists have a problem of getting light and radiation out to the universe to exchange with the rest of the universe. even background radiation. 15 billion years, they can only get it about half way and that is why they have inflation theories which means everyone has a problem concerning the light issue. people do not understand that we have some models on our website to help explain those sorts of things. >> your counter rebuttal. >> i am completely unsatisfied. you did not in my view address fundamental questions. 680,000 years of snow ice layers which require winter-summer

cycles for let's say you have 2000 kinds instead of seven, that makes the problem even more extraordinary. all flying 11 by 3.5. we get to 35, 40 species every day that we do not see. they are not extent. we are losing species due to mostly human activity and loss of habitat. as far as know of being an extraordinary shipwright, my family spend their whole life learning to make ships. it is very reasonable perhaps to you that noah had superpowers and was able to build this extraordinary craft with seven family members but to me it is not reasonable. by the way: the fundamental thing we disagree on is this nature of what you can prove to yourself.

this is to say when people make assumptions based on radiometric data, when they make assumptions about the expanding universe, when they make assumptions about the rate at which genes change in populations of act. laboratory growth media, they're making assumptions based on previous experience. they are not coming out of whole cloth. next time you have a chance to speak, i encourage you to explain to us why we should accept your word for it that natural law changed 4000 years ago completely and there is no record of it. there are pyramid said her older than that. there are human populations that are far older than that. with traditions that go back farther than that and it is not reasonable that everything changed for thousand years ago. by everything i mean the

species, the surface of the earth, the stars in the sky, and the relationship of all the other living things on earth to humans. it is not reasonable to me that everything changed like that. another thing i would very much appreciate you addressing mode there are billions of people in the world who are deeply religious and i respect that. people get tremendous community and comfort and nurture and support from their religious fellows in their communities and faves and churches. they do not accept your point of view. there are christians who do not accept that the earth could be this extraordinarily young age because of all the evidence around them. what is to become of them? in your view? this thing started as i understand it, based on the old testament. when you bring in i am not a

theologian, when you bring in the new testament, it is and that a little out-of-the-box? i am looking for explanations of the creation of the world as we know it. based on what i am going to call science. not historical science, not observational science. things that each of us can do akin to what we do. we try to out guess the characters on murder mystery shows or crime scene investigations especially. what is to become of all those people who do not see it your way? for us in the scientific community, i remind you that when we find an idea that is not tenable, it does not work, it does not fly, it does not hold water, whatever it him you would like to embrace, we throw it away. we are delighted. if you can find a fossil that is between the layers, bring it on. if you could show that the

microwave background radiation is not a result of the big bang, kaman. writer paper, tear it up. your view that we are supposed to take your word for this book written centuries ago, translated into american english is somehow more important than what i can see with my own eyes is next ordinary claim. for those watching online especially i want to remind you that we need scientists and especially engineers for the future. engineers use science to solve problems and make things. we need these people so the u.s. can continue to innovate and be a world reader. we need innovation and that needs science education. thank you. >> thank you both. we are going to get things moving faster. i think they might be quite interesting. questions and answers submitted

by our audience. we handed out these cards to everyone. i shuffled them and the back and i dropped a lot of them and skip them up again and to view summary sorting through them here he was to get a pile for each so we can alternate reasonably between them. the reason i will skip over one if i cannot read it or if it is a question i do not know how to read because it does not seem to have sense. what is going to happen is we will go back and forth between mr. nigh -- nye and mr. ham. the other will have one minute to answer the question. mr. ham, you have been a first. mr. nye, you can stand by. how does creationism account for celestial bodies moving farther

apart and what function does that serve in the grand design? >> when it comes to looking at the universe, we believe that in the beginning god created the heavens and the earth and creationist astronomers say you can observe the inverse expanding. he it says he stretches out the heavens and seems to indicate that there is an expansion of the adverse. we would say yeah, you can observe that in that fits with observational science. i cannot answer that question. the bible says god made the heavens for his glory and that is why he made the stars that we see out there. it is to tell us how great he is. one of our programs looks at this when you see how large the

universe is and it shows us how great god is. how big he is and he is and all-powerful god and infinite, all-knowing god who created the universe to show us his power. can you imagine that westmark the thing that is remarkable as it says on the fourth day of creation, he made the stars also. so much like by the way. he is an all powerful god. he made the stars and made them show us how great he is. the more they understand what that means is god is all-powerful, infinite, you realize how small we are and realize he would consider this planet is so significant that he created human beings here. that is what i would say when i see the adverse as it is.

>> one minute. and your response? >> there is a question that troubles us all from the time we are youngest and first able to think. that is where did we come from? where did i come from? this question is so compelling that we have invented the science of astronomy. we have invented life science, we have invented physics. we discovered these natural laws we can learn more about our origin and where we came from. to you, when it says he invented the stars also, that is satisfying. you are done. to me when i look at the night sky i want to know what is out there. i am driven. i want to know what is out there is any part of me and indeed, it is. by the way, i find compelling you are satisfied.

and the big thing i want from you mr. ham is can you come up with something that you can predict. do you have a creation model that predicts something that will happen in nature? >> how did the atoms that created the big bang get there? >> this is a great mystery. you hit the nail on the head. what was before the big bang? this is what drives us. this is what we want to know. let's keep looking. let's keep searching. when i was young, it was presumed that the universe was slowing down. there's the big bang. except it's in outer space, there's no air so...goes out like that and so people presumed that it would slow down. that the universe, the gravity especially will hold everything together and maybe it's going to come back and explode again and people went out and the mathematical expression is is the universe flat. it's a mathematical expression. will the universe slow down,

slow down as...without ever stopping? well in 2004 saul perlmutter and his colleagues went looking for the rate at which the universe was slowing down. we're going to, let's go out and measure it and we do it with these extraordinary system of telescopes around the world, looking at the night sky, looking for supernovae. these are standard brightness that you can infer distances with and the universe isn't slowing down. it's accelerating. the universe is accelerating in its expansion. and you know why? nobody knows why. nobody knows why. and you'll hear the expression nowadays dark energy, dark matter which are mathematical ideas that seem to reckon well with what seems to be the gravitational attraction of clusters of stars, galaxies and their expansion and then isn't it reasonable that whatever's out there causing the universe to expand is here also and we just haven't figured out how to detect it.

my friends, suppose a science student from the commonwealth of kentucky pursues a career in science and finds out the answer to that deep question. where did we come from? what was before the big bang? to us, this is wonderful and charming and compelling. this is what makes us get up and go to work everyday is to try to solve the mysteries of the universe. >> bill, i just want to let you know that there's actually a book out there that actually tells us where matter came from and the very first sentence in that book says "in the beginning, god created the heavens and the earth." and really, that's the only thing that makes sense. it's the only thing that makes sense of why not just matter is here, where it came from but why matter when you look at it, we have information and language systems that build life, not just matter. and where did that come from because matter can never produce information. matter can never produce a

language system. language can only come from intelligence. information only comes from information. the bible tells us that the things we see like in the book of hebrews are made from things that are unseen. an infinite creator god who created universe, created matter, the energy, space, mass, time, universe and created the information for life. it's the only thing that makes logical sense. >> the overall majority of people in the scientific community have presented valid, physical evidence such as carbon dating and fossils to support evolutionary theory. what evidence besides the literal word of the bible supports creationism? >> first of all, you know, i often hear people talking about the majority. i would agree that the majority of scientists would believe in millions of years. the majority would believe in evolution but there's a large group out there that certainly don't. but the first thing i want to say is that it's not the majority that judge the truth.

there have been many times in the past when the majority have got it wrong. the majority of doctors in england once thought that after you cut up bodies, you can go...and wonder why the death rate is high in hospitals until they found out about a disease caused by bacteria and so on. the majority once thought that the appendix was a leftover organ from evolutionary ancestors. when it's okay, rip it out. when it's diseased, rip it out. these days, we know that it's for the immune system and it's very, very important. it's important to understand that just because the majority believes something doesn't mean that it's true. one of the things i was doing was i was making some predictions. i made some predictions. there's a whole list of predictions. and i was saying if the bible is

right, there's adam and eve, there's one race and i talked about that. if the bible is right, god made kinds and i went through and talked about that and so you know really that question comes down to the fact that we're again dealing with the fact that there's aspects about the past that you can't scientifically prove because you weren't there but observational science in the present. bill and i have all the same observational science. we're here in the present. we can see radioactivity but when it comes to talking about the past, you're not going to be scientifically able to prove that. that's what we need to admit. but we can be great scientists in the present as the examples i gave you. dr. damadian , or dr. stuart burgess or dr. fobich and we can be investigating the present. understanding the past is a whole different matter. >> thank you mr. ham. i have to disabuse you of a fundamental idea. if a scientist, if anybody makes a discovery that changes the way people view natural law, scientists embrace him or her.

this person's fantastic. louis pasteur, he made reference to germs. if you find something that changes, that disagrees with common thought, that's the greatest thing going in science. we look forward to that change. we challenge you. tell us why the universe is accelerating. tell us why these mothers were getting sick and we'll find an explanation for it. the idea that the majority has sway in science is true only up to a point and then the other thing i just want to point out, what you may have missed in evolutionary explanations of life is the mechanism by which we add complexity. the earth is getting energy from the sun all the time. and that energy is used to make lifeforms somewhat more complex. >> how did consciousness come from matter? >> i don't know. this is a great mystery.

a dear friend of mine is a neurologist. she studies the nature of consciousness. now i will say i used to embrace a joke about dogs. i love dogs, who doesn't. and you can say this guy remarked "i've never seen a dog paralyzed by self-doubt." actually, i have. furthermore, the thing that we celebrate. there are three sundials on the planet mars that bear an inscription to the future. to those who visit here, we wish you safe journey and the joy of discovery. it's inherently optimistic. that the future of human kind that we will one day walk on mars. but the joy of discovery. that's what drives us. the joy of finding out what's going on. so we don't know where consciousness comes from but we want to find out. furthermore, i tell you it's deep within us. i claim that i've spent time with dogs. that i've had the joy of

discovery. it's way inside us. we have one ancestor as we can figure. and by the way, if you can find what we in science call a second genesis. this is to say did life start another way in the earth? there are researchers, astro-biology researchers supported by nasa, your tax dollars that are looking for an answer to that very question. is it possible that life can start another way? is there some sort of a lifeform akin to science fiction that's crystal instead of membranes. this would be a fantastic discovery that would change the world. the nature of consciousness is a mystery. i challenge the young people here to investigate that very question. and i remind you, taxpayers and voters that might be watching, if we do not embrace the process of science, i mean in the mainstream, we will fall behind economically. this is a point i can't say enough. >> bill, i want to say that

there is a book out there that does document where consciousness came from. and in that book, the one who created us said that he made man in his image and he breathe into man and he became a living being and so the bible does document that. that's where consciousness came from. that god gave it to us. and you know, one thing i want to say is i have a mystery. and that is you talk about the joy of discovery but you also say that when you die it's over and that's the end of you and if when you die it's over, you don't even remember you were here. what's the point of the joy of discovery anyway. i mean it in an ultimate sense. i mean, you know, you don't even know you were here. so what's the point anyway? i love the joy of discovery because this is god's creation and i'm finding more about that to take dominion for man's good and for god's glory.

>> what if anything would ever change your mind? >> well, the answer to that question is "i'm a christian." and as a christian, i can't prove it to you but god has definitely shown me very clearly through his word and shown himself in the person of jesus christ. the bible is the word of god. i admit that that's where i start from. i can challenge people that you can go and test that, you can make predictions based on that, you can check the prophecies in the bible, you can check the statements in genesis, you can check that and i did a little bit of that tonight.

and i can't ultimately prove that to you. all i can do is to say to someone look if the bible really is what it claims to be, if it really is the word of god and that's what it claims to be then check it out. if you can't believe that he is, he will reveal himself to you. and you will know. as christians, we can say we know. and so as far as the word of god is concerned, no, no one's ever going to convince me that the word of god is not true. but i do want to make a distinction here and for bill's sake. we build models based upon the bible and those models are always subject to change. the fact of noah's flood is not subject to change. the model of how the flood occurred is subject to change because we observe in the current world and we're able to come up with maybe different ways this could've happened or that could've happened and that's part of that scientific discovery. that's part of what it's all about. so the bottomline is that as a

christian, i have the foundation. that as a christian, i would ask bill the question what would change your mind? i mean you said even if you come to faith, you'd never give up believing in billions of years. i think i quoted you correctly saying something like that recently. so that would be my question to bill. >> we would just need one piece of evidence. we would need the fossil that swam from one layer to another. we would need evidence that the universe is not expanding. we would need evidence that the stars appear to be far away but they're not. we would need evidence that rock layers can somehow form in just 4000 years instead of the extraordinary amount. we would need evidence that somehow you can reset atomic clocks and keep neutrons from becoming protons. bring on any of those things and you would change me immediately. the question i have for you though fundamentally and for everybody watching "mr. ham, what can you prove?

what you have done tonight is spend most of it, all the time, coming up with explanations about the past. what can you really predict? what can you really prove in a conventional scientific or in a conventional "i have an idea that makes a prediction and it comes out the way i see it." this is very troubling to me. >> outside of radiometric methods, what scientific evidence supports your view of the age of the earth? >> the age of the earth. well, the age of stars. radiometric evidence is pretty compelling. also the deposition rates, it was lael a geologist who realized in my recollection he came up with the first use of the term deep time when people realized that the earth had to be much much older.

and in a related story, there was a mystery as to how the earth could be old enough to allow evolution to have taken place. how could the earth possibly be three billion years old. lord calvin did a calculation that if the sun were made of coal and burning, it couldn't be more than a hundred thousand or so years old. but radioactivity was discovered. radioactivity is why the earth is still as warm as it is. it's why the earth has been able to sustain it's internal heat all these millenia. and this discovery, it's something like this question without radiometric dating, how would you view the age of the earth. to me it's akin to the expression "well if things were any other way, things would be different." this is to say that's not how the world is. radiometric dating does exist. neutrons do become protons and that's our level of understanding today. the universe is accelerating.

these are all provable facts. that there was a flood 4,000 years ago is not provable. in fact the evidence for me at least as a reasonable man is overwhelming that it couldn't possibly have happened. there's no evidence for it. furthermore, mr. ham you never quite addressed this issue of the skulls. there are many many steps in what appears to be the creation or the coming into being of you and me. and those steps -- >> i just wanted people to understand too. when it comes to the age of the earth being billions of years, no earth rock was dated to get that date. they dated meteorites and because they assumed meteorites were the same age as the earth left out from the formation of the solar system, that's where they come from. people think they dated rocks on the earth that's four and a half billion years. that's just not true. and the other point that i was

making and that is i said at the end of my first rebuttal time that there are hundreds of physical processes that set limits on the age of the earth. here's the point, every dating method involves a change with time and there are hundreds of them and if you assume what was there to start with and if you assume something about the rate and you know about the rate, you make lots of those assumptions. every dating method has those assumptions. most of the dating methods, 90% of them contradict the billions of years. there's no absolute age dating method from scientific method because you can't prove scientifically young world. >> can you reconcile the change in the rate continents are now drifting versus how quickly they must have traveled at creation's 6,000 years ago? can you reconcile the speed in which continents are now drifting today to the rate they

would have traveled 6,000 years ago to which where we are now? >> this again illustrates exactly what i'm talking about in regard to historical science and observational science. we can look at continents today and we have scientists that have written papers about these on our website. i'm definitely not an expert in this area, i don't claim to be but there are scientists even dr. andrews spelling a phd geologist has done a lot of research here too as well and certainly we can see movements of plates today and if you look at those movements and if you assume at the way it's moving today the rate it's moving that it's always been that way in the past. see that's an assumption. that's the problem when it comes to understanding these things. you can observe movement but then to assume that it has

always been like that in the past, that's historical science. and in fact, we would believe basically in catastrophic plate tectonics that as a result of the flood the time of the flood, there was catastrophic breakup of the earth's surface. and what we're seeing now is sort of a remnant of that movement. and so we do not deny the movement. we do not deny plates. what we would deny is that you can use what you see today as a basis for just extrapolating into the past. it's the same with the flood. you can say that the layers today can only lay down slowly in places but if there was a global flood, that would have changed all of that. again, it's this emphasis on historical science and observational science. i would encourage people to go to our website in answers in genesis because we do have a number of papers. in fact, very technical papers. dr. john bumgardner is one who has written some very extensive work dealing with this very issue. on the basis of the bible, of course we believe that there's one continent to start with

cause -- one place. so we do believe that the continent has split up. particularly the flood had a lot to do with that. >> it must have been easier for you to explain this a century ago before the existence of tectonic plates was proven. if you go into a clock store and there's a bunch of clocks. they are not all going to say exactly the same thing. do you think that they are all wrong? the reason that we acknowledge the rate at which continents are drifting apart, one of the reasons is we see what's called sea floor spreading in the mid-atlantic. the earth's magnetic field has reversed over the millenia and as it does it leaves a signature in the rocks as the continental plates drift apart. so you can measure how fast the continents were spreading. that's how we do it on the outside. as i say i lived in washington

state when mt. st. helens exploded. that's a result of a continental plate going under another continental plate and cracking and this water-laden rock led to a steam explosion. that's how we do it on the outside. >> what's your favorite color? [laughter] >> i will go along with most people and say green. and it's an irony that green plants reflect green light. most of the light from the sun is green yet they're reflected. it's a mystery >> can i have three words since he had three hundred? observational science, blue. [laughter] >> how do you balance the theory of evolution with the second law of thermodynamics?