Bill Nye to Debate Evolution at Creation Museum

His opponent is a Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham.

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/will...ace-its-debatable-2D12028450?ocid=msnhp&pos=4

Will evolution debate blow up in the Science Guy's face? It's debatable

Why on earth would Bill Nye the Science Guy agree to debate evolution and creationism in a place called the Creation Museum? And how on Earth could creationist Ken Ham lose?

The conventional wisdom among evolutionary biologists is that they have much more to lose than to gain from Tuesday's face-off in Kentucky — just as the consensus among creationists is that they're getting a high-profile forum for their views, nine years after suffering a major defeat in federal court.

"I don't think Nye should be getting into this," Jerry Coyne, a biologist at the University of Chicago who uses the title "Why Evolution Is True" for his blog and his latest book, told NBC News. "He may be walking into a buzzsaw."

Meanwhile, the organization that Ham heads, Answers in Genesis, says the debate will "equip believers with solid creation apologetics — while at the same time exposing the assumptions the evolutionary ideas rest upon." Answers in Genesis is already offering the DVD on pre-order.

Debaters get ready
Nye acknowledges that he's getting some heat from colleagues for giving creationists a high-profile forum, but insists that an open debate is necessary. "We're just trying to change the world here, and draw attention to these forces in our society that are trying to get creationism in science textbooks," he told NBC News. "My argument is, this is bad for the country, bad for our economy. We can't raise a generation of science students who are not scientifically literate."

He said he's been preparing for the debate by consulting with experts via email and studying how Ham and other creationists have stated their case in past forums.

"Many people have been critical of me for taking this debate because I'm not an expert on evolution," Nye said. "But this is not advanced evolutionary theory. This is not high-school science. It might be elementary-school science. That Mr. Ham and his followers don't embrace it is troubling."

Ham is preparing as well — in consultation with creation-minded colleagues who have Ph.D.s, such as molecular biologist Georgia Purdum and geologist Andrew Snelling. Like Nye, Ham is researching his opponent's past statements on evolution. And like Nye, Ham says he's doing this debate to reach the next generation.

On his blog, Ham said he has seen lots of young people leave the church "because they saw evolution as showing the Bible could not be trusted." In a follow-up interview with NBC News, Ham said, "If you're taught that there's no God, that you're just an animal that arose through natural processes, that has great bearing on how you view yourself, and your fellow man, and your morality."

Some of the handicappers on Nye's side of the fence, like Coyne, worry that Ham is the more experienced debater. Ham, however, said he's taken part in only one formal debate on evolution, back in the 1990s. He also pointed to Nye's years of TV experience on "Bill Nye the Science Guy."

"He's like me. He's a communicator," Ham said. "We're not really used to doing formal debates."

Debating the debate
On each side of the debate, there's yet another debate going on: For example, some of the defenders of evolution education think Tuesday's face-off won't be such a bad thing.

"In general, we advise people against doing debates. The biggest thing is that a debate on stage is not how science is decided. It's entertainment, it's theater," said Josh Rosenau, program and policy director for the National Center for Science Education, which defends the teaching of evolution. "But because it's about entertainment, if anyone's going to do it, I think Bill Nye is not a bad choice."

Nye isn't a professional scientist, but a mechanical engineer who became a comedian and then blossomed as a science popularizer. "The thing that Bill has going for him is that he is great at explaining science," Rosenau told NBC News.

He said the way the debate is framed may give Nye an added advantage. The official topic of the discussion is whether creationism provides a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific world. "I hope that means that Ken Ham is actually going to try to offer some sort of scientific claims for his position," Rosenau said. "I think he's going to have a hard time doing that, coming up with a scientific argument."

Bible as scientific evidence
Ham's view is that the Genesis account of the universe's development and the rise of life on Earth is literally true, including the part about everything being done in six 24-hour days. As a young-Earth creationist, Ham contends that the universe is only about 6,000 years old. So what about the 70 million-year-old fossil bones of dinosaurs? The way Ham sees it, those are the millennia-old bones of animals referred to in legends as dragons.

"What we believe about the age of the Earth (that it is relatively young) is a consequence of our stand on biblical authority, and nothing in observational science contradicts that," Ham wrote this week. "You see, we use the Bible as evidence!"

Even among folks who insist there's evidence that the universe was designed by some sort of intelligent being, such views don't always sit well. Stephen Meyer, director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture and the author of "Darwin's Doubt" sees pluses as well as minuses to Tuesday's debate.

"It's a plus because it generates interest in the topic," Meyer told NBC News. "It's a minus because it inhibits an understanding of the complexity of the issue."

Meyer worries that the debate over evolution will be portrayed as Darwinian materialism vs. biblical literalism — leaving out such ideas as theistic evolution, old-earth creationism and his own perspective, intelligent design. "It would be really terrific if the proponents of the mainstream Darwinian view of origins engaged some of the other critics of their theory, who see evidence of design in nature but are not biblical fundamentalists," he said.

 

Nye is primarily an entertainer so of course this is about publicity that said I give him credit for willing to have the debate at the Creationist Museum. I doubt this will change some many minds but considering that recent polling is showing an increase in the amount of people who don't accept Evolution I don't see anything wrong with having a public debate that gets more attention to the issue.

 

This depends on what the basis and rules of the debate are. If this was primarily focused on problems with the prevailing theory of Evolution then that could be tough for Nye. If it is though about Creationism, particularly Young Earth, as a valid alternative then this could turn into another Scopes trial.