WorldNetDaily on the Nye-Ham Debate

Everyone remembers the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia, who runs the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum. It was last February, and we had a post on it: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham — Live Debate Thread.

Like most on the science side of The Controversy, we were opposed to the debate. A month before the event we posted Ken Ham to Debate Bill Nye — Big Mistake! Nevertheless, we were pleasantly surprised at Nye’s strong performance compared to that of ol’ Hambo.

Although ol’ Hambo has never stopped writing about the debate, apparently regarding it as the greatest thing that ever happened to him, we thought the thing was behind us. But like the zombies in all those dumb movies, it keeps coming back.

Today, thanks to the ever-vigilant Drool-o-tron™, with its blaring sirens and flashing lights, we were compelled to notice the blinking letters of its wall display, which said WorldNetDaily (WND). Our computer was locked onto WND’s latest article, Pitting evolution against creationism. WND says, with bold font added by us:

It might not have had the epic quality of the famed Scopes “Monkey Trial” (or perhaps it did), but the 2014 debate between the Darwinist Bill Nye and apologetics teacher Ken Ham will surely go down as one of the most watched events of its kind.

Yeah, it probably was. And as they say about such things, it looks better on Hambo’s résumé than on Nye’s. WND continues:

One must give Nye credit for agreeing to such a format. For many years, the Institute for Creation Research touted its own Dr. Duane Gish as a formidable debater, and quite often his debate opponents grumbled about their own lackluster performances.

What Gish’s opponents mostly grumbled about was the absurdity of dealing with the Gish Gallop. Then WND starts promoting a book which has “partial transcripts from the debate.” For some reason they don’t mention the book’s author, but we’re told that:

Sprinkled throughout are illuminating points, such as the “Nye Opening”:

[Presumably this is from the book:] “Mr. Nye opened with a story about his father that was quite humorous, then transitioned to say that he and Ham would be debating two stories: one being that of ‘Mr. Ham’s story’ and the other of ‘mainstream science.’

[Presumably this is from the book’s unnamed author:] “Now I would like to comment on the two things positioned here. First, it is not Mr. Ham’s story but rather about biblical creationism as revealed in God’s Word and confirmed by observational science.”

Regarding that, WND says:

This is an important point (and the book is filled with such commentary), because it shows clearly how evolutionists manipulate language to convince audiences of the claims of Darwin. Ham was able to make several salient points that enabled the viewing audience to see how biased evolution is (I believe I can speak for creationists here, as well, by saying that they admit their own bias).

Ah yes, those manipulative evolutionists. Let’s read on:

For Bible believers, Appendix B is invaluable, as well. For there, Ham and AiG make the compelling case that it very much matters what we believe about the age of the earth. Christian apologists across the spectrum often argue that this is a non-essential part of the Christian faith, but is it? With young people well aware that denying the Genesis accounts of origins logically concludes with questioning the historicity of the New Testament (including the crucifixion and the resurrection), the question of the age of the earth is critical.

That appendix seems to contain all the stuff Hambo didn’t say during the debate. Perhaps he didn’t mention that material out of fear that Nye would all too easily debunk it. One last excerpt:

All in all, “Inside the Nye-Ham Debate” is an extraordinary achievement, and one can say that while the book is biased in favor of Ham’s position, it is more compelling to point out that the liberal stranglehold on media has ensured that generations of many millions of people have been subjected to evolutionary bias with little counterpoint.

Here’s a link to the Amazon listing for the book: Inside the Nye Ham Debate.

You can be confident that the book is a fair account of the debate, because although the WND article doesn’t mention it (despite a few hints), Amazon says it was written by Ken Ham and Bodie Hodge, one of ol’ Hambo’s employees. The publisher is Master Books, described at their website as “the world’s largest publisher of creation-based material.” They also say: “Dr. Henry Morris and Tim LaHaye pioneered the formation of Master Books® in 1975.”

So go ahead, buy the book. If all you did was watch the debate, you don’t really understand anything. Ol’ Hambo’s book will set you straight. Hey — it’s recommended by WorldNetDaily, so you can’t go wrong.

Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

11 responses to “WorldNetDaily on the Nye-Ham Debate

  1. michaelfugate

    Two forwards to the book, one by an engineer and the other by a medical doctor – the Salem Region out in full force.

  2. waldteufel

    I visit Hambo’s goofy AiG website every day for a little chuckle. Hambo posts some drivel about this debate frequently even now, long after the fact. At the time, I thought it was a mistake for Nye to share a stage with a carnival barker. I still think it was a mistake, even though Nye cleaned the floor with Hambo.

  3. With young people well aware that denying the Genesis accounts of origins logically concludes with questioning the historicity of the New Testament (including the crucifixion and the resurrection), the question of the age of the earth is critical.

    So, let’s see … first you insist that all the Bible must be literally true (not metaphorical or allegorical), then insist that unless it literally true it is all false, then insist that it is critical to believe it is literally true, even in the face of massive evidence that (at the least) some of it is false?

    And then you blame “Darwinists” for your problems?

    Ham runs the risk of disappearing up his own ass running in such tight circles.

  4. I wouldn’t waste my money. Though according to AiG in recent times, whilst ‘evolutionists’ apparently no longer want people to listen to the debate because they’ve stopped (a year later) suggesting they do, meanwhile AiG want creationists to watch the debate AND also purchase this publication that WND seem to love. And Bodie Hodge is Ken Ham’s son in law I believe. Would Ham listen to something about the debate written by a close relative of Bill Nye?

  5. All of the Bible is literally true … including those things that aren’t in the Bible but are just made up … except those things that are in the Bible but people don’t like.
    One example of “just made up” being: “all of the Bible is literally true”.

  6. Our Curmudgeon endorses the book on the grounds

    it’s recommended by WorldNetDaily, so you can’t go wrong.

    Absolutely true! Merely “wrong” doesn’t even come close to how far outside the bounds of sanity such Creationist tracts are!

  7. Since Hambo paid to have Nye appear (the proceeds eventually going to science education), I can’t say I blame him for wanting as good a return on his investment as possible. Hambo would be hard pressed to show the debate video to a true fence sitter without his book as well, since he clearly lost the debate. For the most part it is just a regular part of fleecing the flock. Most contributions from average people require a sale of something like a book or dvd and of course some of the profits in the form of royalties stay in the family to feather the nest.

  8. Nye has his own book out as well, titled “Undeniable: Evolution and the Science of Creation”. He doesn’t dwell on the debate itself quite as much, but the book was certainly prompted by it.

    Ham is right on one thing – when I began to understand evolution and deep time, I began to doubt religion. That was the tipping point for me. Ham knows that as more people begin to question the creation account, more people will begin to question other aspects of religion and eventually the existence of god himself.

    Perhaps some people will become Deists, if they are incapable of fully surrendering their belief in god. But as Ham knows, it’s hard to build a theocracy with deists. One needs zealous believers.

  9. I’m holding out for the illustrated version of this book, painstakingly drawn by Jack Chick.

  10. My own personal feeling, I don’t understand why evolution should be such a critical issue for religion, when there are such serious problems, as serious as theodicy, and history of religious
    persecutions. How can one begin to compare evolution with the Shoah?
    No, I’d rank biology a little less problematic than meteorology vs. praying for rain.
    Origin of Species cast less doubt on the Bible than did Enûma Eliš.