The debate about creationism

Thursday, 6 March 2014
I recently came across a debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye, via La ciencia y sus demonios. The question posed is "Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern, scientific era?" Here you have it. 

I found it very surprising, and somehow outrageous. The Earth was created 4500 years ago? Really? Adam and Eve were created only 4500 years ago? I don't know why Bill Nye didn't even point out that there are archaeological settlements much older than that. 

Ken Ham divides science between experimental and historical science to make the point of giving experimental science the credit for all our technology, but to "historical" science basically what the bible says. However, Bill Nye says that science is science. No distinction between them. 

As I said, I found it outrageous. While the honest answer from Bill Nye of not knowing everything (they asked him about the origin of the Universe), Ken Ham answers saying he "knows" what the origin is. That is the main contradiction in calling science to creationism. When they don't know how to explain something, they go to god. God is where they hide their ignorance. 

One stupid question I could ask is: why do they bother to go to the doctor when they are ill? That is science. They should pray and rely on god. That is what their religion says. They believe that the explanation of natural phenomena are better explained by the science of men that lived 4500 years ago. Of course that science was inspired by god, so no mistakes. That is not science. Science is about making an affirmation (an hypothesis), and test it against nature. It is about constantly questioning the natural world. That is how science builds itself. Of course there are many unknowns, but that doesn't mean the method is wrong. They don't question, they just believe. 

He keeps citing scientists that believe in god, some of them even believe in creationism. The question I ask: why don't they publish their believes in science journals? Perhaps because what they publish is not about their beliefs, but about real science? 

I find very unsettling that those people have an increasing power in our society. As a scientist, I am a little bit worried.

No comments :