Skip to main content

According to Bill Nye, Creationism Will Thwart Technological Advances In America. Is He Right?


You may have watched the Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham debate early this year.  If you didn't, it is available in its entirety online here.  I hope you'll take the time to watch it.  During the debate, Bill Nye asserted that Bible-believing creationists cannot do good science.  He argued that a biblical worldview suppresses good science and therefore, if creationists persist in telling children that the Bible can be trusted when it speaks of the origin of the universe, the result will be that the United States will suffer and lag behind the rest of the world in our scientific progress.  His premise is that technological advances will come to a stand-still if would-be scientists allow that there may be a Creator. Ken Ham did an excellent job refuting that argument.  Ham showed video clips of well respected scientists and inventors who are biblical creationists; the debate audience could hear and see these scientists give testimony to their belief in six-day creation.

Along those same lines, I recently read the book in six days: why fifty scientists choose to believe in creation. The really cool thing about this book is that it is entirely composed of essays from 50 different scientists who believe in the Bible's account of creation.  They explain in their own words why they believe in biblical creation (six-day creation).  The book is available online for free at https://answersingenesis.org/answers/books/in-six-days/, or you can purchase it here.


Check out the credentials of the scientists who are featured in this book.  Mr. Nye's argument is simply false.

Popular posts from this blog

Why Couldn't Esau Repent?

What a terrible thing to want to repent and not be allowed to.  Why would God withhold repentance from Esau who was obviously broken in spirit?  Unfortunately for Esau, that seems to be what Hebrews 12:17 is saying.  Here’s the verse in its immediate context: Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.  For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.  Heb. 12:15-17 (KJV) You are probably familiar with the story from Genesis chapter 25.  Esau, the firstborn, returns from an exhausting day in the field and is hungry.  He asks for some of Jacob’s stew and Jacob offers to sell a bowl of stew to Esau in exchange for Esau’s birthrigh...

The Lord's Supper and Eating Unworthily

By far the most popular passage in Baptist churches concerning observing the Lord's Supper is 1 Corinthians 11:17-34.  A particular focus has been placed on verses 27-31 quoted below from the King James Version that many of us grew up with. 27  Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28  But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 29  For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. 30  For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 31  For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. (1 Cor. 11:27-31 KJV) photo courtesy of www.freeimages.com Pastors often point to these verses as a warning to would be participants in the ordinance that they should first examine themselves so that they don't partake unworthily ...

Obama Makes Illogical Pro-abortion Arguments

On January 22, 2016, the 43rd anniversary of the horrible Roe v. Wade decision concerning abortion in America, President Obama made a statement advocating for abortion (click here to access statement) .  President Obama's statement reflects the standard talking points of pro-death abortion advocates.  Let's think through his statement line by line. First he says Roe v. Wade "affirmed a woman's freedom to make her own choices about her body and her health."  This is the "pro-choice" argument.  The problem is that it isn't logical.  No woman in America has complete freedom of choice when it comes to her own body or her own health.  For instance, there are laws against drug abuse.  A woman doesn't have the legal right to make her own choice about her body in this instance.  The law takes that choice away.  She is not allowed to abuse drugs simply because that's what she chooses to do with her body.  A second reason that this is illogical ...