Written by Emily Longman<\/p>\n
On February 4, 2104, creationist Ken Ham and evolutionist Bill Nye met at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, KY for a formal debate.\u00a0 The question: \u201cIs creation a viable model of origins in today\u2019s modern scientific era?\u201d Lasting for two and a half hours, the debate included presentations, rebuttals and even a Q&A session addressing questions from the studio audience.\u00a0 In addition to the 900 ticket holders who were in attendance, the debate was reportedly watched by an estimated 750,000 people who streamed it live.<\/p>\n
Concordia\u2019s Campus Ministry hosted a live-stream event on campus, which was fairly well attended: about 40 to 50 students were joined by several professors to watch the debate.\u00a0 The viewing party was followed by a discussion led by Professor John Rhoads and Dr. Andrew Steinmann.<\/p>\n
CUC student Jason Becker was there and shared some of his impressions from the debate. He believed neither Nye nor Ham won the debate.<\/p>\n
\u201cBoth sides made some good points, and both sides made some awful points, frankly\u2026there wasn\u2019t a good answer to the initial question.\u201d<\/p>\n
Good answer or not, Nye and Ham both used their allotted time to its full advantage, prompting moderator Tom Foreman to cut them off mid-sentence more than once.\u00a0 Both debaters were well spoken and well prepared.\u00a0 Ham even anticipated the content of Nye\u2019s presentation and had a separate slide show prepared for his rebuttal, though many viewers, including Becker, noted that regardless of straying from the question at hand, \u201cBill Nye probably used his points better in the debate part\u201d as opposed to the Q&A session at the end.<\/p>\n
Unlike Becker, Cole Thannisch, a Christian college student in Nashville, TN, saw a clear winner to the debate \u2013 and surprisingly, it was not Ken Ham.\u00a0 In fact, he boldly declared, \u201cI personally think Ken Ham is a moronic and irrational buffoon.\u201d\u00a0 Thannisch wholeheartedly agreed with Bill Nye\u2019s argument, claiming that evolution is in fact a feasible model of the genesis of the universe in which we live.\u00a0 However, unlike Nye, he does<\/i> give an explanation as to the \u201cmystery\u201d of how the first cells came to be, exclaiming, \u201cWhat\u2019s wrong with believing in God and evolution at the same time???\u201d<\/p>\n
Though it may not have ended with a definitive answer as to whether or not creationism is plausible, the debate certainly stirred up more constructive discussion about the conflict rather than impassioned, irrational attacks on the opposing side. Becker and Thannisch both acknowledged this as a positive product of an otherwise frustrating and inconclusive debate.<\/p>\n
People are still talking about the debate, with the hashtag \u201ccreation debate\u201d being used up to 35 times an hour on Twitter.\u00a0 Other forms of social media have also been the platform for discussion as users of sites such as Facebook shared their impressions and opinions of the debate\u2019s success and the points it addressed.<\/p>\n
Ultimately, many conceded that the arguments of both sides require an element of faith, as none of us were there at the time the universe began.\u00a0 And so the \u201cmystery\u201d continues\u2026or at least the debate.<\/p>\n