Did you watch the live hot debate yesterday between Bill Nye the Science Guy and Ken Ham at the Creation Museum?
Online debate tickets for a spot in the 900-seat Legacy Hall sold out in less than two minutes, and coverage in the news media, blogs, and other websites was intense.
The title of the debate was “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?”
The main point that caught my attention in the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham was the necessity of having science to be observational and it must be testable, falsifiable, and repeatable.
Naturally evolutionary ideas, fell under the category of historical science that are not testable, falsifiable, or repeatable because it was simply not observable.
Evolution is not observable!
So, what criteria must be met for a theory to be considered scientific?
George Gaylord Simpson, Professor at Harvard and perhaps the foremost writer on evolution, has stated that,
“It is inherent in any definition of science that statements that cannot be checked by OBSERVATION are not ….science.” George Gaylord Simpson, Science, Volume 143 , p.769.
And a definition of science given by the monumental OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY states:
“A branch of study which is concerned either with a connected body of DEMONSTRATED truths or with OBSERVED facts systematically classified.”
Note that SCIENCE deals with “demonstrated…..Observed” data arrived at by experimenting in a laboratory or observing in the real world of nature. But since evolution cannot be studied in a laboratory or seen in nature, since its assumed mechanisms operate so slowly as to require millions of years for demonstrable results. This fact is admitted by David Kitts in Evolution Magazine:
“Evolution, at least in the sense that Darwin speaks of it, cannot be detected within the lifetime of a single observer.”
In fact, the whole question of ORIGINS is really outside the limits of science, not being subject to scientific experimentation and analysis. Both CREATIONISTS and EVOLUTIONISTS alike agree that no human observer witnessed the origin of our earth and its life, so the observational aspect of scientific investigation is automatically ruled out in any consideration of origins.
The notable evolutionist Richard Dawkins, adds in a 2009 interview,
“We can’t see evolution happening because we don’t live long enough,”
Evolution is unobservable therefore evolution is not a fact!
