Creation Movement Wrong on Historical Science

Ken Ham debates Bill Nye the science guy on creation* Can You Know a House Had a Builder? Creation organizations attempt to diminish "historical" science as compared to "observational" science. That claim, at odds with the overwhelming success of forensic science, comes awfully close to the false materialist claim that you can only really know what your five senses tell you. Question: Can you have a certainty that a house had a builder, even if you did not see your home being built? Yes. For, if you cannot trust your mind to ascertain many things that absolutely have happened in the past, then neither could you trust your eyes about what is happening in the present.

* Arguments Creationists Should Not Use: We recommend that you not use the argument that historical science has less validity as compared to observational science. As a Real Science Radio listener says, Answers in Genesis shouldn't pull the rug out from their own signature flood observation. "It is historical science—in action— to understand Ken Ham's point about billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the earth."

* Reporters/Bloggers Claim Ham & Sarfati Reject Historical Science: Jonathan Sarfati posted on Facebook this week that a friendly reporter overstated her case. For Dr. Sarfati does not reject historical science, but draws a distinction between it and observational science. Also this week Ken Ham offered, attempting to defend creationism, that his opponents misunderstand the difference between historical and observational science. However, this is no defense.

So please click to continue reading this article and you can also hear and Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams discuss

Creation Movement Wrong on Historical Science