bob enyart debates

* God's Philosophers author James Hannam Debates Bob Enyart on Theistic Evolution: Part 1 of 3! On this special edition of Real Science Radio, one of the topics discussed is the nature of physical (and other) laws and a claim that Einstein made about physical laws (which claim Bob agrees with and James finds interesting).

* British Darwinist's Assessment of Debating Bob: After this debate, evolutionist PZ Myers copied and pasted the following quote, written by well-received British author and Darwinist James Hannam, about young-earth creationist Bob Enyart:

What About Bob? "Richard Dawkins once said that 'if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that).' It rapidly became clear that Bob was none of these things. For a start, I know a fair bit about evolution and genetics. But when it came to familiarity with the arguments, he was way ahead of me. On epigenetics, RNA/DNA chemistry, and animal physiology, I was hopelessly outclassed. Bob is not ignorant. And it is pretty clear he is neither stupid nor insane. He came across, in fact, as extremely intelligent. So perhaps he is wicked? Well... I am sure he is nothing of the sort." -British Author and Darwinist James Hannam

* Handy Hannam Links: Tune in to next week's installment for this fascinating discussion just keeps getting better and better!
- James Hannam's article on debating creationism with Bob Enyart
- Enyart's interview with Hannam on God's Philosophers
- Hannam & Enyart on Theistic Evolution Pt. I (this page)
- Hannam & Enyart on Theistic Evolution Pt. II
- Hannam & Enyart on Theistic Evolution Pt. III
- British author James Hannam's site: God's Philosophers (the medieval world and the foundations of science)
- Hannam's 2011 article in the Guardian opposing de facto discrimination against creationist scientists

* Ten Objections: Bob gave National Sales Tax author Ken Hoagland the first eight objections below to the FairTax, a National 22% Sales Tax (and he kept the last two objections for this list):

* Bob Debates Ph.D. Evolutionist Eugenie Scott: One of the world's leading anti-creationists vs. Bob Enyart. The debate is decided in the first round, by TKO. That’s after Bob asked the well-known scientist for any evidence that any high level function had ever evolved, like eye sight, or hearing, or flight, or mobility in general? Through the hour-long debate, this evolutionist refused to offer any such evidence.

* 2012 Update: A landmark study published in the journal Nature reveals that 440 researchers working in 32 laboratories around the world have so far been able to identify function for 80 percent of the human genome! And a project leader is predicting that eventually, we will learn that about "100%" of the genome is functional. (ENCODE Consortium, Dunham, et al., Nature, 2012, pp. 57-74, and see RSF's fun program on this report!) So what previously was used, everywhere, as evidence against creation and for evolution, can no longer be honestly used in that way. After all, if it ever were a valid offering of evidence, now, it is evidence against Darwinism and for creation. Wish as they might, evolutionists can't have it both ways. After all, when the scientist finally reaches the summit, he finds the theologian already there.

* JUNK DNA: Eugenie Flubs Genetics Prediction, Creationist Hits the Bull's-eye. The negative evidence that Eugenie did offer was Junk DNA. This scientist, from her Darwinist worldview, therefore didn't offer scientific evidence but made this philosophical argument about what a Creator would or would not do; namely, that He wouldn't fill our genome with so much non-protein-coding DNA. While some simple worms have 20,000 genes, it is typically a small portion of DNA that actually codes for proteins. A human has only 20,500 genes, which fills only 2% of our genome. Yet the widespread evolutionary claim for decades (including through the last two decades, and for many, still held today) was that the rest of the genome was left-over evolutionary garbage. Debating this physical anthropologist, Bob Enyart was just a Christian fundamentalist talk show host who spoke from his biblical worldview. Bob argued that our knowledge of genetics was in its infancy, and that it was too early to make the determination that all those non-coding segments of DNA had no function. After this 1998 debate, the next decade of explosive genetic discoveries overwhelmingly validated this creationist perspective, so much so that aside from coding for 20,500 proteins, it is estimated that the remainder of the genome has approximately four million other functional regulatory segments of DNA. So much for junk. Fulfilled predictions, as the world saw with Einstein's 1919 eclipse prediction, go toward scientific credibility. However, Dr. Scott strongly rejected this creationist prediction making an extraordinary claim, which Bob immediately offered her to retract, that scientists currently knew everything they would ever need to know about genetics to conclusively state that all those regions were useless junk. Bob would love a rematch. But Eugenie Scott, (Ph.D. in Physical Anthropology, leading anti- creationist, and director of the National Center for Science Education), who had just debated evolution on a nation- wide PBS television program, ended this one-hour program with Bob stating, "Well, I don’t debate."

* Bob Enyart Debates Long-time AUL Attorney Paul Linton: The former general counsel for Americans United for Life (AUL) Paul Linton represents is the pro-life lawyers, politi

* Bob Enyart Interviews AronRa: Continuing with the Foundational Falsehood videos, Bob has a conversation with one of the web's leading anti-creationists, AronRa.

* RSR AronRa Conversations with creationist Bob Enyart:
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 1
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 2 (this show)
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 3
- AronRa and Enyart Begin Round Two: Pt. 4
- Fred Williams of RSR Weighs in on AronRa
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 5
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 6
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 7

* AronRa Wrong about Bible Claiming Earth Covered by a Dome: AronRa claims at 7:02 into his 3rd Foundation Falsehood, "If the Bible is interpreted literally, then it is clear that its authors believed that the world was a flat disc, which was originally said to be covered by a giant crystal dome." That popular atheist misrepresentation of Scripture would be valid if the Bible only used a certain Hebrew concept, raqia, to refer to the heavens, but if it applies that same concept to the crust of the Earth, then what is alleged to be a dome is actually the crust of the Earth, then atheists would lose a favorite argument. So, check out the RSR article, What is the Firmament of Genesis 1:8? or these excerpts:

Raqia is the noun from the verb raqa meaning being hammered or spread out, as in working metal into a thin sheet or plate. "They beat (raqa) the gold into thin sheets" (Exodus 39:3). "The goldsmith overspreads (raqa) it with gold" (Isaiah 40:19; i.e., gold-plated). Similarly, God overspread the waters of the earth with the plates of the earth's crust, i.e., the firmament, what Walt Brown calls hydroplates. For "God made the firmament (raqia), and divided the waters which were under the firmament (raqia, the crustal plates) from the waters which were above the firmament" (Genesis 1:7).
...
Firmament (raqia) is used "of the heavens" commonly and eleven times the Bible speaks of God stretching out the heavens... Another three times the Bible says that God raqa the earth itself. This shows, unlike as stressed [by atheists], that raqia very naturally also refers to the earth:

To Him who laid out (raqa) the earth above the waters… Ps. 136:6
Thus says God the Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread forth (raqa) the earth and that which comes from it… Isa. 42:5
“I am the Lord, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who spreads abroad (raqa) the earth by Myself;" Isa. 44:24

Consider also Aron's false claim that the Bible presents a dome-covered flat earth. As established unequivocally by many including the well-received author James Hannam (check out Bob's interview and debate with this British Darwinist), neither the Christian church nor Christian leaders ever taught that the Earth was flat. (Not surprisingly, the president of the actual Flat Earth Society is, of course, not a biblical creationist, but a Darwinists.) Rather, the claim that the church (or the Bible) taught that the Earth was flat is an example of atheist revisionist history.

Also, AronRa and I argued his claim, which he presents as fact, that, "the Earth is not at the center... of the universe in any respect. The way the Bible depicts the Earth in relation to the rest of the universe is wrong and has been known to be wrong for thousands of years." Actually, the cosmological principle which is today's accepted dogma, is not based on scientific observation but on philosophical bias. And what evidence that does exist regarding the structure of the universe, consisting of the most extensive observations ever collected in the history of science, at least apparently suggests that Aron (and atheists generally) are wrong and that, first, the universe does have a center; and if so, the Earth is in a preferred location, near that center. [Update: See our fun 2013 program, Real Science Radio: The Cosmological Principle.]

* Hollywood Finally Gets Scopes Trial Right: Enjoy this feature film about the Scopes Monkey Trial starring Brian Dennehy (Rambo), Fred Thompson (Law & Order), Colm Meany (Star Trek), Ashley Johnson (The Help), Nathan West and Khori Faison. This great movie Alleged, available at Walmarts nationwide, is accurate to the history and trial transcript of the Scopes Monkey Trial unlike Hollywood's previous Inherit the Wind attempt. Order your copy today. Alleged is available from Amazon or pick it up from your local Walmart or order it online at Walmart DVD or Walmart Blu-ray. Enjoy!

* Real Science Radio Debates Atheist AronRa:

Two Formats: On-Air (in 7 parts) and Written (in 6 rounds).

Beginning with a discussion about Ra's 1st Foundational Falsehood video, Bob has a conversation with one of the web's leading anti-creationists, AronRa. In one highlight, AronRa refused to agree that Isaac Newton is in the special creation camp. Bob was shocked by this, and tried to explain that because Newton believed that God created fully human Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, and because Newton wrote extensively to show that the biblical chronology of an approximately 6,000-year-old earth is accurate, that he cannot be included in the camp of methodological naturalism as AronRa claimed. It is surprising but somewhat forgivable that atheist AronRa did not know that Isaac Newton wrote more about Scriptural chronology and theology than he did about physics and math, but it is not forgivable, apart from a correction by AronRa, that he then proceeded to defend in writing his refusal to admit that this historical giant, one of the greatest scientists who ever lived, Isaac Newton, was in the special creation camp. Of course, Newton did not need to know about Darwin nor genetics to reject biblical creation and agree with the ancient Greek philosophical claim of an eternal universe. Newton was a creationist. And if AronRa acknowledges that and corrects his claim, we'll update this page! [See the 2012 Enyart/Ra written debate below where Aron eventually begrudgingly admits in a backhanded insulting way that Newton was a creationist.]

* Radio Debate: AronRa vs. Creationist Bob Enyart:
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 1 (this show)
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 2
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 3 (soft tissue; and center of universe?)
- AronRa and Enyart Begin Round Two: Pt. 4
- Fred Williams of RSR Weighs in on AronRa
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 5 (frozen mammoths)
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 6
- AronRa and Enyart: Pt. 7

* Written Debate: AronRa vs. Creationist Bob Enyart:

Please Note League of Reason Dysfunction: Since 3-11-13, links to leagueofreason.co.uk ceased functioning but they do function with the prefix "the" added. Initially we've updated the relevant links on this page and perhaps, if this is a long-term LoR problem, we may update the other LoR links throughout our site. We won't let AronRa get away that easily :). So where necessary, just prepend "the" to any LoR links, as in theleagueofreason.co.uk.

Round One: As an atheist, Aron appeals to authority. Also, Ra's refusal to admit that Isaac Newton was a creationist.

Round Two: AronRa did not know about the many peer-reviewed confirmations of dinosaur soft tissue. Also...

Newsweek 1987 Statistic:, as often claimed by evolutionists, Ra says that 99.86% of scientists affirm Darwinism, a statistic that is unintentionally fabricated by a confused misuse of a 1987 Newsweek article that reports no poll or survey but a "count" of creationist scientists. (That count, we believe we can demonstrate, was the membership of the Creation Research Society.) Newsweek reporters Martz and McDaniel wrote, "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientist) who give credence to creation-science, the general theory that complex life forms did not evolve but appeared "abruptly." Enyart was not able to reach Larry Martz, but from Ann McDaniel he received this gracious reply: "Bob – I wish I had the notes for that story, but I don’t have everything from 25 years ago, and I don’t remember. So sorry that I cannot help you." Bob also spoke with Glen Wolfram, the CRS membership director who has served in that position since the 1980s. Wolfram agreed with Enyart's conclusion that Newsweek was likely referring to the publicly known number of scientist members of CRS, and he provided published membership records from throughout the 1980s. Over the five years from mid-1982 to mid-1987, the average CRS membership was about 2,000 with 36 percent being voting members, that is, having earned a postgraduate science degree. So there were an average of 710 "scientists with respectable academic credentials" as members of CRS in the years leading up to that Newsweek article, which number was undoubtedly the source for that 1987 report. As for the 99.86, that percentage was, almost certainly unintentionally, arrived at by some who inncorrectly calculated a percentage based on the "count" of 700. By such an overly invalid statistical method, atheists themselves would comprise only two-hundredths of one percent of 230 million U.S. adults if we calculated using "one count" of atheists, namely, the membership of the Skeptics Society. Of course that's wrong. So Real Science Radio hereby ask evolutionists to help us creationists by correcting anyone who still promotes that incorrect 99.86%. Thanks!

Round Three: Catalog of the peer-reviewed confirmation of dinosaur soft tissue; rapid stratification; carbon 14 everywhere; wildly unexpected genomic discoveries.

Round Four: Millions of nautiloid fossils standing on their heads; uniform strata boundaries; gently curved strata;  and alleged millions of years of missing strata; all versus AronRa's denial of evidence of rapid strata deposition at the Grand Canyon; Global flooding on Earth vs. Mars; And Bob's brief replies to AronRa's claims about Babel and The Exodus including on the major Darwinian predictions about the origin of language being disproved by evolutionists.

Round Five: AronRa claims that the traditional tree of life, based on anatomy and the fossil record, is doubly confirmed when drawn by genetic sequences. Bob Enyart challenges this and references the many genomes that leading evolutionists admit do not fit into the predicted Darwinian pattern (like PNAS reporting that horses are closer to bats than to cows). Presenting the discoveries published in peer-reviewed evolutionary journals, as in RSF's List of Genomes that Just Don't Fit, and as in the cover story in Britain's leading science magazine, New Scientists' own Darwin was wrong about the tree of life, evolutionary geneticists at respected institutions are nonetheless blatantly admitting that DNA, RNA, and proteins demonstrate contradictory evolutionary pathways and that therefore, genetic science is, far from "doubly confirming" it, actually undermining the alleged Darwinian tree of life. A famed evolutionist repeated AronRa's confusion, claiming that the nonconformist genomes are relegated to the realm of microorganisms, which misunderstanding of theirs is falsified in the RSR rebuttal to Jerry Coyne's criticism of Bob Enyart. (In this round Aron included an image and caption that he thought came from the NS article in question, but actually came from two different online sources, and that all added to the confusion of the evolutionists as to what the NS article was saying.)

Round Six Post Ends Debate: AronRa unexpectedly quit the debate shortly after he and PZ Myers bragged about how well this debate was going for the atheists when Aron wrote that Bob's "next submission ought to be interesting whatever it is…" So Bob had the opportunity to conclude the debate regarding:
- Aron presented zero evidence for his claim against creationism in 1st Foundational video
- Copernicus, Bacon, Kelvin, and Galileo reply to AronRa's misrepresentation of them
- Evolutionists during debates pretend they've not heard of common words and concepts
- Aron's insistence that Bob claims the dinosaur soft tissue is "edible"
- Darwinists identify entities like bodily organs and supragroups as ancestors even though, because they do not reproduce, they are not even Darwinian evolutionary units
- The claim of the standard model that the universe has "no center" is not based on science but philosophy
- Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam help close the debate
- Evolutionists reject the "hard science" of multiple, independent, radioactive dating techniques that produced a "too old" age for Skull 1470 so they threw that date out based on their certainty of when pigs evolved (really)
- Tropical forests and millions of mammoths catastrophically buried in the Arctic as across thousands of miles these giant creatures one-by-one, according to Aron, fell into holes
- Aron's source, physicist Lawrence Krauss, tells RSR that he agrees that T. rex blood vessels have been discovered
- Aron's source, Dr. Philip Gingerich, agrees with RSR that he wrongly reconstructed alleged whale ancestor Rodhocetus
- Bob answers AronRa's Phylogeny Challenge.

* Typo Alert: Two computer-editing typos appear in a final round post, both saying "On MSds", which should say:
Illusions of Identified Ancestry for Turtles, Flowers, etc.: [Aron's 8th of 9]
Discoverer of Whale "Ancestor" Rodhocetus Retracts Claims: [Aron's 9th of 9]:

* In ALLEGED -- Hollywood Finally Gets Scopes Trial Right: Enjoy ALLEGED, the feature film about the Scopes Monkey Trial starring Brian Dennehy (Rambo), Fred Thompson (Law & Order), Colm Meany (Star Trek), Ashley Johnson (The Help), Nathan West and Khori Faison. This great movie Alleged, available at Walmart, is accurate to the history and trial transcript of the Scopes Monkey Trial unlike Hollywood's previous Inherit the Wind attempt. Order your copy today. Alleged is available from Amazon or pick it up from your local Walmart or order it online at Walmart DVD or Walmart Blu-ray. Enjoy!

* AronRa's First Foundational Falsehood Video Completely Unsubstantiated: If this accusation is true, that Aron provides zero evidence to support the central claim of his first video, this undermines the credibility of AronRa's entire Foundational Falsehoods series. So feel free to watch the video and see his quotes, omission of evidence, and the evidence that falsified his first and foremost claim, all below!

* AronRa Fails to Cite Even a Single Example: Aron's 1st Foundational Falsehood video against creationists, titled "evolution = atheism", says that we creationists claim that evolution is synonymous with atheism, which we do not. We deal with theistic evolutionists all the time. AronRa's video provides not a single quote from any leading creationist to substantiate his claim. When Bob Enyart pointed this out in their radio debate at KGOV.com/AronRa the popular atheist said that his video shows Answers in Genesis president Ken Ham himself. But Enyart pointed out that it was video of Ken Ham, but with AronRa's own voice superimposed. Enyart is unfamiliar with any creation ministry that makes this claim and challenged Ra to provide one example from any leading creation ministry. During our broadcast, it appeared that Aron became confused even about what his first foundational falsehood claim was. So to clarify, from his video, Aron alleges without providing evidence that creationism…

3:53 – 4:03 "is based on at least a dozen foundational falsehoods. First and foremost among them is the idea that accepting evolution requires the rejection of theism, if not all other religious or spiritual beliefs as well."

4:03 – 4:14 "For decades, those behind the creationist movement have tried very hard to portray that one cannot accept evolution and still believe in God. They know better."

6:43 - 6:52 " Poll after poll continues to reveal that, around the world, most “evolutionists” are Christian, and most Christians are evolutionists.  So evolution is not synonymous with atheism"

4:20 – 4:23 "That's been their central claim since the movement began." [hear all four]

Central claim? RSR cannot present here the quotes or evidence that Aron provides, because his video presents nothing to back up his claim. Judging by his YouTube channel's millions views, his atheist viewers must be satisfied with accusations without evidence because apparently not a single evolutionist has made him realize that he should provide such evidence. Bias has that effect. So Aron should either show that this belief of his is defensibly accurate or he should correct it. As Aaron says in his 4th Foundational Falsehoods video:

8:17 – 8:30 "But if you believe in truth at all, then you should make sure that the things that you say actually are true. That they are defensibly accurate, and academically correct. And if they are not correct, you should correct them. You wouldn't claim to know anything that you couldn't prove that you knew." hear it

* AronRa Confused about His Own First Foundational Falsehood: When creationists argue that evolution is false, and that atheism is false, AronRa confuses himself into thinking that we are asserting that evolution is synonymous with atheism. That is his non sequitur. Aron explicitly does this on the radio when debating Bob Enyart accusing the creationist of conflating evolution with atheism on the sole grounds that Enyart argued that both are false. (See the related story, KGOV.com/pot.) AronRa is as confused as if he claimed that anyone opposed to the UFO craze and opposed to Keynesian economics is therefore claiming that Lord Keynes was an alien. So RSR challenges AronRa, first to admit that his first foundational video provides not a single quote to substantiate his point. And then to go and try to find one from any leading creation organization. And if he cannot, then he needs to take his own advice.

* Positive Evidence Contradicting AronRa's First Foundational Falsehood: Creationists have always acknowledged and responded to theistic evolutionists. (Aron, you seem to confuse the presentation of "conclusions", which you do throughout your videos, with the presentation of "evidence. The rest of this paragraph is an example of the presentation of evidence.) Strident evolutionists (like William Provine and as in the journals Nature and Science), as well as creationists, have long argued that the opposing positions are untenable. Here, however, are examples of the leading creationist organizations writing about those who advocate both the existence of God and of evolution by way of theistic evolution:
- CMI's creation.com has many articles dealing with T.E. including 10 dangers of theistic evolution
- AiG's answersingenesis.org has many articles dealing with T.E. including The Basic Assumptions of T.E.
- ICR's icr.org has many articles dealing with T.E. including Could evolution and creation be telling the same story
- CRS's creationresearch.org has many articles dealing with T.E. including An examination of theistic evolution
- CSC's creationscience.com has many references to T.E. including Theistic evolution vs. the Biblical account

* Evolutionists Commit This Kind of Error Themselves: When Darwinists claim, as they all do, that nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution, they are saying that a creationist cannot be a scientist (at least not in the biological sciences, and Big Bang and chemical evolution proponents show similar bias in their fields). Thus, in this way, Darwinists commonly claim, falsely, that you cannot be a scientist unless you believe in evolution. Not surprising then, wherever they can, evolutionists kill the careers of those who doubt Darwin. (RSR documents atheists being guilty of the very things that they accuse creationists of.) However, some evolutionists acknowledge that creationists can be good scientists.

* Chris Peltz and Bob Enyart Talk about the Bible and Wine: An evangelist from a Denver Church of Christ, Chris Peltz, hosts a talk show that airs one hour before Bob Enyart Live. Bob and Chris conclude their debate on their opposing beliefs regarding what the Bible teaches about drinking alcohol.

* Chris Peltz and Bob Enyart Talk about the Bible and Wine: An evangelist from a Denver Church of Christ, Chris Peltz, hosts a talk show that airs one hour before Bob Enyart Live. Bob and Chris discuss their opposing beliefs regarding what the Bible teaches about drinking alcohol.

* BOB DEBATES KEEPING THE SABBATH: This important discussion with Jeff, a Christian brother from Yuma, Colorado on the Sabbath provides a brief yet detailed sur