| Operational Science Versus Historical Science |
|
A debate took place between Ken Ham and Bill Nye. The debate was over whether creation is a viable subject of scientific inquiry. During the debate, Bill Nye insisted that there were no different kinds of science. He insisted that there was no such thing as operational science even though whole departments of Universities are dedicated to operational science and the term is in common use by scientists. Bill insisted that there was no such thing as historical science, in spite of the fact that whole departments of universities are dedicated to historical science and the term is in common use by scientists. Bill Nye insisted that there was no operational science or historical science. There is only science, at least in the mind of Bill Nye. Bill Nye gave the example that we can know that the Earth is not flat in the same way that we can know that the Earth is not less than 10,000 years old. For that reason, we are providing this very simple graphic that should make the difference plain.
https://creation.com/index-fossils https://creation.com/fossils-wrong-place https://creation.com/fossil-taxonomic-manipulations https://creation.com/fossil-range-expansions https://creation.com/dodging-living-fossils https://creation.com/geological-conflict https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth https://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-radiometric-dating-prove 
How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question |
Other Pages in this sectionAttacks on the Bible Story Telling Versus Revelation The Professor: a Testimony Creation, Flood, Etc. The Naturalism Hoax The Existence of God Believers are Anti-Science??? Tactics & Tricks The Burden of Proof Recently Viewed |
