Below is a link to a debate between Ken Ham and Eugenie Scott. Both of them were on a radio talk show and there were listeners who called in and asked them questions.
One of the things that Ken Ham said was that there needs to be an increase of genetic information in order for molecules-to-man evolution to work. Eugenie Scott thought the idea of an increase in information was vague so Ken Ham tried to explain what an increase of genetic information would be. There was no response from Eugenie Scott because the talk host show had a caller ask a question.
Ken Ham said that he did not trust the radiometric dating methods because they rest on assumptions, but he did not explain what those assumptions were and why those assumptions were false.
Eugenie Scott said that evolution was the idea that living things have a common ancestry and that there is descent with modification. She talked about the kinds of biological change that a creationist would agree with.
Eugenie Scott vs. Ken Ham
One of the things that Ken Ham said was that there needs to be an increase of genetic information in order for molecules-to-man evolution to work. Eugenie Scott thought the idea of an increase in information was vague so Ken Ham tried to explain what an increase of genetic information would be. There was no response from Eugenie Scott because the talk host show had a caller ask a question.
Ken Ham said that he did not trust the radiometric dating methods because they rest on assumptions, but he did not explain what those assumptions were and why those assumptions were false.
Eugenie Scott said that evolution was the idea that living things have a common ancestry and that there is descent with modification. She talked about the kinds of biological change that a creationist would agree with.
Eugenie Scott vs. Ken Ham