A long-awaited debate occurred on Feb. 4 between Bill Nye and Ken Ham. These influential men are on two sides of a pressing issue—whether creationism should be taught alongside evolution in schools.

Both individuals were qualified to explain and defend their opinions. Bill Nye was a well-known advocate  for science education even before his notorious 90’s program “Bill Nye the Science Guy”. He studied mechanical engineering at Cornell University where he earned a Bachelor in Science.

Ken Ham is the CEO of Answers in Genesis, an organization that has a mission to “seek to expose the bankruptcy of evolutionary ideas”. He earned a Bachelor of Applied Science at the Queensland Institute of Technology, and a diploma in Education from the University of Queensland.

Ham is also the founder of the Creationist Museum in Kentucky, a project that took nearly six years and a total of $27 million dollars to complete. The museum sprawls 70,000 square feet, and features both exhibits that serve to disprove specific evolutionary ideas, and exhibits that simply wish to illustrate the Bible. There are rebuttals to evolutionist ideas about ancient human skeletons in an exposition called “homology”. There are also displays of the Garden of Eden, Noah’s Ark, and even a few areas where humans are depicted walking alongside dinosaurs.

The idea for the debate was sparked by Ham’s outrage over a video with Bill Nye entitled, “Creationism is Not Appropriate for Children”. Ham posted a rebuttal video, “Creationism is Highly Appropriate for Children”, and the talk started.

However, atheists and agnostics have offered to debate the CEO of Answers in Genesis in the past. Ham has declined all other offers, on the grounds that the challengers were “mocking, strident evolutionists” who weren’t serious enough about creationism to have a respectful discussion. Other evolutionists such as Richard Dawkins opposed Nye’s decision to debate Ham.

Dawkins wrote on his blog that by debating a creationist, Nye is giving the impression that creationism has a logical chance against evolution. Dawkins writes, “Ham is a snake oil salesmen and Nye just offered him up an infomercial to sell his product.”

As the debate unfolded, tensions were high. Each debater had their chance to give an opening statement, to present 30 minutes of evidence for their beliefs, and to answer on-the-spot questions of creationism vs. evolution.

Nye’s platform was centered around the dangers of teaching creationism to children.

In Nye’s YouTube video from Big Think, “Creationism is Not Appropriate for Children”, the same video that sparked Ham’s interest, Nye warned that America would fall back as a scientific authority if we taught creationism to our children. “If we continue to eschew science … we are not going to move forward,” Nye claimed in the debate, “We will not embrace natural laws. We will not make discoveries. We will not invent and innovate and stay ahead.”

Ham’s argument consisted of many multimedia presentations, including PowerPoint slides, video demonstrations, and the introduction of scientists who believed devoutly in creationism.

“Creation is the only viable model of historical science confirmed by observational science in today’s modern scientific era,” Ham said. This was a repeated point that was also found in his rebuttal video to Nye’s “Creationism is Not Appropriate for Children”. The video “Creationism is Highly Appropriate for Our Children” featured two of Ham’s resident scientists at the Creationist Museum, explaining the difference between historical and observational science, and claiming that Nye was confusing the two.

“You don’t observe the past directly,” Ham said at the end of his opening statement. “You weren’t there.”

As for “who won”, most secular advocates believe that Nye did well, but ultimately could have done better. Jerry A. Coyne says to The Christian Science Monitor, “The debate was Ham’s to win and he lost. And the debate was Nye’s to lose and he won,” Coyne continues to explain that Nye could have crushed some of Ham’s claims, but he missed those opportunities.

The debate has drummed up enough fundraising and business for Answers in Genesis and the Creationist Museum, that Ham now has a chance to build a real life, to scale “Noah’s Ark”. An Answers in Genesis staffer wrote that “[the debate] has drawn countless believers and unbelievers alike to consider the Creation Museum’s teachings about the true history of the universe,” something that would surely terrify evolutionists like Richard Dawkins and Jerry A. Coyne.