A Facebook friend suggested that it would be fun to see the Doctor respond to Ken Ham’s “Were you there?” And so I made the two images in this post.
I’d pay to see this one!
Outstanding, mega kudos
There was an episode of Doctor Who where he took one of his companions to witness the creation of the universe. It was a magnificent episode.
Perhaps in another version, Ken Ham asks Dr. Who: “Where you there?”
The Doctor runs to his TARDIS, steps inside the TARDIS, steps back out, and says “Yes, actually….”
I think there is plenty of room for some more creative photoshopping, with potential results far better than mine. If you or anyone else runs with these ideas, please do share what you come up with here!
Ken Ham remained unconvinced until near the end of the debate when the Doctor took Ken into the TARDIS….
That’s the trouble with fictional time machines. Most people think that a trip in one would prove them right…
How do we know the TARDIS is a time machine and not a sophisticated virtual reality device?
Ham has written the following on his facebook page:
“At last, theistic evolutionist Dr. James McGrath and I agree about something concerning creation/evolution! McGrath is an Associate Professor in the Religion and Philosophy department at Butler University in Indiana. He often writes scathing blogs against me and Answers in Genesis. Today, I decided to share a recent blog by McGrath (he did it as a spoof) with you, primarily because I love the science fiction TV program “Dr. Who.” You see, Dr. McGrath has used “Dr. Who” to correctly frame the evolution/creation issue, including as it relates to my February 4 public debate with Bill Nye “The Science Guy.” Yes, Dr. McGrath, I agree. Your blog has correctly represented the upcoming debate about creation/evolution/science—it is a debate about fiction (evolution) versus truth (Genesis)! Yes—Dr. Who (fiction) vs Truth (God’s Word). Yes, this time I have to thank you for a blog about AiG. Oh—I also agree with you about the principle that unless you were there in the past to see how the universe and life formed, you wouldn’t know what really happened. Now, it would be great to have a TARDIS machine to travel back in time, but we have a far better “Time Machine.” It’s called the Bible. God, who is outside of time, has revealed to us in His Word when time began and what has happened over time to enable us to correctly understand the history of the universe—not just the origin of life and the universe, but the origin of man, our problem (sin) and the solution in Jesus Christ. Enjoy his “Dr. Who” illustrations—I did! See: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionprof/2014/01/the-doctor-to-debate-ken-ham.html”
I will resist commenting further.
Props to Ken, that is a fun comeback. But maybe from the comeback we can deduce that it is Ham (master of eisegesis) vs McGrath (professional scholar).
It is hard to have as negative an opinion of him now that I’ve learned that he likes Doctor Who.
But I strongly object to the notion that the Bible is a time machine!
It currently has 108 shares from Ken’s FB. That’s awesome!
It is almost certainly the first thing I’ve made or done or written that he has spoken positively about!
He posted one from Unfundamentalist Christians too. My feelings are almost hurt that I’ve been left out
It’s not too late. Are you skilled with Photoshop? Give Ken a ride in the TARDIS! 😉
LOL. Well, I am a member of the National Association of Photoshop Professionals, but I’ve never done dino work before…
But, I have a post coming tomorrow that he might think is funny (or maybe not)
I look forward to it!
You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din. I’m going to stop typing right now so I don’t say something I later regret. Except:
The stupid. It burns…
Judging by his response I’m very tempted to think the guy knows his medicine show is a scam a la Steve Martin in “Leap of Faith” and he’s laughing all the way to the bank . . .
Of course all this “were you there” drivel is irrelevant to the debate topic at hand. It is NOT ‘Does the Bible mention origins and is the Bible infallible’ it is ‘Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific world?’
Nye must INSIST that Ham addresses the real TOPIC and not some OTHER topic. Ham CANNOT say “evolutionists were not there therefore the creation ‘model’ is viable even in a scientific era because ‘God was there’ and knows the truth”. That would be tantamount to lying and Nye must not let such pass unchallenged.
If Ham cannot show that the answer to the debate question is ‘yes’, or (as I suspect) fails to try and instead attacks science in general, Nye should seize upon this failure and tell the audience in no uncertain terms that Ham has LOST the debate and that he has NO viable scientific model just denial. (The debate is about scientific models, not about Christianity versus unbelief.)
I assume the ‘Ian’ at the start of there wasn’t me. Or is Disqus doing weird things again.
I was responding (indirectly) to your comments that began “Props to Ken …”.
Gotya, thanks. I agree, I think it very unlikely Ham will be content to argue for the proposition. Though I think the wording of the motion is a bit of an open goal. Any half-decent debater should be able to carry that motion, I’d say.
So sad that this is just a spoof…though a lot of people would look forward to this debate-an equal amount of seriousness, humor and Biblical facts. No doubt Mr. David Tennant would win…hands down.
We’ve all seen the debating strategies of scientists and young-earth creationists. It might liven things up to have an actor performing in a debate just for entertainment value – whether they did it as themselves or in character.
Yes, Billions of years. But curses will do that.