A statement in Bill Nye's book 'Undeniable' claims that, "...creationism, which offers a static view of the world, one that cannot be challenged or tested with reason. And because it cannot make predictions, it cannot lead to new discoveries, new medicines, or new ways to feed all of us."
In this sentence there are 3 separate statements, 1: creationism offers a static view of the world. 2: That the creationist view can not be tested with reason. And 3: That creationism can't make predictions which lead to new discoveries. Overall he is stating that creationists can't be real scientists. I plan on proving all 3 of these statements wrong.
Statement 1: First of all we have to understand what he means by static view. The definition of static is, lacking in movement, action, or change, especially in a way viewed as undesirable or uninteresting. So by static he means not changing. I believe otherwise.
In the beginning God created everything, each time after creating something he said it was good. At that time everything was perfect, then sin entered the world (also known as the fall). After that God had to change some things.
Genesis chapter 3 verse 16 To the woman he said "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you." verse 17 ..."cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. verse 18 "It will produce thorns and thistles for you and you will eat eat the plants of the field."
Throughout the Bible there are various accounts of change, this is probably one of the biggest. But what do all the various accounts have in common? God is the one who is doing the changing. So the conclusion is the world changes, but only when God wants it to. Otherwise we do live in a static world.
But what does a static view have to do with anything? I believe it is crucial! Let me explain. One of the most important parts of science is performing experiments, In order to draw a conclusion the experiments must be repeatable and have the same results. In the atheist view is that the world is always changing. Therefore the experiments they perform today could have different results tomorrow. This is the complete opposite of creationism, which (as so eloquently put by Bill Nye) offers a static view of the world, one that does not change, and our conclusions do not change (except for experimental error.)
Now what about the third statement? Creationists and atheists use the same methodology (the scientific method). So in order to call creationists inaccurate or unscientific they are calling themselves that. Regarding us not able to make discoveries; Isaac Newton also known as the Father of Physics, Ben Carson well known for his medical breakthroughs, Raymond Damadain inventor of MR (Magnetic Resonance) Scanning Machine, these are just some of the most important people in science. They also believe in the creation. These 3 people are enough proof that Christians can be scientists. In fact we can be great scientists, we have the one thing atheists don't. We have the Creator of the Universe on our side and no amount of science can stand up to that.