Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham

Many thanks for posting that.
You obviously need to be well prepared for this sort of public debate. I wonder whether debating evolution should be the topic but rather age issues. Establish a good case for long age then some sort of evolution follows be it deistic, theistic, or atheistic. Hammering ice layers might be good because apart from the several means of establishing that the layers are annual, lead levels reflect its use in the Industrial Revolution, and the beginning of its use by the Greeks BC, by being present at the right count, and the volcanic layer at about 65,000 BC brings in support for RM dating.
Of course, as is often demonstrated here, some YEC are so rusted on that a visit from an angel telling them it was wrong would not change them.

Hi Faith,
If it is so hard to know about the "unwitnessed" past ,then it should be easy for you ,or anyone, to show where RAZD's Correlation thread goes wrong. So why has no one done so? In the debate with Mindspawn, once the evidence became apparently unanswerable, Mindspawn disappeared.Why don't you have a go at disproving the ice core counts of tens of thousands of years? They are checked by several different means to confirm the counts are annual, and can show deposits of known volcanic eruptions where expected in the count, and ditto for lead at the times human used it.
The Greenland Ice Core Chronology 2005 studied 5700 metres of three cores in concluding they showed 60,000 years, with the testing including 180,000 isotope and 1,000,000 chemical measurements, so there is plenty of scope for showing where they got it wrong.

Hi Faith,
You have many times said you reject RM dating, but have yet to adduce a single reason why, apart from it disagreeing with the Bible.