Ken Ham dismisses evolution with an argument that we can’t know what we weren’t there to see happen. There is a difference between observational science (physics, chemistry) and historical science (anthropology, paleontology) each having its tools. How does historical science operate and how reliable are its conclusions?

Watch this as video on our YouTube channel: Believers and Nonbelievers In Discussion.

Please support me at Patreon: Phil Calderone. As reward you’ll have access to all the Q&A sessions for these BNB episodes.  https://www.patreon.com/philcalderone