It’s the debate literally no one was asking for.

Catholic blogger (and man-everyone-on-the-internet-loves-to-mock) Matt Walsh recently said Young Earth Creationism was silly because there’s just no way the Earth is 6,000 years old. I can’t remember saying this before, but the man who’s wrong about damn near everything is right about this. Walsh added that he wasn’t denying the truth of the Bible but rather dismissing what he considered a faulty interpretation of it. He also said promoting Creationism made it harder for people to accept Christianity… which is also true.

Naturally, this infuriated Creationist Ken Ham. The two men are now waging an all-out internet war against each other over which person is doing more damage to Christianity.

(Spoiler: They both win.)

Here’s Walsh explaining his side of the story:

I did a podcast a few weeks ago explaining why I do not hold to the Young Earth Creationist view. Ken Ham over at Answers in Genesis responded to that episode. His response is intentionally misleading and dishonest. He blatantly mischaracterizes my view and provides no link to the actual episode and doesn’t even quote me directly at any point. Instead he tells his followers that I’m a “compromised Christian” who rejects God’s word, among other insults. At first, I wasn’t going to respond to this. But his post has apparently made the rounds quite a bit. A lot of people have reached out angry and upset at me because they read Ken Ham’s version of my opinion on creationism. He has caused many people to believe that I really do reject Scripture and faith. And, again, he gave people this impression without providing a link to the episode or quoting me at any point.

Ham, desperate to replicate the Bill Nye debate by using someone else’s larger platform to amplify his personal brand of faith-based bullshittery, says he’ll offer a livestreamed response to Walsh on Monday. In the meantime, he’s saying that Walsh’s position — the one that takes reality into account — will lead to the destruction of animals and kids. Somehow.

Walsh’s main points were that the days in Genesis could not be twenty-four hours and that science has proved the earth is billions of years old. We have repeatedly addressed these claims on our website, again making me wonder if he did any research before making his video. However, the fundamental point that Mr. Walsh is making is that he is more willing to rely on man’s fallible word than to trust God’s infallible word. He repeatedly cites “science” as the reason the earth cannot be young. Yet, when observational science is performed, there are mountains of evidence from geology, astronomy, physics, archaeology, and so on that the earth is indeed young. … It is very ironic that Walsh regularly defends biblical positions such as biblical marriage, human life made in God’s image beginning at fertilization, two created genders and so on, but rejects the foundation for those beliefs. Without appealing to Genesis, there is no foundation for marriage. Abortion becomes perfectly acceptable if we aren’t made in the image of God. Get rid of spare cats or spare kids — what’s the difference? Why should we have two genders if God did not make them male and female in the beginning? Genesis provides the answers to those questions.

Ham sees the Book of Genesis as the first in a long series of dominoes. Take it anything less than literally, and the rest of the Bible falls away quickly. He blames every societal problem on people not believing in a specific Creation myth that involves a talking snake, a giant boat, and an apple that no one was supposed to eat.

Walsh, making sense for once, said the Christian conspiracy theory didn’t hold up under evidence, and this led to backlash from his corner of the world. That’s what you get when you spend your career cultivating a fan base full of people who think women are to blame for their own assaults and that yoga is demonic. Of course they’re going to rebel when you say something reasonable.

So if you can stomach it, have fun watching two guys who think they’re good at evangelizing tear each other down over the dumbest idea in all of Christendom. Even if Walsh wins this particular argument, the idea that he thinks there’s a debate worth having tells you plenty about his position.

