Did Ham really say that he accepts the Bible literally up to the flood? After that it's any man for himself?
I had hoped to get an understanding of how intelligent people accept the bible literally. I did not. I saw a lot of successful scientists claiming to be creationists but not going into detail.
A disappointment.
But I did learn that there are two sciences: one of observation and the other of history. You can't know history because you weren't there. Dare I ask - if no original texts of Genesis exist today and what we have has been repeatedly re-interpreted by the scribes who copied them (no one was in the Garden of Eden to write a history, I believe) then historical science doesn't exist.

Or have I overthought this?

As I said, I was hoping for more.

The most saddening/frightening moment for me occurred before the debate even began. A young boy of about 9 was with his mother eagerly anticipating the show. He was sure Ham would win the debate "because he is right".

Evolution is of course still a theory but one with confirming discoveries happening every day. So sad that that little one will never know.

There is a beautifully written book by David Quamman (sp?) called Song of the Dodo. It details the rise and sometimes fall of life on isolated islands.More proof of evolving species.