James Daulton
Footballguy
Bill Nye vs Ken Ham. Should be entertaining at least.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Bill Nye To Debate Creationist At Creation Museum February 4th (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter James Daulton
- Start date
sporthenry
Footballguy
James Daulton
Footballguy
No not that Ham. This guy is a renowned young-earth creationist. There's also an interesting link on nbcnews with him arguing about some kind of round ark that's being proposed. From what I gather, his trump card is that the bible is the literal word of God and thus everything in it is true. I'm not sure how you argue around that.
Last edited by a moderator:
El Floppo
Footballguy
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
I predict Ken Ham wins this rather easily.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
babydemon90
Footballguy
update?
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Australian accent and transparencies - strong combo. This ####er is solid.
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
http://debatelive.org/
Its over 2 1/2 hours. I don't think I can listen to Ken deny clear evidence with the same argument for that long ...
Its over 2 1/2 hours. I don't think I can listen to Ken deny clear evidence with the same argument for that long ...
I guess I'll put this on right now as I'm falling asleep. Then tomorrow I can try to figure out how far I got by looking for the break between stuff I remember and stuff I don't.
Maelstrom
Footballguy
Just finishing it up. Ham's main point, many times reiterated, is that God, through the Bible, has told us how the Earth was created and how long it took. He dismisses any science related to the age of the Earth by claiming it is "historical science" and not "observational science", and therefore because history cannot be observed, historical science is literally just each person's interpretation of the evidence.
Personally, the science holds up very well, and Nye, while he couldn't match the Aussie accent and was a bit more nervous, possibly, did a good job of presenting the facts of how we can tell, through science, how old the Earth is. Nye had far more to lose than Ham, and while I found this is interesting, it was really troubling to me that Ham and the people that believe like him are literally trying to say things that are known to be scientific fact are not such, based on the Bible, rather than based on actual evidence to the contrary.
Personally, the science holds up very well, and Nye, while he couldn't match the Aussie accent and was a bit more nervous, possibly, did a good job of presenting the facts of how we can tell, through science, how old the Earth is. Nye had far more to lose than Ham, and while I found this is interesting, it was really troubling to me that Ham and the people that believe like him are literally trying to say things that are known to be scientific fact are not such, based on the Bible, rather than based on actual evidence to the contrary.
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
I am about 40 minutes in and Ham is focused on the "high jacking" of the term evolution by the scientists. It all boils down to the evidence that he isn't addressing and it doesn't sound like he will. He is now talking about Noah's ark only needing one pair of types of animals (ex. one pair of dogs) and the evolution trees developing from there. I don't think I can take much more but trying.
ETA: Ham is a smooth talker, got to give him that. But kind of strikes me like a David Duke type, smooth talker, horrible ideals. He comes off a lot better than that crazy ##### Wendy Wright. There is enough money behind this perspective, they should have put this guy out more prominently than they have. It takes talent to put on this kind of presentation and not appear crazy. Guy would make a great trial attorney.
Prior rep for the cause ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFjoEgYOgRo
Last edited by a moderator:
On The Rocks
Footballguy
I'm a "young earther" - but I recall someone here on this board at some point opening my mind to the possibility that the earh was created as an "old or mature" earth - similar to Adam being created as a mature adult.
I'm going to watch the debate today, if it's still available for watching onlne.
I'm going to watch the debate today, if it's still available for watching onlne.
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu
Footballguy
Watch this:I'm a "young earther" - but I recall someone here on this board at some point opening my mind to the possibility that the earh was created as an "old or mature" earth - similar to Adam being created as a mature adult.
I'm going to watch the debate today, if it's still available for watching onlne.
What Darwin Never Knew
Doug B
Footballguy
Love Bill Nye. But if Ken Ham is that slick, they need to sick Michael Shermer on him. Shermer eats slick B.S. every morning for breakfast.
Ketamine Dreams
Footballguy
Embarrassing that this is still a 'debate'.
Homer J Simpson
I don't push
As a young earth creationist, why even pretend that you need "evidence" for your beliefs? If you're gonna go with it, man, just go with it.I'm a "young earther" - but I recall someone here on this board at some point opening my mind to the possibility that the earh was created as an "old or mature" earth - similar to Adam being created as a mature adult.
I'm going to watch the debate today, if it's still available for watching onlne.
JZilla
Footballguy
As a young earth creationist, why even pretend that you need "evidence" for your beliefs? If you're gonna go with it, man, just go with it.I'm a "young earther" - but I recall someone here on this board at some point opening my mind to the possibility that the earh was created as an "old or mature" earth - similar to Adam being created as a mature adult.
I'm going to watch the debate today, if it's still available for watching onlne.
Nobody likes a guy who buries his head in the sand then keeps peeking out
Rayderr
Footballguy
Here it is in a nutshell:I'm a "young earther" - but I recall someone here on this board at some point opening my mind to the possibility that the earh was created as an "old or mature" earth - similar to Adam being created as a mature adult.
I'm going to watch the debate today, if it's still available for watching onlne.
Nye: We have scientific evidence that the earth wasn't created 6,000 years ago in 6 days and that many of the events in the bible (i.e. great flood) never happened.
Ham: You can't use science to determine history. You can only rely on eye witness accounts, and that's what the bible is. I win!
Doug B
Footballguy
It's very much not a debate -- both sides don't play by the same evidentiary rules. One side's arguments are conceivably falsifiable, the other side's (fundamentally**) are not.
** no pun intended
Rick James
Footballguy
If you visit the Christianity subreddit, you'd find a lot of people who disagree with Ken Ham.
Doug B
Footballguy
To be fair, scientific inquiry can't quite establish that. A subtle change:
Nye: We have falsifiable evidence that the earth is at least 4 billion years old. Additionally, we have found no evidence whatsoever that many of the events in the bible (i.e. great flood) ever happened.
Doug B
Footballguy
A headcount of all self-identified Christians worldwide (including non-practicing "cultural" Christians, "cafeteria Catholics", etc.) woudl reveal that among this set, hardcore Creationists** would be outnumbered several hundred to one. At best.
** this excludes those that believe in the "watchmaker God" that initiated the Big Bang, then sat back and watched the universe unfold.
NCCommish
Footballguy
While you excluded them they have the best argument. No one can say what happened before the Big Bang. No one can say how it started. We reach a point where an omnipotent being is as good an answer as anything science has. Now I don't believe it but it's at least in line with scientific evidence to some degree.
igbomb
Footballguy
I'm Catholic, and the Church does not support YE Creationism. In fact, the first Church statements on evolution were that Christianity and evolution can exist together. Pope John Paul II went so far as to say that evolution is more than a hypothesis and can be supported by Catholics.
Catholic schools teach evolution and support the theory.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Not particularly. I've never been a creationist, I find the theory of evolution to be aesthetically appealing, and none of that causes any particular issue with my religious belief. The "origin" story that I think you're referring to plays almost no role in Christianity, and I think that's also true for most other religions although I can't speak for all of them of course.
shader
Footballguy
I'm shocked there are young-earth creationists. Believing that the earth is really old doesn't take away from the bible at all.
I always think it's funny that YEC think that the sun itself was created in one of the creative days, yet the length of the day MUST be 24 hours, which ironically is a time period that is dependent on there being an earth and a sun.
I always think it's funny that YEC think that the sun itself was created in one of the creative days, yet the length of the day MUST be 24 hours, which ironically is a time period that is dependent on there being an earth and a sun.
matuski
Footballguy
NCCommish
Footballguy
I have evaluated that statement for some time. The reality is an omnipotent being has as much potential as say our universe really being like a sheet paper that touched another universe thus causing the Big Bang. Until we get a few nanoseconds out and the laws of the universe kicked in we got nothing. Now I don't believe in God or gods. But I have absolutely no basis in science to say beyond an absolute doubt that an omnipotent being couldn't have started the Big Bang. Of course there are reasons to reject the God theory but that is true of every theory out there. And if we believe where science is leading us with quantum theory we really have to allow for an infinitesimally small chance of it happening that way.
timschochet
Footballguy
The distinction between historical science and observational science reminds me of the distinction between German physics and Jewish physics.
matuski
Footballguy
Not being able to say it "absolutely" does not mean it is an equally likely explanation. Just another variable on top of an already mind boggling level complexity.
Put another way, which is more complex (less likely)?:
The Big Bang by itself
or
The Big Bang + supernatural omnipotent god
Why add a god to the mix? Which god or gods are you adding? You just made an the problem infinitely harder.
Last edited by a moderator:
matuski
Footballguy
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
Its kind of like the distinction between a 13 year old who looks 20 and just your average 13 year old.
trogg78
Footballguy
NCCommish
Footballguy
Every theory given so far for the Big Bang is incredibly complex and has a very small chance of being right. I don't think an omnipotent being makes it that much more complex at that point in time. Of course added complexity is one of those reasons I mentioned for rejecting the God theory. But again you can't name a Big Bang theory that hasn't been worked over pretty good on multiple fronts or one that has even come close to being accepted as the one, especially given all the new work on the theoretical existence of a multiverse.Not being able to say it "absolutely" does not mean it is an equally likely explanation. Just another variable on top of an already mind boggling level complexity.
Put another way, which is more complex (less likely)?:
The Big Bang by itself
or
The Big Bang + supernatural omnipotent god
Why add a god to the mix? Which god or gods are you adding? You just made an the problem infinitely harder.
Scoresman
Footballguy
No ####. Do we even live in a first world country? I mean look at all the stupidity in the link below. Buzzfeed sent a reporter to have creationists write a message to people who believe in evolution.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/messages-from-creationists-to-people-who-believe-in-evolution
My favorite has to be "If we came from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?" Unreal that people seemingly capable of logical thought believe in this stuff.
matuski
Footballguy
I am not nor ever will be an expert on the Big Bang, but I recognize the complexity and inherent room for improvement.Every theory given so far for the Big Bang is incredibly complex and has a very small chance of being right. I don't think an omnipotent being makes it that much more complex at that point in time. Of course added complexity is one of those reasons I mentioned for rejecting the God theory. But again you can't name a Big Bang theory that hasn't been worked over pretty good on multiple fronts or one that has even come close to being accepted as the one, especially given all the new work on the theoretical existence of a multiverse.Not being able to say it "absolutely" does not mean it is an equally likely explanation. Just another variable on top of an already mind boggling level complexity.
Put another way, which is more complex (less likely)?:
The Big Bang by itself
or
The Big Bang + supernatural omnipotent god
Why add a god to the mix? Which god or gods are you adding? You just made an the problem infinitely harder.
I guess we are splitting hairs, but adding an infinite amount of complexity (a god) to an incredibly complex equation (Big Bang) certainly affects it's likelyhood.
Worm
slimy ninja
I disagree.
I've read multiple books that deal with trying to reconcile old earth + evolution with the Christianity story.
The problem, for me, is that old earth + evolution directly contradicts the story of Adam and Eve, which is where things start falling apart with the reconciliation. If you don't have historical adam and eve, and you don't have a "fall", then it makes it very difficult to even consider the story as an allegory because of how it directly leads into the Christ story.
NCCommish
Footballguy
And this is why I have a fit when I see someone who believes Evolution saying we came from monkeys. We shared a common ancestor with the other great apes, we didn't come from them.
Similar threads
