Forums → WEPR → Ken Ham vs. Bill "The Science Guy" Nye
116 | 42295 |
- 116 Replies
116 | 42295 |
This will be your chance to discuss the debate as it happens. At the time I'm posting this the debate will start soon. Here is a link to where you can see it.
Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham
There have been some issues raised about Nye taking on this debate. Feel free to express your views on that point as well.
that and there's youtube where everyone can watch you do it themselves now
God made the stars and put them so far away that the light from them wouldn't reach us in 6-10 thousand years. It would take billions of years to see what we see.
It's a little jarring to see how little support Bill Nye is getting. I knew how stacked the auditorium was, but only one clap? And when Bill Nye claimed that we found scientific support for where matter came from, the audience laughs?
"Diseases caused by bacteria and so on." - Ken Ham
Doesn't the Bible say that was demons?
Ken is side stepping the issue presented to him on other things besides the Bible for his view.
Bill Nye saying "don't know" on the emergence of consciousness. Not a good move, too easily quote mined. Would have been best to keep with "one of those mysteries of the universe".
Bill Pointing out how Ken has just be presenting unbacked stories was a good blow.
Point goes to Nye.
"Diseases caused by bacteria and so on." - Ken Ham
Doesn't the Bible say that was demons?
Bill Nye saying "don't know" on the emergence of consciousness. Not a good move, too easily quote mined. Would have been best to keep with "one of those mysteries of the universe".
"one of those mysteries of the universe".
I'm not talking about scientists. I'm talking about the average Joe evolutionist, who doesn't have the equipment to perform rigorous experiments, who can't collect data by himself (I'm sure there's plenty out there). If any of you fit this description, then why do you "believe" in evolution? What's the difference between you subscribing to evolution and someone else believing in creationism? Are they both not just faith in text that they cannot themselves confirm? If not, then why not?
I prefer to go with Africa and South America fitting like puzzle pieces and fossil records showing highly similar animals on all the continents when many of them are now extinct. It takes time for plates to move and all of the creatures found in fossils couldn't have lived at the same time as all of the creatures we have now. Ole T-rex living beside cows just doesn't cut it. The cows would've been dead and gone way before they were ever able to leave their mark on the world.
But then again the whole universe IS a hologram and we can't ever KNOW anything according to some
From what I have seen, Nye has asked -3 times- what predictions can be made with Creationism.
This entire question refutes the idea of Creationism being a viable scientific model.
If any of you fit this description, then why do you "believe" in evolution? What's the difference between you subscribing to evolution and someone else believing in creationism?
I'm not talking about scientists. I'm talking about the average Joe evolutionist
If any of you fit this description, then why do you "believe" in evolution?
What's the difference between you subscribing to evolution and someone else believing in creationism
Are they both not just faith in text that they cannot themselves confirm? If not, then why not?
This entire question refutes the idea of Creationism being a viable scientific model.
No such example of new functions can be given anywhere in the world, except for examples like these.
Lizards Undergo Rapid Evolution After Introduction To A New Home
Evolution in Action: Lizard Moving From Eggs to Live Birth
Evolution and Information: The Nylon Bug
You must be logged in to post a reply!