The Open Mat Forum

Miscellaneous => Evolution(?) => Topic started by: ctc on January 04, 2014, 11:46:58 am

Title: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on January 04, 2014, 11:46:58 am
This will be awesome.  Can't wait.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2014/01/02/bill-nye-ken-ham-debate

TV’s famed “Bill Nye the Science Guy” will argue the case against creation and for evolution as he faces the founder and president of the Creation Museum, Ken Ham, on February 4, 2014, in the museum’s 900-seat Legacy Hall. The museum, which has drawn two million guests in six years (including 20,000 visitors at its recent Christmas Town programs), is located in Petersburg, Kentucky (near the Cincinnati Airport).

The agreed-upon topic for the 7 PM debate is “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?”

“A debate with Mr. Nye, nationally known for his children’s TV program and for promoting evolution, will be one of our major events in 2014 to highlight how children and teens are being influenced by evolutionary thinking," declared Ham. “This year, our AiG theme is ‘Standing Our Ground, Rescuing Our Kids.’ Having the opportunity to hold a cordial but spirited debate with such a well-known personality who is admired by so many young people will help bring the creation/evolution issue to the attention of many more people, including youngsters.”

Ham added, “I hope to show Mr. Nye and our debate audience that observational science confirms the scientific accuracy of the Genesis account of origins, not evolution.”

Nye is the former host of the popular Bill Nye the Science Guy PBS-TV program for children, the current executive director of the Planetary Society, and a frequent guest on TV interview programs.

Ham also noted, “If his travel schedule permits that day, Mr. Nye will be my guest at the museum. I would personally show him through our museum before the debate. I would also like him to meet our several full-time staff members who hold earned doctorates in science.”
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on January 04, 2014, 08:37:28 pm
This will be awesome.  Can't wait.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2014/01/02/bill-nye-ken-ham-debate

TV’s famed “Bill Nye the Science Guy” will argue the case against creation and for evolution as he faces the founder and president of the Creation Museum, Ken Ham, on February 4, 2014, in the museum’s 900-seat Legacy Hall. The museum, which has drawn two million guests in six years (including 20,000 visitors at its recent Christmas Town programs), is located in Petersburg, Kentucky (near the Cincinnati Airport).

The agreed-upon topic for the 7 PM debate is “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?”

“A debate with Mr. Nye, nationally known for his children’s TV program and for promoting evolution, will be one of our major events in 2014 to highlight how children and teens are being influenced by evolutionary thinking," declared Ham. “This year, our AiG theme is ‘Standing Our Ground, Rescuing Our Kids.’ Having the opportunity to hold a cordial but spirited debate with such a well-known personality who is admired by so many young people will help bring the creation/evolution issue to the attention of many more people, including youngsters.”

Ham added, “I hope to show Mr. Nye and our debate audience that observational science confirms the scientific accuracy of the Genesis account of origins, not evolution.”

Nye is the former host of the popular Bill Nye the Science Guy PBS-TV program for children, the current executive director of the Planetary Society, and a frequent guest on TV interview programs.

Ham also noted, “If his travel schedule permits that day, Mr. Nye will be my guest at the museum. I would personally show him through our museum before the debate. I would also like him to meet our several full-time staff members who hold earned doctorates in science.”

And Bill Nye will decimate Ken "I Never Met A Lie I Didn't Like" Hamm and of course the creationist, who are the only ones who will not accept evidence, will ignore the truth and claim Ken won.  But then reasonable people recognize what is going on.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on January 08, 2014, 12:33:34 pm
Tickets sold out in 2 minutes.  Plans are to live stream it.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on January 08, 2014, 08:27:14 pm
Tickets sold out in 2 minutes.  Plans are to live stream it.

I wonder is someone will be counting how many times Kenny lies.  He usually averages a lie ever 5 or 6 sentences so it should work out to a good 30 or so lies in a 1 hour debate.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: mspart on January 09, 2014, 11:11:51 am
And this will resolve what?  To be honest, the debate is good, but it will resolve nothing. I welcome the debate but will not watch.  I'll read about it maybe if it is available.

mspart

Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on January 09, 2014, 11:18:53 am
And this will resolve what?  To be honest, the debate is good, but it will resolve nothing. I welcome the debate but will not watch.  I'll read about it maybe if it is available.

mspart
You fight the good fight.  Silence would be totally surrendering.  When you debate political viewpoints on here, are you accomplishing anything?  To both questions, I say "yes, something is being accomplished".
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: TobusRex on January 09, 2014, 10:11:30 pm
Love how the whackos "champion" in this debate is a con man.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2012/06/ken-ham-wants-other-christians-to-be-con-artists-like-he-is.html
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on January 09, 2014, 10:34:28 pm
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2013/02/ken-hams-saddled-dinosaurs.html

Quote
Ken Ham is apparently willing to compromise about more than geocentrism and the firmament. Now he is backtracking on the claim that people rode on saddled dinosaurs. That is something depicted in Ham’s own book, Dinosaurs of Eden: Tracing the Mystery Through History. Just take a look at the sample page on Amazon.com:

http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/files/2013/02/wpid-Photo-Feb-1-2013-340-PM.jpg

I still think that Ken Ham is genuinely out to make Christians look as foolish and dishonest as possible because he hates Christianity. I can find no other plausible explanation for his dishonest words about both the Bible and science, his hypocritical behavior, and his fervent efforts to depict Christians as people who believe dragons are real.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfpmCDIQHOA
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on January 10, 2014, 06:06:02 am
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2011/10/18/david-barton-and-ken-ham-arent-mistaken-theyre-just-lying/

Quote
The same is true for Ken Ham. Ken Ham is a liar, a charlatan, a con-man, a bearer of false witness. He lies for money. Like Barton, he has been personally and publicly corrected innumerable times over many years, confronted again and again with the demonstrable, undeniable falsehood of his statements. And like Barton he makes no correction and offers no apology for those false statements. With an astonishingly cynical contempt for his audience, he simply assumes that his critics have no influence among those he has been fleecing, and he willfully continues fleecing them, continuing to make the very same claims and statements that he has been shown are false, continuing to say things that he knows are not true. Because he can get away with it and because it’s profitable.

David Barton and Ken Ham are not fundamentalists. They are not in denial, defensively retreating from a bewildering world they do not understand except as a vague threat to their faith. No. Fundamentalists in denial are their prey, their mark — the goose that provides them with golden eggs.

It’s considered rude to state this so bluntly. That’s what they’re counting on. Their ability to continue this lucrative con depends on a misplaced notion of civility that mistakenly presumes that the presumption of good faith is absolute and impervious to evidence. That warped idea of civility is what creates the space in which they are free to act in bad faith with impunity, to lie without any danger of ever being called to account for lying. Refusing to call liars to account is not civility, it’s aiding and abetting — becoming an accomplice in their scam.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on January 26, 2014, 05:55:06 pm
I think Sparkles may have written to the Answersingenesis people to complain.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2014/01/24/feedback-answering-debate-conjectures

It will be live streamed free.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on January 30, 2014, 10:29:32 am
Feb 4th.  Live streamed free.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2014/01/29/debate-teaching-in-public-school
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on January 31, 2014, 06:03:40 am
Bill's reason for this debate is good.  We need to keep exposing these charlatans.

http://www.charismanews.com/us/42563-agnostic-bill-nye-predicts-results-of-upcoming-creation-evolution-debate

Quote
Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” who is preparing for his debate against Creation Museum CEO and President Ken Ham next month, recently spoke about his expectations for the event.

“Well I don't think I'm gonna win Mr. Ham over, anymore than Mr. Ham thinks he’s going to win me over,” Nye, who identified himself as an agnostic, told HuffPost Live Wednesday.

“Instead, I want to show people that this belief (creationism) is still among us. … It finds its way into school boards in the United States,” Nye explained. He reminded viewers that he is a mechanical engineer and not really a scientist, but said, “I’m going in as a reasonable man.”

Nye, who is also the CEO of The Planetary Society, a science advocacy group, said the push to include creationism in science class frightens him.

“If the United States produces a generation of science students who don’t believe in science, that’s troublesome.”

When asked if he believes in God, Nye said he is an agnostic.

“You can’t know,” he argues. “The idea that there’s a plan for everybody and this deity has this all worked out and is really directing things is an extraordinary claim that I find troublesome. It’s not for me.

“There’s billions of religious believers around the world. Billions of Christians. That’s fine. People get a great deal out of it. They get a lot of community.”

Nye is scheduled to debate Ham on Feb. 4 at the Creation Museum's 900-seat Legacy Hall in Petersburg, Ky. The agreed-upon topic for the debate is: "Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern scientific era?" The sold-out event will stream live for free.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 01, 2014, 06:53:13 am
http://americanhumanist.org/HNN/details/2014-01-why-the-bill-nye-ken-ham-debate-is-a-good-thing

Quote
Bill Nye “The Science Guy” will be debating Answers in Genesis director Ken Ham on the subject of evolution at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. The event sold out in minutes.

Examining the atheist-humanist blogosphere, it’s clear that the many in the freethought movement are concerned that this event will give legitimacy to intelligent design theorists while others think it’s a waste of time trying to convince these already far-gone new creationists. But is it?

We need to do better than simply dismissing the creationist movement because it’s not going away—and it’s doing real damage to the science community. According to Karl Giberson of The Daily Beast:

Americans entered 2013 more opposed to evolution than they have been for years, with an amazing 46 percent embracing the notion that ‘God created humans pretty much in their present form at one time in the last 10,000 years or so.’ This number was up a full 6 percent from the prior poll taken in 2010.

Examining the poll further, the number of people who believe that “humans evolved, but God had no part in the process” decreased by one percent.

So despite the incredible scientific and technological advancements we’ve made in human history, including access to a wealth of information and knowledge about the world, the number of people who believe in creationism is actually going up—and that’s even as the number of nontheists continues to rise. Apparently, even moderate religious people are susceptible to arguments from people like Ken Ham.

Some argue that debating creationists is like debating people who believe in ghosts or fortune tellers—that their absurd ideas are harmless and unchangeable. But I don’t see pro-ghost advocates successfully intervening in public school science classrooms to teach the possible existence of the paranormal. Creationism is more than just a belief—it’s a well-funded influential movement which aims to legitimize itself as a theory on the same level as evolution. State legislators in Colorado, Missouri, Montana and Oklahoma are currently considering creationism bills while a number of our elected officials in Congress hold views supporting intelligent design.

The strategy to simply ignore intelligent design and hope it goes away is not going to work. If creationists are making inroads and changing people’s minds to allow for such nonsense, we can tug the pendulum back the other way and open people’s minds to real scientific evidence. Allowing intelligent design advocates to spread their message without strong rebuttals will gain more converts right under our nose.

Is a debate the best format for changing minds? Maybe not. But it’s already garnered national attention. It may not change the minds of people sitting in that auditorium, but the media coverage of the event just might be widespread enough for people to tune-in and make up their own minds. (Answers in Genesis will announce details of how to live-stream the event soon.)

And despite what you think about Ken Ham, he has a following. Answers in Genesis is a nearly $20 million operational organization—that’s more than all the national freethought organizations in the entire movement combined. The Creation Museum, despite declining attendance, still managed to get over 250,000 people to walk through its doors. We can’t just ignore him, just like we can’t ignore prominent people who publicly hold anti-atheist bias. Dr. Nye has a huge following too, and that’s why he’s perfect for this debate as a respected scientist and evolution advocate. He’ll be a terrific representative of the science and humanist communities. 

Frankly, this debate is going to be damn good entertainment. Hell, I wish I thought of it and the American Humanist Association was hosting the debate ourselves. No doubt Bill Nye is going to lay the “science smackdown,” and I can’t wait to see him in action while Ken Ham undoubtedly fumbles with his ridiculous faith-based claims. As Nye stated in his Humanist of the Year acceptance speech at the 2010 American Humanist Association Conference, “Science is the best idea we’ve had so far. Got a better idea? Bring it on.”
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: SVV on February 01, 2014, 11:10:10 am
And why it's a bad idea.


   http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/29/creationism-faith-and-legitimizing-bad-ideas   (http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/29/creationism-faith-and-legitimizing-bad-ideas)
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on February 01, 2014, 11:21:41 am
And why it's a bad idea.


   http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/29/creationism-faith-and-legitimizing-bad-ideas   (http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/29/creationism-faith-and-legitimizing-bad-ideas)
Very scholarly article.  Here is an example -

The only legitimate answer to this question is, “No.” Because this response is obvious yet a debate is still scheduled to take place, a great deal of controversy has arisen. Many oppose the debate because, echoing biologist Richard Dawkins, it gives the “oxygen of respectability” to the creationist position. (Ham surely knows this. In fact, in a release about the event Ham said, "Having the opportunity to hold a cordial but spirited debate with such a well-known personality who is admired by so many young people will help bring the creation-evolution issue to the attention of many more people, including youngsters.”)

If you are going to make a claim and then support your claim, it might help to actually support your claim.  This one example illustrates that clearly.  "Respectability" does not equate "issue to the attention".  The whole article is written to appeal to the mentally deficient.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on February 01, 2014, 11:28:45 am
Here is the brilliant Richard Dawkins clearly explaining to us the foolishness of giving creationism credibility in a debate format.

Enjoy the 2 minute piece.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abugiGHOHg0
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: head n arm on February 01, 2014, 01:16:20 pm
I find it interesting that the only people who don't want this debate to happen are the atheists and scientists. Some have even resorted to name calling when they mention Ham. Why wouldn't you all be excited for the chance to have science just speak for itself? Why the name calling on Ham? Why the hesitation for the debate at all?

Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on February 01, 2014, 01:38:42 pm
I find it interesting that the only people who don't want this debate to happen are the atheists and scientists. Some have even resorted to name calling when they mention Ham. Why wouldn't you all be excited for the chance to have science just speak for itself? Why the name calling on Ham? Why the hesitation for the debate at all?
When you really don't have anything intelligent to say and cannot scientifically actually support your position - resort to ad hominem attacks.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 01, 2014, 05:50:23 pm
I personally agree with the side of the debate on whether it is a good idea to debate or not that says it is.  The right side, the scientific side, has been ignoring the moronic view, the creationist side, for too long and the result is that America is getting dumber and the percentage of people believing the lies of the creationist has increased.  We can not allow ignorance to win the day, we have to start engaging them and let them expose themselves as the liars and fools they are publicly so that people have a hard clear line between facts and intelligence and lies, ignorance  and superstition to choose between.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: SVV on February 01, 2014, 06:51:12 pm
I find it interesting that the only people who don't want this debate to happen are the atheists and scientists. Some have even resorted to name calling when they mention Ham. Why wouldn't you all be excited for the chance to have science just speak for itself? Why the name calling on Ham? Why the hesitation for the debate at all?

I don't doubt that Nye will thoroughly embarrass Ham, but I'd rather see a scientist from the field of biology...or no one at all since the creationist side isn't a real side.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 01, 2014, 08:00:57 pm
I find it interesting that the only people who don't want this debate to happen are the atheists and scientists. Some have even resorted to name calling when they mention Ham. Why wouldn't you all be excited for the chance to have science just speak for itself? Why the name calling on Ham? Why the hesitation for the debate at all?
When you really don't have anything intelligent to say and cannot scientifically actually support your position - resort to ad hominem attacks.

Sounds like you are describing the creationist.  Scientist actually have very intelligent thins to say and have the only scientific support that exists for the discussion of origins and evolution.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on February 01, 2014, 08:46:11 pm
I find it interesting that the only people who don't want this debate to happen are the atheists and scientists. Some have even resorted to name calling when they mention Ham. Why wouldn't you all be excited for the chance to have science just speak for itself? Why the name calling on Ham? Why the hesitation for the debate at all?

I don't doubt that Nye will thoroughly embarrass Ham, but I'd rather see a scientist from the field of biology...or no one at all since the creationist side isn't a real side.
But the evolutionist's side is a real side.  Let's see -

1.  Somehow all the right chemicals came together to make amino acids - magically
2.  All the 21 different amino acids were all together surviving the UV rays and oxygen deterioration - magically
3.  Only left handed amino acids got together and not a single right handed one - magically
4.  They aligned in order to make a single protein - magically
5.  This same hap-chance happened over 60 times to make one single protein - magically
6.  These 60 or more proteins aligned together perfectly - magically
7.  Accidentally, DNA with enough information to fill 1000 volumes of Encyclopedia Britannica got together - magically
8.  Ability to read this massive information came together - magically
9.  Ability to survive, feed, reproduce came fully intact with the first life - magically

Yes, SVV, you believe in magic.  I believe the only sensible solution - Creator God.  You can have your faith in magic.  I'll stick with the ONLY viable answer.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 01, 2014, 08:53:56 pm
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/

Quote
When Charles Darwin introduced the theory of evolution through natural selection 143 years ago, the scientists of the day argued over it fiercely, but the massing evidence from paleontology, genetics, zoology, molecular biology and other fields gradually established evolution's truth beyond reasonable doubt. Today that battle has been won everywhere--except in the public imagination.

Embarrassingly, in the 21st century, in the most scientifically advanced nation the world has ever known, creationists can still persuade politicians, judges and ordinary citizens that evolution is a flawed, poorly supported fantasy. They lobby for creationist ideas such as "intelligent design" to be taught as alternatives to evolution in science classrooms. As this article goes to press, the Ohio Board of Education is debating whether to mandate such a change. Some antievolutionists, such as Philip E. Johnson, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley and author of Darwin on Trial, admit that they intend for intelligent-design theory to serve as a "wedge" for reopening science classrooms to discussions of God.

Besieged teachers and others may increasingly find themselves on the spot to defend evolution and refute creationism. The arguments that creationists use are typically specious and based on misunderstandings of (or outright lies about) evolution, but the number and diversity of the objections can put even well-informed people at a disadvantage.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 01, 2014, 10:21:00 pm


1.  Somehow all the right chemicals came together to make amino acids - magically

There was nothing magical about it.  The process has been duplicate over and over again in the laboratory, hence it is an experimentally proven natural process.

2.  All the 21 different amino acids were all together surviving the UV rays and oxygen deterioration - magically

They survive today, why wouldn't they 2 billion years ago.  Again, nature shows itself, no magic involved.

3.  Only left handed amino acids got together and not a single right handed one - magically

In the original experiment.  However there is natural evidence for both kind of amino acids.  Again no need for magig.

4.  They aligned in order to make a single protein - magically

Again this process has been demonstrated when combining the right amino acids in a lab, natural process which has been repeated, no need for magic.

5.  This same hap-chance happened over 60 times to make one single protein - magically

It actually only had to happen one time and then their were billions of years for the natural process to work.  No magic involved.

6.  These 60 or more proteins aligned together perfectly - magically

CTC seems to think he knows what was involved in the first living cell, which not even the smartest scientist claims to know.  No magic was needed however.

7.  Accidentally, DNA with enough information to fill 1000 volumes of Encyclopedia Britannica got together - magically

This is a red herring created by some one trying to make a point.  The information is like computer code 0's and 1's.  Not to hard to imagine and nothing too complicated for the natural process.  No magic involved.

8.  Ability to read this massive information came together - magically

No ones reading this information, it is a natural system that evolved over time by natural processes, no magic involved.

9.  Ability to survive, feed, reproduce came fully intact with the first life - magically

The source of energy was the sun, no need to feed any more than any plant has to feed.  It took many millions of years, not all at once fully intact, so no it was not magical it was a slow tedious natural process.

Yes, SVV, you believe in magic.  I believe the only sensible solution - Creator God.  You can have your faith in magic.  I'll stick with the ONLY viable answer.

The only one who believes something occurred suddenly and by magic is ctc who believe by faith in the magic a supernatural world.  As for myself, other scientifically minded and I assume SVV, we will stick with the only viable natural answers given to us by the meticulous and studious process of science.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 01, 2014, 10:48:22 pm
ctc's explanation for the origins of life:

Quote
A magic man without a physical body came from "outside of time and space"(whatever that means) and poofed the first cells into existence in a puff of smoke, simply through the power of thought.

Because obviously that makes sense, that there are magic men without physical bodies, and that they can simply think matter and energy into existence and shape.

The very basis for their blind faith in this proposition is, yes, our current ignorance. We don't know - therefore immaterial magic men with omnipotence.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: head n arm on February 02, 2014, 01:55:48 am
I find it interesting that the only people who don't want this debate to happen are the atheists and scientists. Some have even resorted to name calling when they mention Ham. Why wouldn't you all be excited for the chance to have science just speak for itself? Why the name calling on Ham? Why the hesitation for the debate at all?

I don't doubt that Nye will thoroughly embarrass Ham, but I'd rather see a scientist from the field of biology...or no one at all since the creationist side isn't a real side.

So as a science type guy, you have already gone into this with a closed mind. That is what I find hilarious from every "scientist".

Per a scientist's philosophy, have an open mind! But I know most won't and knew most wouldn't. It is written in the Bible. (Matthew 13:10-11)
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 02, 2014, 03:37:56 am
I find it interesting that the only people who don't want this debate to happen are the atheists and scientists. Some have even resorted to name calling when they mention Ham. Why wouldn't you all be excited for the chance to have science just speak for itself? Why the name calling on Ham? Why the hesitation for the debate at all?

I don't doubt that Nye will thoroughly embarrass Ham, but I'd rather see a scientist from the field of biology...or no one at all since the creationist side isn't a real side.

So as a science type guy, you have already gone into this with a closed mind. That is what I find hilarious from every "scientist".

Per a scientist's philosophy, have an open mind! But I know most won't and knew most wouldn't. It is written in the Bible. (Matthew 13:10-11)

An open mind for what?  Ham will simply point to the writing of the Bible and claim it is God's word and cannot be wrong.  All, and I do mean every single bit of evidence, supports evolution.  There is nothing the supports a young Earth creationist claim except the Bible which is simply a book written by men.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: mspart on February 02, 2014, 04:33:14 am
I'm just getting so excited about this.  Bill Nye the science guy against Ken Hamm the Genesis guy!!  I won't be able to watch it but will be interested in the feedback here.  It will probably change the course of history.

mspart
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 02, 2014, 05:22:47 am
I'm just getting so excited about this.  Bill Nye the science guy against Ken Hamm the Genesis guy!!  I won't be able to watch it but will be interested in the feedback here.  It will probably change the course of history.

mspart

Nice to see you have a sense of humor, most right wingers don't.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: SVV on February 02, 2014, 06:40:13 am

So as a science type guy, you have already gone into this with a closed mind. That is what I find hilarious from every "scientist".

Per a scientist's philosophy, have an open mind! But I know most won't and knew most wouldn't. It is written in the Bible. (Matthew 13:10-11)

This isn't a debatable topic, at least from the stance that Ham is going to take.  I know his take on this and he's absolutely wrong.  If he presented something new or interesting then I'd be more inclined to watch, but he won't.
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: ctc on February 02, 2014, 08:07:14 am

So as a science type guy, you have already gone into this with a closed mind. That is what I find hilarious from every "scientist".

Per a scientist's philosophy, have an open mind! But I know most won't and knew most wouldn't. It is written in the Bible. (Matthew 13:10-11)

This isn't a debatable topic, at least from the stance that Ham is going to take.  I know his take on this and he's absolutely wrong.  If he presented something new or interesting then I'd be more inclined to watch, but he won't.
Yeah, Ken Ham is wrong.  He isn't "The Magic Man" like you SVV.   :D
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: LILHOWDOG on February 02, 2014, 12:44:49 pm
Sparky completely debunks ctc 'magic' claim yet ctc clings to it like his first binky.. Its like two different languages being spoken. 
Title: Re: Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate
Post by: coachsparky on February 02, 2014, 06:38:16 pm
http://m.phys.org/_news165555744.html

Quote
For a group of paleontologists, a tour of the Creation Museum seemed like a great tongue-in-cheek way to cap off a serious conference.

But while there were a few laughs and some clowning for the camera, most left more offended than amused by the frightening way in which evolution -- and their life's work -- was attacked.

"It's sort of a monument to scientific illiteracy, isn't it?" said Jerry Lipps, professor of geology, paleontology and evolution at University of California, Berkeley.

"Like Sunday school with statues... this is a special brand of religion here. I don't think even most mainstream Christians would believe in this interpretation of Earth's history."

The 27 million dollar, 70,000-square-foot (6,500-square-metre) museum which has been dubbed a "creationist Disneyland" has attracted 715,000 visitors since it opened in mid-2007 with a vow to "bring the pages of the Bible to life."

Its presents a literal interpretation of the Bible and argues that believing otherwise leads to moral relativism and the destruction of social values.

Creationism is a theory not supported by most mainstream Christian churches.

Lisa Park of the University of Akron cried at one point as she walked a hallway full of flashing images of war, famine and natural disasters which the museum blames on belief in evolution.

"I think it's very bad science and even worse theology -- and the theology is far more offensive to me," said Park, a professor of paleontology who is an elder in the Presbyterian Church.

"I think there's a lot of focus on fear, and I don't think that's a very Christian message... I find it a malicious manipulation of the public."

Phil Jardine posed for a picture below a towering, toothy dinosaur display.

The museum argues that the fossil record has been misinterpreted and that Tyrannosaurus rex was a vegetarian before Adam and Eve bit into that sin-inducing apple.

Jardine, a palaeobiologist graduate student from the University of Birmingham, was having fun on the tour, but told a reporter that he was disturbed by the museum's cartoonish portrayal of scientists and teachers.

"I feel very sorry for teachers when the children who come here start guessing if what they're being taught is wrong," Jardine said.

Arnie Miller, a palentologist at the University of Cincinnati who was chairman of the convention, said he hoped the tour would introduce the scientists to "the lay of the land" and show them firsthand what's being put forth in a place that has elicited vehement criticism from the scientific community.

"I think in some cases, people were surprised by the physical quality of the exhibits, but needless to say, they were unhappy with things that are inaccurately portrayed," he said.

"And there was a feeling of unhappiness, too, about the extent to which mainstream scientists and evolutionists are demonized -- that if you don't accept the Answers in Genesis vision of the history of Earth and life, you're contributing to the ills of society and of the church."

Daryl Domning, professor of anatomy at Howard University, held his chin and shook his head at several points during the tour.

"This bothers me as a scientist and as a Christian, because it's just as much a distortion and misrepresentation of Christianity as it is of science," he said.

"It's not your old-time religion by any means."