Bill Nye and Ken Hamm will debate

[ctc]

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.”

[coachsparky]

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.

[ctc]

Tickets sold out in 2 minutes.  Plans are to live stream it.

[coachsparky]

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.

[mspart]

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

[ctc]

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".

[TobusRex]

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

[coachsparky]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2013/02/ken-hams-saddled-dinosaurs.html

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

[coachsparky]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2011/10/18/david-barton-and-ken-ham-arent-mistaken-theyre-just-lying/

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.

[ctc]

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.

[ctc]

Feb 4th.  Live streamed free.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2014/01/29/debate-teaching-in-public-school

[coachsparky]

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

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.

[coachsparky]

http://americanhumanist.org/HNN/details/2014-01-why-the-bill-nye-ken-ham-debate-is-a-good-thing

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.”

[SVV]

And why it's a bad idea.


   http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/29/creationism-faith-and-legitimizing-bad-ideas 

[ctc]

And why it's a bad idea.


   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.