- Joined
- Dec 13, 2011
- Messages
- 10,348
- Reaction score
- 2,426
- Location
- The anals of history
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]
Right, it was settled 100 years ago.... that's why half of the country doesn't believe in evolution.
I don't know why he would debate a creationist. That debate was settled over 100 years ago. By debating them you give the appearance of legitimacy to their arguments when there is no legitimacy to them. Would you debate someone that claimed the earth was flat? Would you debate someone that claimed the earth was the center of the universe? How about debating someone that believed that mental illness resulted from demonic possession? How about debating someone that rejected the law of gravity and instead asserted that objects fall to the earth due to God's divine force acting upon them?
There are two fundamental laws in Biology:
1. All of the phenomena of biology, the entities and the processes, are ultimately obedient to the laws of physics and chemistry. Not immediately reducible to them, but ultimately consistent and in consilience with them, by a cause and effect explanation.
2. All biological phenomena, these entities and processes that define life itself, have arisen by evolution through natural selection.
The fact that some ignorant fundamentalists don't accept that has does not call those laws into question. It merely demonstrates their ignorance. I am all for scientists doing a better job of communicating the science behind evolution to the masses, but debating some nut and thus giving legitimacy to that nut's position is a bad idea in my opinion.
Right, it was settled 100 years ago.... that's why half of the country doesn't believe in evolution.