• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164, 712]

Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

*sigh*

"We think natural laws haven't changed but tree rings might have previously formed like 50 rings per year instead of one, you weren't there you don't know! I know nobody has ever seen a tree develop 50 trees per year, but it could have happened YOU DONT KNOW YOU WERENT THERE BUT GOD WAS. SAYS SO IN THIS BOOK."
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

I'm playing World of Warcraft right now, and I think my time is being used smarter and more productively than anyone watching the 'debate'.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

How many creationists does it take to change a light bulb? Only one. And you better believe it takes him no more than seven days.

Keep your day job, once you get one.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

To anybody who wants to watch it live:



I wish they'd stop interrupting them.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

*sigh*

"We think natural laws haven't changed but tree rings might have previously formed like 50 rings per year instead of one, you weren't there you don't know! I know nobody has ever seen a tree develop 50 trees per year, but it could have happened YOU DONT KNOW YOU WERENT THERE BUT GOD WAS. SAYS SO IN THIS BOOK."

Written by someone who wasn't there.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

"Bill, we already have a book that tells us. In the beginning there was nothing..."

Oh, okay, we can all go home now, I guess.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

I find this debate incredibly dissatisfying and underwhelming. Ken Ham is clearly well-versed on his discussion points, whereas Bill Nye seems to be struggling to organize his thoughts (perhaps the lack of a screenwriter? ;) ). I think Bill is missing an opportunity to discuss the logical incongruity between mainstream science and creationism. Mr. Ham describes both as "two philosophical worldviews" and "beliefs." I think it is important to highlight that science isn't about 'proving' or 'belief' or 'philosophy', but rather objectivity and best, testable explanations. The difference is between a priori (creationism: explanation comes before the evidence [and, I would argue, that the 'evidence' cannot be removed from potential bias, given that it is being tailored to a specific conclusion]) and a posteriori ('mainstream' science: explanation comes from evidence) thinking.
 
Last edited:
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

It sounds like 2 salesmen desperately trying to sell their product. Bill Nye is quite possibly the worst person they could have picked for this. So many eloquent advocates for scientific theory (Dawkins comes to mind).
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

It sounds like 2 salesmen desperately trying to sell their product. Bill Nye is quite possibly the worst person they could have picked for this. So many eloquent advocates for scientific theory (Dawkins comes to mind).

If I'm not mistaken they didn't pick Nye. He challenged Ham.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

If I'm not mistaken they didn't pick Nye. He challenged Ham.

In any case, Ken Ham, the moron who founded the Creation Museum in Petersburg, KY, challenged Bill Nye to a public debate and…

Nope.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

How many creationists does it take to change a light bulb?
Three. One to hold the light bulb and two to turn the ladder.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

The flood caused the splitup of the continents????!!!!
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

The flood caused the splitup of the continents????!!!!

You have to remember, people who believe this have something wrong with them upstairs. Saying ridiculous things like this just proves it.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

The flood caused the splitup of the continents????!!!!

My friend wanted me to tell him about the debate because he is in, ironically, Evidence and when I told him this part he just spammed lololololololololol.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

It sounds like 2 salesmen desperately trying to sell their product. Bill Nye is quite possibly the worst person they could have picked for this. So many eloquent advocates for scientific theory (Dawkins comes to mind).
I agree. Bill Nye is clearly struggling to articulate his point, drawing from a (seemingly) fairly limited pool of depth of understanding on his part. That Bill Nye is seen as a face of science, I feel like he is on the precipice of doing a disservice to the argument against creationism (analogous - though not quite the same and without such drastic repercussions - as Al Gore with climate change).

I find it interesting that Ken Ham's argument is that creationism is the "only viable explanation," when he has provided very little evidence against scientific arguments. Granted, the debate is specifically over the viability of creationism, but Ham doesn't even support his own (more inclusive) thesis.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

Hamm already answered this. He said he can't be convinced.

...and we weren't there.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

I agree. Bill Nye is clearly struggling to articulate his point, drawing from a (seemingly) fairly limited pool of depth of understanding on his part. That Bill Nye is seen as a face of science, I feel like he is on the precipice of doing a disservice to the argument against creationism (analogous - though not quite the same and without such drastic repercussions - as Al Gore with climate change).

I find it interesting that Ken Ham's argument is that creationism is the "only viable explanation," when he has provided very little evidence against scientific arguments. Granted, the debate is specifically over the viability of creationism, but Ham doesn't even support his own (more inclusive) thesis.

Pretty much what I thought, neither seems very prepared. Neil DeGrasse Tyson/Michio Kaku are also a great voice. Bill Nye, for all of his work in bringing science to kids is not even a lightweight in the scientific world. I think the question "Is there room for God in science?" Should have been answered with "Yes. Of course, the concept of "God" provides hope for millions of people in desperate situations. It is the chain that links humanity from a moral perspective. However, there is no room for any god in the scientific process."
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

I find it interesting that Ken Ham's argument is that creationism is the "only viable explanation," when he has provided very little evidence against scientific arguments. Granted, the debate is specifically over the viability of creationism, but Ham doesn't even support his own (more inclusive) thesis.

That's because there is no support for creationism, the only thing creationists can do is swat at evolution ineffectually because the think that somehow proves their side.

They're wrong.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

Bill hasn't been as aggressive as he should have been.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

Friendly reminder for tonight's debate.
19h00 to 21h30 EST Feb 4

Live streaming from debatelive,org

my Firefox had trouble connecting but IE managed.

Who is going to win?

Go, Bill, goooo...!
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

Bill hasn't been as aggressive as he should have been.

It's not his style. He's just a kind gentle man and that's all there is to it.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

It's not his style. He's just a kind gentle man and that's all there is to it.

He should, however, be calling Ham the idiot that he is. That's just a fact.
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

"Specifically, we love science that doesn't potentially contradict my faith."

Gotta love that, though: "real time science."
 
Re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

Bill Nye, for all of his work in bringing science to kids is not even a lightweight in the scientific world. I think the question "Is there room for God in science?" Should have been answered with "Yes. Of course, the concept of "God" provides hope for millions of people in desperate situations. It is the chain that links humanity from a moral perspective. However, there is no room for any god in the scientific process."
Good points. I'm glad, at least, that he isn't completely polarizing science and religion: I think that is often a hurdle for science when disputing creationism.

And I'm constantly frustrated by Bill's assertion that science can prove something (e.g. the age of the earth). While it's clear that he doesn't really believe in full proof, with the audience he's trying to reach he needs to be much clearer about what science can and can't do.
 
Back
Top Bottom