 |
| This picture pretty much sums up the night. Nye looking confused at everything coming out of Ham's mouth. |
This is just under three hours long so I expect that it will take many of you some time to watch the whole thing. However I encourage you to do so, as it was actually incredibly interesting.
I did not have very high hopes for this debate, but Bill Nye, who can be incredibly loveable and dorky at the same time, did a very good job of presenting the facts and making Ham look like the fraud that he in fact is.
Of course there were times when I thought Nye could have made his point more convincing (Such as asking Ham why, if you were going to base your science on a creation story, he felt that the Judeo-Christian version had any more validity than the hundred of other creation stories passed down through the ages?), however taken all together it seemed that Nye was well prepared and clearly presented the evidence.
(By the way for those who simply do not have time to watch the video, Time magazine offers a synopsis here. And another good one here.)
During the debate Ham used a number of cheap parlor tricks to deceive his audience, including attempts to redefine science, evolution, the Bible, and faith.
Through it all Nye remained jovial, while refuting Ham, and making repeated requests to his audience to protect science and encourage young children to learn about it as"having scientifically literate Americans is important to our country's future."
However Ham's argument devolved into "Well there's a book which tells me." And believe me I am not even making that up!
There was one question that essentially won the debate for Bill Nye in my eyes, and that was when both men were asked if there was anything that would change their mind about Evolution or the creation of the earth? Ken Ham essentially said "nothing," and Bill Nye said "evidence."
For a critical thinker that was really all I needed to hear.
"The religion of Natural Selection."
ReplyDeleteNice try, Bozo.
Science is not a religion and doesn't want to be.
Sarah and Piper were suppose to attend the debate. They were late getting there and missed it.
ReplyDeleteThe dinosaur they were riding had a blister on it's toe and could only go 5 MPH.
If you never read the Buffalo Beast's visit to the creation museum's grand opening, and takedown of Ham please read! Ian is the same guy who pretended to be a Koch sucker who pranked Scott Walker!
ReplyDeletehttp://buffalobeast.com/117/let_there_be_retards.htm
Pat Robertson implores creationist Ken Ham to shut up: ‘Let’s not make a joke of ourselves’
ReplyDeletePat Robertson responded to the recent debate between Young Earth creationist Ken Ham and Bill Nye, a.k.a. “The Science Guy,” by reiterating his disagreement with Ham’s form of creationism.
“Let’s face it,” Robertson said, “there was a Bishop [Ussher] who added up the dates listed in Genesis and he came up with the world had been around for 6,000 years.”
“There ain’t no way that’s possible,” he continued. “To say that it all came about in 6,000 years is just nonsense and I think it’s time we come off of that stuff and say this isn’t possible.”
“Let’s be real, let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”
“We’ve got to be realistic,” he concluded, and admit “that the dating of Bishop Ussher just doesn’t comport with anything that is found in science and you can’t just totally deny the geological formations that are out there.”
Last November, Robertson raised the ire of Young Earth Creationists when he made similar statements. The hosts of “Creation Today,” Eric Hovind and Paul F. Taylor, attacked Robertson for claiming that dinosaurs could exist, because the world isn’t, in fact, only 6,000 years old.
“Pat Robertson is claiming, then, that 6,000 years comes from Ussher’s book and not the Bible,” Taylor said. “The point is, where did Ussher get his figure of 6,000 years?”
“Now, then, Pat Robertson,” he continued, “are you claiming the Bible is not [divinely] inspired when the Bible clearly tells us that the world is 6,000 years old?”
Watch Robertson’s comments on The 700 Club below.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/05/pat-robertson-implores-creationist-ken-ham-to-shut-up-lets-not-make-a-joke-of-ourselves/
Republicans Across The Country Are Passing Illegal Laws Requiring Teaching Creationism
ReplyDeleteThe United States Constitution is very clear in prohibiting government from making any law respecting an establishment of religion, or impeding the free exercise of religion, and yet Republicans in Congress and states pass an inordinate number of laws founded completely on the Christian religion. In fact, in spite of the Constitution and several federal court rulings banning the practice, Republicans have illegally passed laws mandating the teaching of the bible as science in public schools using taxpayer dollars because they claim the creation myth is real and evolution is an abomination to bible god. It is little surprise, then, that creationists are absolutely apoplectic over a resolution introduced by a New Jersey Democrat, Representative Rush Holt, to designate British naturalist Charles Darwin’s birthday on February 12 as a day to recognize ‘the importance of science in the betterment of humanity.”
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/05/republicans-country-passing-illegal-laws-requiring-teaching-creationism.html
Creationist author Terry Mortenson doesn’t understand how an atheist like Bill Nye “the Science Guy” can find joy in scientific discoveries.
ReplyDeleteFollowing the debate between Nye and Creation Museum founder Ken Ham on Tuesday night, Mortenson sat down with Creation Today co-hosts Eric Hovind and Paul Taylor to discuss the event.
“I was kind of intrigued by one of Bill’s last comments about the joy of discovery, but I thought, what is the joy of realizing that I came from pond scum as a result of an explosion and that eventually I’m going to die and I won’t be here, I won’t remember that I ever lived, nobody else will ever remember,” Mortenson said. “What is the joy of that? It is purposeless, as Richard Dawkins and William Provine and others have said.”
“There is no purpose,” he continued. “There is no morality. All you have in evolution in is what is is. It’s the survival of the fittest and if I’m stronger than you and I’m a lion and you’re a gazelle, sorry, you’re my lunch. And if I’m Hitler and you’re a Jew, sorry, you’re lunch. And if I am outside the body and you’re in the mother’s womb, and I don’t want you, sorry, you’re lunch.”
“There is no basis of morality or purpose, and Bill is stealing from the Christian worldview to find joy in discovery when there is no purpose or meaning to it.”
During the debate, Nye said the process of science filled him with joy.
“I base my beliefs on the information and the process that we call science,” he explained. “It fills me with joy to make discoveries every day of things I’d never seen before. It fills me [with] joy to know that we can pursue these answers. It is a wonderful, astonishing thing to me that we are — you and I — are somehow at least one of the ways that the universe knows itself.”
Watch video below.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/05/creationist-denies-bill-nyes-joy-in-scientific-discovery-because-hitler-ate-jews-for-lunch/
In my lifetime, we exterminate smallpox. That fills me with joy.
DeleteIt must be a burden walking the earth and knowing you're lower than pond scum. Did he just say jews were lunch for hitler? Yep, lower than pond scum, and he calls Nye "immoral".
DeletePat Robertson on Creation Debate: ‘Nonsense’ to Think Earth Is Only 6,000 Years Old
ReplyDeleteTelevangelist Pat Robertson reacted Wednesday to the big debate between Bill Nye “the Science Guy” and Creation Museum founder Ken Ham on Tuesday night. Robertson actually took issue with one of the central arguments of creationism and said it’s “nonsense” to say the world’s only six thousand years old. He brought up the findings of a bishop centuries ago who came up with that figure and said, “There ain’t no way that’s possible.”
Robertson argued that there’s too much scientific evidence in the world to assert the world is thousands, and not billions, of years old. He said, “To say that it all came about in 6000 years is just nonsense, and I think it’s time we come off of that stuff and say this is impossible.”
He implored fellow believers in God, “Let’s be real, let’s not make a joke of ourselves.” Robertson made it clear he still doesn’t believe in “so-called evolution,” but it doesn’t shake his faith one bit to have “progressive evolution” under the control of God.
This has been an issue Robertson has been at odds with other religious conservatives over for a while now; back in 2012 he told a caller that people shouldn’t “try and cover it up,” but instead be intellectually honest about scientific fact.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/pat-robertson-on-creation-debate-nonsense-to-think-earth-is-only-6000-years-old/
" let’s not make a joke of ourselves"
DeleteToo late. Pat Robertson's views on some many things are too demented to be anything other than a joke. Have a read about Pat's logic about women's responsibilities in marriage.
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/pat_robertson_awful_looking_women_are_ruining_marriages/
OK Bill, we got it. Happy 6001st Birthday! And many more. Now drink your applesauce and STFU
Deletehttps://www.facebook.com/TheMarmelPage/posts/834736136553461
ReplyDeleteSome very well thought out comments about this
I told myself I wasn't going to watch the "debate" but ended up watching the entire debate. It was exactly what I expected it would be with Nye giving scientific facts and Ham saying not much more than, "Because God say's so". You can't legitimately call that a debate, and especially not an interesting one at that. My mind started to wonder when Han gave his initial argument because it seemed like he was only trying to give legitimacy to what the Bible said, and from what a couple of scientist believed. He even called an engineer a scientist who developed an elbow for one of the satellites or Mars rover we've sent into space. Another one he used was an astrophysicist who claimed he saw no evidence in space to say that our earth is over 6,000 years old. That particular example really amazed me knowing he's supposedly is among a group of people who must see and deal with facts every day that supports the fact that our earth is billions, not millions of years old. I just wonder how well his work is accepted among the group of scientist who must work with this guy every day. I just wished I remembered his name so I could look him up.
ReplyDeleteI just found out who the other "scientist" is that stated he hasn't found any evidence in his observation of space to indicate that our earth is any older than 6,000 years old. Like the guy who Ham calimed was a "scientist", but who is actually an engineer who "invented" the elbow for a space satellite or rover, Dr Stuart Burgess is also just an engineer without any educational background that I can see in astronomy. This makes at least two of the three "scientist" Ham pointed out as being scientist and who he implied specialized in a specific field of science, are not scientist at all. Overall, I believe these two serious misstatements of fact by Ham who seriously misrepresented the backgrounds of both of these engineers, is enough to cast serious doubt on anything else he may have claimed was factual, which if my memory is correct, he made very few if any other statements as being factual.
DeleteSee link below for pic and description of the farthest galaxy ( MACS0647-JD) we know. It's about 13.3 billion light-years away from us. Either the earth is older than 6,000 years or the light from that galaxy is a lot speedier than any light we know. God, "the bible", little voices in your head, all of them have nothing to do with it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.space.com/18502-farthest-galaxy-discovery-hubble-photos.html
What is the one thing upon which you base your belief?
ReplyDeleteHam: the Bible. There’s no other book like it. It tells us everything we need to know. Man is a sinner. The Gospel…Jesus died on the cross. Salvation, Jesus, God, God, the Bible. The Bible, the Bible, the Bible. God will reveal himself to you.
Nye: “I base my beliefs on the information and the process that we call science. It fills me with joy. It is a wonderful and astonishing thing to me. If we abandon all that we have learned, if we let go of everything we have learned before us, if we stop looking for answers, we will be defeated…We have to embrace science education. We have to keep science education in science classes.”
In the Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham debate, the answer to those asking who won is: it’s clear Nye emerged the winner because he relied on a large amount of fossil and scientific evidence. Ham relied almost exclusively on the Bible and provided no fossil or scientific evidence whatsoever.
That Ham guy reminds me of Wolfman.
ReplyDeleteAnd what is the deal with these Australians (Ham and Murdoch come to mind) that are coming to this country and poisoning it with their bullshit? Why arent' they setting up shop in Australia? Did the intelligent Aussies kick them out?
Natural gravitation of hucksters to softest targets with lots of money?
DeleteThere is a strong right-wing element in Australia. I agree with 1:01 that they come to America because we have the largest concentration of "prey."
DeleteI don't know if you've ever read any of his posts, but Zack Hunt of The American Jesus is someone I can usually count on to come across as sane and educated. Here's a link to post on the debate, it's worth a read--
ReplyDeletehttp://theamericanjesus.net/?p=11515
What a sad comment to think Ham & Murdock settled here because of the abundance of prey....and stupid politics, but seems its true. I watched the entire debate and I came away with Bill's strongest point....science=fact, religion=faith.
ReplyDeleteYou are comparing apples and oranges and even our founding fathers that everyone agrees were genius....were extremely clear about that separation. Science belongs in school and religion belongs in church. Becoming a mature adult able of critical thinking will decide what you believe in, many decide both. That is probably the most troubling question Bill posed to Ham....what about the billions of people that didn't even know the bible exists? Ham spoke a word salad going round and round...sound familiar?
One of the rules should have been "You cannot mention "Bible" nor "God says so".
ReplyDeleteCan't wait for "new rules"
Great comments, all. Thanks for the links!
I read complaints that Nye sounded like a nerd. Really? How shocking.
ReplyDeleteSo if a gazelle has enough faith, a lion won't eat it?
ReplyDeleteI actually loved this debate and learned quite a few things from both men. This should be shown in public schools around the nation. Unless you are an utter simpleton, Bill Nye's answers made so much more sense than Ham's. I couldn't help but notice that the audience appeared to be packed with creationists. I bet Nye got some of them thinking!
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteOf course, since I have only watched the Network News (a.k.a. Religious Authority approved Skippy Goebbels) report, I don't have that much info. I will not watch the entire debate until I'm gettin' as much money and/or publicity as Nye & Ham got.
However, for Bill Nye to represent an Atheist POV...well.....I ain't viewed anything like that since Neville Chamberlin got back from Berlin.
You don't get on PBS without being Religious Authority approved, TOO!