"Science Guy’ Bill Nye vs. Creationist Ken Ham: Who Will Win the Big Debate?

Akragon
reply to post by benrl

 

Neither of these guys are actual scientists... that's the amusing part...

Though I do believe Bill at least has a firm grasp on the concepts... he is "the science guy" after all...

What do we call Ken ham?

He has a BA in science... and a lawsuit against his character...

Which is why people in the article where against nye giving it credence.

Two non "professionals " arguing a topic neither is fully trained to know properly.

reply to post by benrl


I think his point is pretty clear...

Even someone who isn't technically a scientist shouldn't have a problem debunking creationism

And considering its held at their "museum"... you know the place will be full of fundies booing him at every turn

On yes this will be interesting

Man I hope Bill does well, but he isn't a biologist which means if he does win...well cool.

Either way this is good for the Creation Museum because by simply debating them it is the same as saying there is something to debate. The Creation Museum is the butt end of jokes towards our nation the less it is publicised the better. Nye better be brushed up on logical fallacy 101 because I predict he will have to address plenty of them.

Who ever us judging this debate better make a firm rule...

that being "because the bible says so" isn't an answer to anything

Akragon
reply to post by benrl

 

I think his point is pretty clear...

Even someone who isn't technically a scientist shouldn't have a problem debunking creationism

And considering its held at their "museum"... you know the place will be full of fundies booing him at every turn

On yes this will be interesting

Which proves the scientist who question him doing its point.

Just as the creationist is misrepresenting so is he.

Take a physicist like hawking, Tyson etc, and they will strongly imply but even they avoid this type if thing.


Why?

Because for all we know we and all we see is spinning on a disc drive on some future civilizations computer for all they really know.

Nye is being as arrogant and ignorant as the creationist.

Akragon
reply to post by benrl

 

Because for all we know we and all we see is spinning on a disc drive on some future civilizations computer for all they really know.

Nye is being as arrogant and ignorant as the creationist.

I find this very interesting.
I do not know who Ken Ham is but I do know Bill Nye "the science guy".
I have found that here on ATS as well as in other venues that it is not the "Creationists" who are "arrogant and ignorant".
I am a Creationists and I will tell you that what I believe, I believe through faith. It is a belief.
On the other hand many who believe in evolution or atheists will say I am ignorant because of my beliefs.
This shows their arrogance as well as their ignorance.
How can anyone possibly shut the door on Creation with out having all the answers?
Quad

reply to post by Quadrivium


You know whats funny...

Im against Ken Ham's ideas yet i am creationist...

God created the universe however many billions of years ago... and let it evolve as it would...

Its just this 6-10 thousand year old universe thing...

oh and man living with dinosaurs...




Well.... a good portion of how "Christianity" views our origins...

reply to post by Quadrivium


I have a question are you a young earth creationist where you also believe dinosaurs and humans coexisted?


I have been under the impression which I may be wrong that some creationist believe that god used the mechanics of the universe including evolution or is there a different name for that?

The difference to me is I find one willfully ignorant and the other understandable maybe even plausible..

The politest thing that I can say about Ken Ham is that he's a bloviating ego-driven Australian dingbat. Bill will knock him for six off the wicket.

Grimpachi
reply to post by Quadrivium

 

I have a question are you a young earth creationist where you also believe dinosaurs and humans coexisted?


I have been under the impression which I may be wrong that some creationist believe that god used the mechanics of the universe including evolution or is there a different name for that?

The difference to me is I find one willfully ignorant and the other understandable maybe even plausible..

edit on 4-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

I have read the Bible and I have failed to find where it is written that the earth is 6 to 10 thousand years old.
My thoughts on Creation are different from others I have heard.
I have thought of making a thread over the years but I know it will just lead to a lot of members flaming it (showing their arrogance and ignorance).
I can tell you, however, that the science we have today and what I get out of reading the Creation story really are not that far apart.
Quad

Quadrivium
I have read the Bible and I have failed to find where it is written that the earth is 6 to 10 thousand years old.
My thoughts on Creation are different from others I have heard.
I have thought of making a thread over the years but I know it will just lead to a lot of members flaming it (showing their arrogance and ignorance).
I can tell you, however, that the science we have today and what I get out of reading the Creation story really are not that far apart.
Quad

It does not say in bible directly that Earth is 6-10 thousands of years old, but that is what you get when they used genealogy to calculate its age. (from first man, how many generations to someone in more recent history) It is not only that we don't have evidence for those in question, but according to bible, there is even date placed by James Ussher, Bishop in the Church of Ireland when earth was created - Sunday, October 23, 4004 B.C.*

* www.godandscience.org...

I believe all Ken will try is just to pain Bill and science as arrogant, and I bet at least once he will ask BIll if he is God?!

Unfortunately Congruent Bias prevents most people from seeing the other side of things. Even if their beliefs are idiotic and starving for evidence.

I understand Dawkins' misgivings, because as he said, 'They have their fingers plugged in their ears, screaming na na na.' But I also understand Nye's frustration with it being crammed down our children's throats at schools all across America. That is no place for religious dogma. My children are being raised to decide for themselves, I am an atheist. They come home telling me how teachers will even stoop to the level of blackmailing them with a 'hell' for doing something bad, since they can no longer paddle them.

Really??? I wish my kids could go to school WITH their cell phones, and record some damn good footage. Excuse the language. The PUBLIC School System should be ashamed, but their not. They know they hold the power when they USE our children's minds. Makes me SICK.

The entire matter:

The problem is that they have a very basic understanding of science, believe they're masters of a very broad topic, and don't use the actual tools of science to deduce right and wrong. Instead, they gather as much "science" (we can debate whether "christian science" is actual science til they're blue in the face) as will support their argument then ignore/redirect past anything that hurts their argument. Christians are masters of debate fallacies. In fact, they use those far better than any "science" they can find to support their skewed views.

If they'd actually learned critical thinking skills to be skeptical of EVERYTHING (yes, even science that has yet to be proven as fact should be viewed skeptically) then they would go much farther, be more informed, and probably not look so biased. It would also help if most christians actually read their bibles to see how self contradicting and full of bull# it is, but that's asking a lot from people who really only want to read confirmation biased information from their indoctrinated youth.

Fun fact: You're what religion you are because of geography. If you were born in one of the sand countries in the middle east, more than likely you'd be muslim. If you were born in china, you'd be a taoist or buddhist. So on and so forth. There's also 3000 something different religions and every one claims to be the one, so most everyone is an athiest anyway. They just choose to believe one more fairy tale figure than an actual atheist.

There is nothing to me more convicting than watching the magnificence of the Universe in all of it's imperfect power. My whole body tingles from just the 'thought' of the knowledge there is to know. I am 'FILLED' with AWE!

The fact that I say this here won't make me very popular here (or a few other places I have been). But the notion of evolution has become almost inescapable. Scientists see evolution at work in too many places. If you try to major in Biology working towards your B.S. degree -- good luck trying to tell any of your professors that "Evolution is JUST a theory!" If you assert that 'Evolution is still unproven!' as a biology major, most places you'll be invited to go major in Social Studies or Communications instead of Biology.

To say that a scientific theory has been proven is to say that the majority of experts in a field have been convinced of it's truth. The majority of experts in the field of biology have been convinced that evolution is a fact.

So you approached the subject with an open mind. Read a popular book on the subject by a well respected scientist. And decided he was wrong. I commend you for your unbiased approach. I had mistakenly thought that you had a religious influence to your thinking.

(Excerpts from others are noted as well).

I'd say that if they get a fair an impartial debate judge, Bill Nye should wipe the floor with this guy since the Creationist argument usually boils down to a large number of logical fallacies. However I am a little worried that he is doing the debate in a Creationist museum and may end up with an unfair judge.

Amarri
The entire matter:

The problem is that they have a very basic understanding of science, believe they're masters of a very broad topic, and don't use the actual tools of science to deduce right and wrong. Instead, they gather as much "science" (we can debate whether "christian science" is actual science til they're blue in the face) as will support their argument then ignore/redirect past anything that hurts their argument. Christians are masters of debate fallacies. In fact, they use those far better than any "science" they can find to support their skewed views.

If they'd actually learned critical thinking skills to be skeptical of EVERYTHING (yes, even science that has yet to be proven as fact should be viewed skeptically) then they would go much farther, be more informed, and probably not look so biased. It would also help if most christians actually read their bibles to see how self contradicting and full of bull# it is, but that's asking a lot from people who really only want to read confirmation biased information from their indoctrinated youth.

Fun fact: You're what religion you are because of geography. If you were born in one of the sand countries in the middle east, more than likely you'd be muslim. If you were born in china, you'd be a taoist or buddhist. So on and so forth. There's also 3000 something different religions and every one claims to be the one, so most everyone is an athiest anyway. They just choose to believe one more fairy tale figure than an actual atheist.

There is nothing to me more convicting than watching the magnificence of the Universe in all of it's imperfect power. My whole body tingles from just the 'thought' of the knowledge there is to know. I am 'FILLED' with AWE!

The fact that I say this here won't make me very popular here (or a few other places I have been). But the notion of evolution has become almost inescapable. Scientists see evolution at work in too many places. If you try to major in Biology working towards your B.S. degree -- good luck trying to tell any of your professors that "Evolution is JUST a theory!" If you assert that 'Evolution is still unproven!' as a biology major, most places you'll be invited to go major in Social Studies or Communications instead of Biology.

To say that a scientific theory has been proven is to say that the majority of experts in a field have been convinced of it's truth. The majority of experts in the field of biology have been convinced that evolution is a fact.

So you approached the subject with an open mind. Read a popular book on the subject by a well respected scientist. And decided he was wrong. I commend you for your unbiased approach. I had mistakenly thought that you had a religious influence to your thinking.

(Excerpts from others are noted as well).

So your point is that you don't like Christians?

Well thanks for sharing that, it was totally relevant to the biologist vs priest debate on evolution . . . .
-FBB

reply to post by SuperFrog


Meh, I much prefer Mr. Wizard!

reply to post by Auricom


Good luck scheduling a debate with Mr. Wizard.

Creationist Museum? They must be using the term museum very, very loosely.

mu·se·um

a building in which objects of historical, scientific, artistic, or cultural interest are stored and exhibited.

Bill Nye for the win!

bill nye must understand that all of his efforts to explain evolution and the scientific method to these religious groups are about as effective as showing card tricks to a dog

I am a creation and i love science

They are both on a collision course

Take the Christian out of creation

And the atheist out of science

And it really works quite beautifully

Examples

First half of the 20th century

Atheist believe in a static universe- Einstein

Religion believes in a big bang - bruno

In a future thread i will detail this more

And don't want to get off topic

But both of these men will lie in order to be "right"

And they are both wrong