Bill Nye debate against Creationist Ken Ham
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkI]Topic: Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern, scientific era?[/url]
3 hours of Bill Nye using facts and logic to explain why Ken Ham's facts and logic are completely wrong in almost every way possible. Worth your time to watch if you're interested.
February 5, 2014
8 Comments • Newest first
Ken Ham absolutely destroyed Bill Nye the 'science' guy
Arguing with people like that only further entertains their delusions.
I was disappointed in Dr. Ham's defense as being more evangelistic than scientific. Some of his concerns about time and dating constants were valid, but I've heard much better argumentation from others. Bill Nye was a great example as an evolutionist and I agreed with him inasmuch as he recognizes the incompatibility between the evolutionary and Biblical framework, though I felt that much of his motivation and fascination with science could be better explained by a theistic worldview. Dr. Ham alluded to prophecy, but unless he gave specific examples earlier (I missed the first half), I felt he did a rather poor job at elaborating during prime opportunities as to how a theistic viewpoint provides for a better future or predicts it. I got the impression that his Biblical understanding may have been a little limited, but that's coming from a theologian.
What I will say is this: [b]Any Christian who denies creation as depicted in Genesis, probably has very little understanding about the Bible[/b] and Christianity, for long time-periods and natural selection are completely incompatible with both. Some examples:
[*]1. If evolution is true and God created through the process of evolution, this raises SERIOUS concerns about the character of God when considering predation, parasitism, death, disease, entire species being obliterated in a whole process that is steeped in blood preceeded Adam and Eve. (Offtopic: As does eternal torment in hell, which is false, by the way).
[*]2. According to Paul, Death followed sin, this is in direct opposition to the evolutionary paradigm. This causes conflict with a Biblical understanding of salvation if false.
Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death;..." According to the evolutionary paradigm, it is the reverse.
[*]3. Jesus and the Apostles John, Paul, Peter, and others taught a literal creation/flood.
[*]4. Peter predicted the rise of a rejection of Creationism by uniformitarianism and the resulting scoffing we see by the scientific community today. (2 Peter 3:3-6)
I could keep going till I reach a dozen or more, but the idea of mutual exclusivity from a theological perspective should be well-demonstrated by this point. PM me for the full list if interested.
please note not all Christians are like this, i'm Christian and believing in pure Creatonism seems also wrong to me...
Personally I don't really see the point of debates like this or see why I'd waste 2 and a half hours watching something that I have no interest either way
Even as a religious person, the idea that everything just popped into existence seems wrong. In fact, I've found that most church people have the same way of thinking. In fact, I know people who believe in a creator because of Big Bang stuff. Just my thoughts... Creationism has been old-fashioned for awhile.
[quote=dopeazn]it's not worth watching because Ken Ham is stupid. creationists were never worth debating with. even the most educated ones are pretty stupid somehow.[/quote]
Ken Ham is Ken Ham, however what Bill Nye has to say and how Ken Ham reacts to what he says is what's worth watching the debate for. It's still informative and helps people understand why we teach evolution and various other related topics in our classrooms rather than creationism.
it's not worth watching because Ken Ham is stupid. creationists were never worth debating with. even the most educated ones are pretty stupid somehow.