Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

You should be watching this.

tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:03:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I've just gotten to the beginning of Hams 30 minute speech. It would seem, thus far, that his argument is mostly an appeal to authority.
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:09:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.

I don't think he will be willing to back down from those points any time soon, though.
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:15:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The orchard vs tree argument Ham presents fails to account for extreme similarities between certain families (Or even within Kingdoms).
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
STALIN
Posts: 3,726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:15:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?

OK I'll watch.
DudeStop
Posts: 1,278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:24:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?

I AM.LETSSHARE POPCORN???!!!
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:27:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 8:24:37 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?

I AM.LETSSHARE POPCORN???!!!

Sure! (passes unsalted popcorn)
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 8:43:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
LOL! Ham just stated "You can't observe the age of the earth."
That's like saying you can't observe the age of a person!
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
DudeStop
Posts: 1,278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:27:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 8:27:27 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:24:37 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?

I AM.LETSSHARE POPCORN???!!!

Sure! (passes unsalted popcorn)

(Puts salt/butter in and hands the original giver a diet coke.)
KnightArtorias
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:29:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.

In other words, he'd have a good argument...if he gave up his argument. Heh.
"Within us all, we are burdened. Hidden away. A murmur of the dark. Always seek the light of reason. Lest you slip and be devoured by the Abyss."
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:39:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 9:29:19 PM, KnightArtorias wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.

In other words, he'd have a good argument...if he gave up his argument. Heh.

Well if he was just arguing against Macro-evolution, then he'd have a tenable stance. It's all of the other things that he's glomed on that makes him sound so foolish.
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:39:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 9:27:03 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:27:27 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:24:37 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?

I AM.LETSSHARE POPCORN???!!!

Sure! (passes unsalted popcorn)

(Puts salt/butter in and hands the original giver a diet coke.)

D:
My popcorn!
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
KnightArtorias
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:52:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 9:39:32 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:29:19 PM, KnightArtorias wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.

In other words, he'd have a good argument...if he gave up his argument. Heh.

Well if he was just arguing against Macro-evolution, then he'd have a tenable stance. It's all of the other things that he's glomed on that makes him sound so foolish.

How do you figure? Macro-evolution is micro-evolution, over an extended period of time. The distinction is meaningless. Several small changes in a species over generations adds up to a new species. Boom. Macro-evolution.

I only ever hear distinctions like these in debates when dealing with individuals who want to try and fit their Creationist worldview into the reality of Evolution. "I believe in Evolution. Just...not really." It's the whole "species adaptation, not evolution" nonsense, reworded.

Rejection of evolution, macro or micro, is simply a ridiculous stance to take. To have a good argument, he'd have to get rid of his entire creationist stance. Even most modern Christian apologists and religious leaders in major churches (such as the Catholic church) recognize this fact, and therefore try and insert their god into the picture as a "guiding hand" of macro-evolution.
"Within us all, we are burdened. Hidden away. A murmur of the dark. Always seek the light of reason. Lest you slip and be devoured by the Abyss."
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:55:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 9:52:09 PM, KnightArtorias wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:39:32 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:29:19 PM, KnightArtorias wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.

In other words, he'd have a good argument...if he gave up his argument. Heh.

Well if he was just arguing against Macro-evolution, then he'd have a tenable stance. It's all of the other things that he's glomed on that makes him sound so foolish.

How do you figure? Macro-evolution is micro-evolution, over an extended period of time. The distinction is meaningless. Several small changes in a species over generations adds up to a new species. Boom. Macro-evolution.

I believe me, I agree. Creationists are the people who would disagree.

I only ever hear distinctions like these in debates when dealing with individuals who want to try and fit their Creationist worldview into the reality of Evolution. "I believe in Evolution. Just...not really." It's the whole "species adaptation, not evolution" nonsense, reworded.


Rejection of evolution, macro or micro, is simply a ridiculous stance to take. To have a good argument, he'd have to get rid of his entire creationist stance. Even most modern Christian apologists and religious leaders in major churches (such as the Catholic church) recognize this fact, and therefore try and insert their god into the picture as a "guiding hand" of macro-evolution.

Again, I agree. But there are some tenable points to be made against macro-evolution. I don't know them off the top of my head, but there are debates regarding them.

The only debates that are ever close calls are the origin of the very first species. Creation vs Abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis almost always wins.
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
DudeStop
Posts: 1,278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:56:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 9:39:59 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:27:03 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:27:27 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:24:37 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?

I AM.LETSSHARE POPCORN???!!!

Sure! (passes unsalted popcorn)

(Puts salt/butter in and hands the original giver a diet coke.)

D:
My popcorn!

Oh we can still share it, I just prefer it put some toppings on it.

Here's a new bowl:'[_]
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 9:57:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 9:56:14 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:39:59 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:27:03 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:27:27 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:24:37 PM, DudeStop wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:48:51 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
http://debatelive.org...
"Is creation a viable model of origins in today"s modern, scientific era?"
Nye is Con.
Ham is Pro.
We should watch together, and weigh in, eh?

I AM.LETSSHARE POPCORN???!!!

Sure! (passes unsalted popcorn)

(Puts salt/butter in and hands the original giver a diet coke.)

D:
My popcorn!

Oh we can still share it, I just prefer it put some toppings on it.

Here's a new bowl:'[_]

SOILED IT!
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
tylergraham95
Posts: 1,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2014 10:08:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Oh goodness the look bill gives Ken during the rebuttals. He just seems so upset on the inside.
"we dig" - Jeanette Runquist (1943 - 2015)
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2014 1:54:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 9:39:32 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:29:19 PM, KnightArtorias wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.

In other words, he'd have a good argument...if he gave up his argument. Heh.

Well if he was just arguing against Macro-evolution, then he'd have a tenable stance. It's all of the other things that he's glomed on that makes him sound so foolish.

No he had some decent points for generic creationism.
KnightArtorias
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2014 2:55:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/5/2014 1:54:31 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:39:32 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 9:29:19 PM, KnightArtorias wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:06:22 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/4/2014 8:03:53 PM, tylergraham95 wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

Yes perhaps, and also dropped the Ark event.

Yeah because Nye basically put that one to bed.

In other words, he'd have a good argument...if he gave up his argument. Heh.

Well if he was just arguing against Macro-evolution, then he'd have a tenable stance. It's all of the other things that he's glomed on that makes him sound so foolish.

No he had some decent points for generic creationism.

What points in particular do you think were good points?
"Within us all, we are burdened. Hidden away. A murmur of the dark. Always seek the light of reason. Lest you slip and be devoured by the Abyss."
Romanii
Posts: 4,862
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2014 8:00:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

IKR. Much of Evolution's evidence really can go in favor of Creationism.

And anyways, I thought people found out that the Hebrew word for "day" also translates to "age", which pretty much dismisses Young Earth Creationism...

Well, actually Bill Nye did a really good job of pointing out the impossibilities caused by the time constraints of Noah's Ark.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2014 8:02:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/5/2014 8:00:48 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 2/4/2014 7:58:57 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I think Ham has some solid points if he drops the whole "Earth is 6000 years old" thing...

IKR. Much of Evolution's evidence really can go in favor of Creationism.

And anyways, I thought people found out that the Hebrew word for "day" also translates to "age", which pretty much dismisses Young Earth Creationism...

Well, actually Bill Nye did a really good job of pointing out the impossibilities caused by the time constraints of Noah's Ark.

Yeah even I've done research in Hebrew on that word and found that out...