Ken Ham Vs. Bill Nye

Posted by: Brainii

Who made the more convincing arguments?

  • Bill Nye

  • Ken Ham

94% 44 votes
6% 3 votes
  • Nye obviously made more convincing arguments, and got Ham to fall for some traps.

  • I choose the intelligent one.

  • Mr. Hamm seemed to be saying many incorrect facts, which mr. Nye refuted.

    Posted by: Jjjohn
  • He's awesome

  • Evolution beats Creationism.

  • Bill destroyed Ham

    Posted by: kbub
  • This has been asked way to many times. Even on Christian websites Bill Nye won polls about this.

    Posted by: SNP1
  • Even the supporters of Ken Ham agreed that his arguments were kinda weak...

  • When I was little in science class we used Bill Nye as a recourse all the time. He would make science fun for me and still be teaching me all of what i need to know.

  • Bill Nye: Provides tons of evidence on ice sheets, tree rings, radiometric dating, astronomical measure of distance of stars (using the information of the diameter of earths orbit and the degree of difference the star is during opposite seasons, which allows us to use trigonometry to work out the stars distance), etc. Ken Ham: All he says is "You weren't there, you don't know" or "There is a difference between historical and observational science" or "So and so believes in creationism and is also a scientist" or "God was there and he wrote a book". How did he make the assumption that god even existed in the first place?

    Posted by: WXL
  • He believes in evolution and has the evidence to back it up while Mr.Ham believes that god created this earth a couple thousand years ago but cannot back it up.

  • BILL NYE THE SCIENCE GUY

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Brainii says2014-04-09T17:03:05.2603455-05:00
@briantheliberal: What makes you think that Bill Nye is more intelligent? As mentioned pre-debate, they both have very good records of intellectual background.
briantheliberal says2014-04-09T17:06:10.1371306-05:00
Well for one, he doesn't believe in magical arks, talking snakes and that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. That's all I need.
Brainii says2014-04-09T17:13:56.9581595-05:00
Why does this make Ken Ham less intelligent? Science does not necessarily contradict miracles.
Brainii says2014-04-09T17:15:02.1817149-05:00
Also, the ark was not magical. There is a huge difference between magic and miracles.
briantheliberal says2014-04-09T17:31:34.8888878-05:00
Sorry but no. Trying to substitute supernatural occurrences with the term "miracle" doesn't make it so. An ark being able to hold two of every species in the world for many days and nights without eating each other or starving to death is not a miracle. The world being flooded by rain enough to kill pretty much everyone and everything is not a miracle. This is magic and like all magic, it's also not real.
Brainii says2014-04-09T17:33:27.1464878-05:00
Actually, there are still cases of witchcraft still around in the world. And if you look in the dictionary, There is a difference between miracles and magic.
briantheliberal says2014-04-09T17:38:35.1419985-05:00
And what cases of witchcraft are you referring to? Is there evidence to prove these things actually occurred? If not, it's just superstition.
xxWesxx says2014-05-04T21:07:36.6297919-05:00
Brainii saysApril 9 2014 04:13 PM Report Post Why does this make Ken Ham less intelligent? Science does not necessarily contradict miracles ---Actually, it kinda does. A miracle, by definition, must involve the suspension of the laws of science. Science clearly shows there is not one documented example of this...But feel free to take your evidence of otherwise to the James Randi Educational Foundation. They have been awaiting you to give $1,000,000 to for nearly half a century.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.