- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham
Posted on 2/4/14 at 6:59 pm to Turkey_Creek_Tiger
Posted on 2/4/14 at 6:59 pm to Turkey_Creek_Tiger
Weird to me that Nye acknowledged that perhaps we've only discovered 10%-50% of species, but is trying to say the fact we're not discovering 11/day is evidence that young earth is wrong.
I'm not a young earth believer, FWIW.
I'm not a young earth believer, FWIW.
Posted on 2/4/14 at 6:59 pm to Patron Saint
Why are they doing this in sister-ficking Kentucky? I'd have gone to see this
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:00 pm to chesty
i like how he says extraordinary instead of bullshite
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:00 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Weird to me that Nye acknowledged that perhaps we've only discovered 10%-50% of species, but is trying to say the fact we're not discovering 11/day is evidence that young earth is wrong.
yeah neither are really doing much to support their position...and both are doing a mediocre job of attacking the competing theory
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:01 pm to chesty
Anyone know what Bill's credentials are? I would wikipedia him...but....well....eh I don't feel like it.
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:01 pm to DeathValley85
B.S. in mechanical engineering from Cornell. Worked at Boeing after graduation. He sometimes gives guest lectures at Cornell.
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:01 pm to Pettifogger
I'm going to guess:
Nye: Someone back then couldn't have built something as massive and intricate as an ark.
Ham: Tell the Egyptians about it.
Nye: Someone back then couldn't have built something as massive and intricate as an ark.
Ham: Tell the Egyptians about it.
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:02 pm to Pettifogger
ETA: Nevermind, misunderstood, bill flopped on his species by the day example
This post was edited on 2/4/14 at 7:05 pm
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:03 pm to Deactived
He must have done well at boeing
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:03 pm to Pettifogger
So I'm pretty far behind in watching. Does Nye mention carbon dating at all? Does Ham just assume it's BS?
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:03 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Nye: Someone back then couldn't have built something as massive and intricate as an ark.
Ham: Tell the Egyptians about it.
bad comparison
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:04 pm to DeathValley85
quote:
Does Nye mention carbon dating at all? Does Ham just assume it's BS?
shockingly, that hasn't really been touched
...even though it is a really solid way to attack/support evolutionary theory
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:04 pm to DeathValley85
Ham talked earlier about how scientists and young-Earth creationists disagree on how to interpret data, so I don't think carbon-dating would convince him.
ETA: I think it's really just mentally lazy to categorically reject anything that goes against young-Earth creationism without even thinking about it. It's just like saying, "It doesn't agree with me, so I don't want to think about it."
ETA2: At least pause to think about it and then address each point to find why you disagree. If you still come to the same conclusion, then at least you thought. Otherwise, it just comes off as stubborn. That's the feeling I get from Ham.
ETA: I think it's really just mentally lazy to categorically reject anything that goes against young-Earth creationism without even thinking about it. It's just like saying, "It doesn't agree with me, so I don't want to think about it."
ETA2: At least pause to think about it and then address each point to find why you disagree. If you still come to the same conclusion, then at least you thought. Otherwise, it just comes off as stubborn. That's the feeling I get from Ham.
This post was edited on 2/4/14 at 7:07 pm
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:06 pm to DrSteveBrule
quote:
I think he was saying that if there were only 7000 species 4,000 years ago, we would have had to have found 11 new ones per day the last 4,000 years to reach the amount we currently know about, which is a very valid point.
Perhaps, but I'm confused as to how compelling that is. I mean, how many known species have been "discovered" within the last 500 years? Millions, I'm guessing. I suspect the average per day is really high, considering the advances of scientific interest/capabilities within a relatively short time period.
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
shockingly, that hasn't really been touched ...even though it is a really solid way to attack/support evolutionary theory
He seemingly touched on a similar topic and he said "we don't know we weren't there"
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:07 pm to Patron Saint
quote:
I think it's really just mentally lazy to categorically reject anything that goes against young-Earth creationism without even thinking about it.
that's not what ham is doing...at all
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
You should expound upon what you keep saying.
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:08 pm to Deactived
quote:
bad comparison
Why, I'm not saying he's wrong about the ark, I just think it's a weak point to categorically say "because 20th century ship builders couldn't have built the ark, no way Noah did."
It's a pretty hollow appeal to authority with modernity being the authority.
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:08 pm to DeathValley85
quote:
He seemingly touched on a similar topic and he said "we don't know we weren't there"
not being there has nothing to do with the process of carbon dating
Posted on 2/4/14 at 7:09 pm to Patron Saint
quote:
You should expound upon what you keep saying.
the ignorant closed-minded pro-science crowd is just as much of a faithful flock of followers as the religious crowd they're mocking
Popular
Back to top



3




