I dont know why your posting that because the overwhelming consensus is that Bill Nye won that debate with Ken Ham (Ham answered nothing in an evidentiary way) but I wouldve much rather seen Ham debate Kenneth Miller or Richard Dawkins; he wouldve got his ass handed to him in a much more streamlined way. Before that debate, the atheists were saying Bill Nye was the wrong guy; hes a mechanical engineer by trade, but I guess hes the pop-star of the science crowd, so he was chosen. After Ham lost the debate, Pat Robertson weighed in: Lets not make a joke of ourselves, Let’s face it, there was a bishop [Ussher] who added up the dates listed in Genesis and he came up with the world had been around for 6,000 years. There ain’t no way that’s possible. To say that it all came about in 6,000 years is just nonsense and I think it’s time we come off of that stuff and say this isn’t possible. Pat Robertson has more sense than I wouldve given him credit for. Ken Hams entire argument is basically that we werent there, so we cant know........sorry, but yes we can and in many ways and making an argument out of your own incredulity is no argument at all; get the facts. I can undermine that absurdity by saying that the speed of light never changes and there are stars and galaxies so far away that by the time their light reaches our eyes, millions of years have passed. This is a fact, not an interpretation and Ham will never answer this without being absurd. He also never answered the fact that there are trees 9000 years old......and wouldve died in the fabled flood. And what the hell would the herbivores have eaten considering all vegetation wouldve been killed in a universal flood like that (there is NO evidence for such a flood.....Hams scapegoat never happened). This universe is very old and is in concert with all of the geological rock formations dating techniques......and the radioactive (though imperfect) dating techniques. Hell, it wouldve taken a sloth more than 6000 years to reach the damned ark.....literally. The idea that dinosaurs and humans lived even remotely close to the same time period is also absurd. Not even close in the same strata anywhere. And Ive went through the footprints arguments and they dont hold water. I do respect Ham for taking the creation account literally, because if you dont, the whole charade ends. Orthodoxy dies. Death, disease and suffering are far older than mankind. Sorry if that goes against your own misinformed paradigm but it is what it is and it is a fact. Just like the old testament teaches that the sun orbits the earth (i.e....the sun stood still for the murderer joshua) and the earth is flat and God created the sun and then the stars (they didnt know the sun was a star) and on and on, this will one day be another point you guys will have the sense to concede to; there is already a mountain of evidence, and not because scientist even take you guys seriously. They dont. Answers in genesis has always been laughable....Ive been on that site for years....if you want to learn something, browse the freeratio.org forums....there are people I can teach on them forums and there are many who can teach me. Creationism predicts nothing, so creationism isnt science. Period. Evolutionary theory does make testable hypothesis and they do pan out......over and over. Read for yourself. If Ken Ham is the best creation science has, you guys are in big trouble. Ive suggested layman books recently; dont be lazy and expect some silly pseudoscience hack to think for you. Scientist dont have this pretended agenda against creationists.........its all a matter of evidence and the evidence IS there; In the famous PA Dover trial (where they fought to have creationism taught in PA schools), the christian judge had to side with the truth after seeing all of the scientists evidence (and the creationists lack of it) and ruled in favor with secular science....I dont have the patience to go through it on facebook.....the biochemist michael behe was the poster-child for creationists in that trial and he was left speechless. His main arguments (see his famous book darwins black box) have been overturned in a glorious way, down to the molecular level. Hell, you dont even have to be open-minded. Just read the books I suggest. My God is not bound by ignorant bronze-age observations and superstitions and Im so damned glad...I wouldnt want that crap to be true because itd be a more cruel existence than what evolution has wrought....no, I absolutley love the mystery of it all. I pretty much live for it. And I still find a place for God in my life.....I believe hes personal, loving and does have moral expectations for his higher creatures, which I fail to live up to; I suppose I should be in some sort of Hell for squandering my life on hedonistic pleasures. Ive seen Christ and do love him (though I dont believe much of what the new testament teaches about him.......and I dont believe he even understood much himself from both a theological perspective and a scientific perspective when he was on earth) and Ive seen many incredible signs, but its still my own faith and my beliefs are always in flux, in certain ways. I dont believe the bible is the word of God, but do believe it contains the word of god. As well as the creation. I wouldnt want to destroy anybodys faith, but only implore you to not be bound by anothers beliefs. Dont be scared to test the waters, it may enrich your life: 1) Finding Darwins God by Kenneth Miller (hes a christian) 2) Your Inner Fish by Neil Schuben (sp?) 3) Relics of Eden by Daniel Fairbanks
Posted on: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 23:34:38 +0000