Posted on 02/04/2014 10:12:04 AM PST by Oliviaforever
Debating Creationism is stupid.
Let me show you why.
All Creationism thought is based on scripture written in Babylon approx. 700bc which was mostly based on stories the Jewish people in exile shared about their culture.
The Earth is older than 4000 years so using scripture to try and validate it is stupid. If its older than 4000 years all of your argument falls apart.
Darwin isn’t totally correct either as major holes exist in his logic. Still debating it is a waste of time.
Don’t we have more important things to do?
Who cares?
How do you get an engineering degree without learning science?
Science type classes were a pretty big part of my engineering degree.
That was not directed to the post where you implied that I was on medication.
And yes, the Science Guy will be destroyed in the debate as he cannot refute the facts of Creation Science.
No. The book of Genesis was written by Moses inspired by the Holy Spirit during a period of approximately 1450 to 1410 B.C.
He was probably overreacting to the word “unanimously”. It does seem a bit unrealistic.
Or perhaps he was reacting to “so called theory”, as if evolution somehow doesn’t qualify as a theory.
No it wasn’t.
Look into Jewish history instead of Christian History.
I can’t imagine what you think you will gain by insulting the lady.
That was not directed to the post where you implied that I was on medication
No, you misunderstood. I meant to imply that you NEEDED TO BE on medication, because of the fanatic frenzied tone of your posts.
It should be an interesting debate.
I’m sorry if you find my posts to have a frenzied tone.
Could you please let me know how my post about a debate has a frenzied tone?
Jesus Himself, ascribes Moses as the author of the Law, which means Torah, synonymous with the first 5 books of the Bible. That's really all I need to know.
When God created man he did so as a fully developed mature being. God did not raise Adam and Eve from a baby.
If He were to create the earth wouldn’t it make sense that he would create a planet fully formed and mature?
Personally I think not a single person on either side will be moved by the debate.
That's my understanding too. He used to be a regular on the Almost Live show in Seattle 25 years ago - I'd heard that is where he got his start as the "Science Guy."
The hardcore scientists ought to rethink their criticisms of Nye doing this debate. If he is perceived as the winner, their side won. If he loses, they can easily point out that Ham only beat their JV squad. I'm predicting that the debate will produce a lot more heat than light. On the science, there will be no winner - the issues are too complex to be adequately resolved in the limited time frame of the debate. However, the debate can be won on the public relations side. I hope that Ken Ham comes across as a knowledgeable Christian gentleman (and suppresses his tendency toward sarcasm) while Bill Nye reveals his mean spirit (which I have been told by an acquaintance of his is always ready to bubble to the surface).
Not sure what was left out of this quote, but this makes Nye sound like a bigot who is concerned that an opposing belief is not yet stamped out.
That was not directed to the post where you implied that I was on medication.
...the individual you’re responding to clearly has a problem being civil, and is apparently content to remain so...suggest you simply dismiss him or her...
...and I’m sure the Creation Museum is an interesting place to visit...but if Hamm’s premise is based on a young earth theory, I’ll have to take my leave...geological time is not measured in thousands of years, but in millions upon millions...
“I don’t think Bill Ny is really much of a science guy, is he? I thought he was an actor/teacher that just did simple experiments for kids. Am I wrong about this?”
You are correct. Any evolutionist who completed HS biology or chemistry is considered a scientist. A creationist with advanced degrees in biology and/or chemistry is a troglodyte.
I don't believe Nye has any serious engineering or science background.
Nye is a far, far, far left puke who is rabid in his belief that climate change is caused solely by man.
Whatever you read about his background is probably lies put out to make this fraud seem smart.
If read Nye blatherings they are all extreme leftist talking points.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.