Bill Nye’s Debate Nightmare

Daily Beast/Yahoo News ^ | February 5, 2014 | Michael Schulson

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Is there a video of this CNN interview?

Here’s a portion of it with Piers Morgan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu67S1g05Vo

[Cyber Liberty]

Image that.

The daily beast will soon promote “ancient aliens”.

[RaceBannon]

maybe this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvmITm8qf40

[SoFloFreeper]

I believe in ID, but don’t necessarily buy into all that Ham says.

That being said, I think Ham DID make a good case for creation being a worthwhile model.

Nye also did a good job for his side.

I had to quit watching after a couple of the Q&A questions...had to go to bed. But I got the feeling it was a draw; most of the time I watch those thinking the ID proponent won.

[mountainlion]

Bill Fly the science Fly missed his calling as the father of the balloon boy. Maybe Bill can come here to Colorado and get high legally and have a balloon sequel.

[SeekAndFind]

Well, here’s a video of the entire debate if you missed some of it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkI

[celmak]

"Meanwhile, the liberal websites are declaring victory."

Would you expect anything less? That's why this article is so surprising, at least this seemingly atheist author knows (God through) Ham won!

[Zeneta]

Truth is supposed to rise to the top.

That concept should have been realized as the Internet became into wide spread use.

Personally, naively, I thought the quest for truth would have established its self first.

Sadly, we are in a battle against a dis-information campaign that was quick to adopt the media well before we caught on.

It is rare to find a popular website such as Yahoo, that will provide an outlet for a different view.

Most scientific websites write “Pop Science” for both political and ideological reasons.

I hope the truth will find its way to the top.

[GunRunner]

This is actually good for science, and it's really going to hurt the Intelligent Design racket since now a wider, general audience is going to see the anti-evolution gang as spearheaded by Young Earth Creationists, who believe the Earth is 6,000 years old and still subscribe to long debunked flood geology.

It's like gun control. When the extremists who actually want to ban guns are the face of gun control, you see gun rights flourish because people see the extremity of the opposition.

I think creationism is still cited by people who not involved in science because they're under the impression that common descent, and even speciation and natural selection are compatible with religious creation; even the Pope accepts it. But once they understand the creationism is actually a total rejection of science and is a cover for a repackaging of George McReady Price's flood geology, I think you'll see a decrease in adherence. And the "Dinosaurs and Cavemen Living Together" exhibits aren't going to help either. Haha!

This is going to be a major failure for the Wedge Strategy. I think we need pictures of the Creation Museum plastered on every news outlet in the country.

[Alex Murphy]

....there are two other reasons that Nye might have done so, and I’ve given both possibilities a great deal of thought in the past few days. The first is that Nye, for all his bow-tied charm, is at heart a publicity-hungry cynic, eager to reestablish the national reputation he once had as the host of a PBS show. When his stint on Dancing With the Stars ended quickly, Nye turned to the only other channel that could launch him back to national attention: a sensationalized debate, replete with the media buzz that he craves. Possibility number two is that Nye is clueless—that, for all his skill as a science communicator, Nye has less political acumen than your average wombat.

After watching the debate, I’m leaning toward that second possibility. Last night, it was easy to pick out the smarter man on the stage. Oddly, it was the same man who was arguing that the earth is 6,000 years old.

PFL

[Monterrosa-24]

“...just declare the matter settled...”

That is what the article is trying to do as well. The author is asking why give Intelligent Design any credibility by even debating it. He wants to say that fireflys or lightning bugs just developed their unique abilities via natural selection or chance mutation through endless unfathomable amounts of time. And furthermore he wants the discussion CLOSED.

[RedStateNotShirt]

Yahoo news used to be every bit as sharp left-leaning as The Daily Beast, so the partnership between the two surprises me as little as the partnership between CBS and the New York Times. I’d love to see Yahoo move at least to the center, but I won’t hold my breath over it.

[SkyDancer]

I’ve heard Creationists debate Evolutionists without even mentioning the Bible. And won. The Evolutionist kept bringing up the Bible and the Creationist guy kept coming back to their arguments and blowing them away.

[celmak]

“This is actually good for science, and it's really going to hurt the Intelligent Design racket since now a wider, general audience is going to see the anti-evolution gang as spearheaded by Young Earth Creationists, who believe the Earth is 6,000 years old and still subscribe to long debunked flood geology.”

Should be: “This is actually good for science, and it's really going to hurt the Darwinist’s evolution racket since now a wider, general audience is going to see the anti-Creation gang as spearheaded by Eugenicists, who believe the Earth is 60,000,000,000 years old and still subscribe to Darwin’s long debunked gradualist geology.

“It's like gun control. When the extremists who actually want to ban guns are the face of gun control, you see gun rights flourish because people see the extremity of the opposition.”

Yeppers, them Creationist are just as liberal as them gun controllers (SARC)!

[FredZarguna]

Generally I agree with you. But if objective science is going to offer lamebrains like mechanical engineer turned stand-up comic turned "science guy" such as Bill Nye to defend evolution, then evidence and reason have got no chance.

Bill Nye is simply a scientific illiterate. His success as some iconic communicator of science is a horrifying tribute to how awful science education is in this country. Some of his "scientific" claims are real howlers; he has almost no understanding of physics or the current state of biochemistry/microbiology at all.

I can see Bill Nye losing big to a skinny bald guy in a red half-toga who claims the universe is an elephant on the backs of four turtles. Maybe even losing badly.

[celmak]

"I’ve heard Creationists debate Evolutionists without even mentioning the Bible."

I've seen this too. But when the topic of whether or not Creationism (i.e., the Bible) is viable in science as a topic for debate, one is hard pressed not to bring up the Bible.

[celmak]

"Bill Nye is simply a scientific illiterate."

You can always tell when a debate is lost by those who believe in leftists science when they rip apart their own guy after he lost.

[metmom]

ping

[GunRunner]

You're the target audience for the creationist movement.

You believe that eugenics deal with the age of the Earth, that evolution claims that the Earth is 60 billion years old, and that Darwin was a geologist.

There's a reason creationists don't have a presence in the scientific community, and are opening up theme parks instead.

[metmom]

After watching the debate, I’m leaning toward that second possibility. Last night, it was easy to pick out the smarter man on the stage. Oddly, it was the same man who was arguing that the earth is 6,000 years old.

Funny about that.....