Posted on 02/06/2014 1:58:22 PM PST by celmak
On many mornings, I wake up and think, You know what this country needs? More culture war. As I scramble up a couple eggs, I find myself wishingfervently wishingthat we could spend more time reducing substantive issues to mere spectacle. Later, as I scrub the pan, Ill fantasize about how those very spectacles might even funnel money toward some of the countrys most politicized religious groups.
Fortunately, Bill the Science Guy Nye has heard my wishwhich, really, is the wish of a nation. Why else would he have traveled to Kentucky this week in order to debate Ken Ham, the young-earth creationist founder of Answers in Genesis, about the origins of the world?
Actually, there are two other reasons that Nye might have done so, and Ive 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 cluelessthat, for all his skill as a science communicator, Nye has less political acumen than your average wombat.
After watching the debate, Im 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
That's not the main question. Believing that God created the world is not a rejection of science, but Young Earth creationism is.
The real question is what side your family members are on. Do they side with Intelligent Design and the Discovery Institute, or with Ham and his Young Earth Creationism?
And keep in mind that by the admission of both parties they are incompatible.
well Fred, it is actually only six plus days old, based upon God’s perspective from the bang, dating by Universe doubling in size each day.
It’s been a while - it happened in a church in CA. Maybe you could check with CRI.com
Sometimes it’s brought up (but only when the Evolutionist does) but to show historic sites that people thought didn’t exist but were found. Just as an example.
Would the explanation of an Astrophysicist satisfy you, Freddie?
But you haven't. All you've done is articulated a baseless belief.
Why are you ASSuming that all creationists believe that the world is 6,000 years old?
Thanks for the ping.
This is also being discussed here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3119934/posts
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.
Nye is a born loser.
Seems that the *scientists* on board don't understand time dilation.
Perhaps this article, written by an astrophysicist with a PhD from MIT, might enlighten them some.
The Age of the Universe
GMTA
Creationists think that if they can somehow, someway disprove evolution then that means that their Biblical creation theory must be true. But there are dozens of creation stories proposed by different religions, races, and cultures. Disprove evolution and how do they then disprove those other creation theories based on no more evidence than their own is?
How does Ham beat the toga guy's argument?
Look I totally agree that while I know that the Bible is true,
to use real scientific evidence (which if the Biblical account is true should match up with the Biblical account; and does) is a MUST.
Ham might be a good evangelist, but is a poor scientist. I’ve been to his creation museum in KY, and got that it was basically an evangelism tool (which is important), but doesn’t have much hard science.
-JS.
We have a few nasty negative nay-bobs at FR and they seem drawn to these types of threads. BTW, Bill Nye is a nasty piece of work, too. He is a short tempered, foul mouthed donkey.
Then maybe that Eyewitness should be debating and not Ham? What with Ham not being present at creation and all.
You live in a deluded alternate universe.
Do not pinch yourself!
Try again.
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.