REL: The Ham on Nye Debate

[PilotMan]

So I guess this is actually going to go on right down the road from me.....at the Creation Museum of all places. Streams online for free as well. I just don't see anything good coming out of it. It's not a debate where people are going to be listening to both sides and rationally deciding which side did the better job. It's going to be two groups who already have decided, one much larger than the other, hoping for a bloodbath of the other side.

Full Video



Ham-on-Nye debate pits atheists, creationists - The Washington Post

Bill Nye may be “The Science Guy,” but Ken Ham is the “Answers in Genesis” man, and a debate between the two over the origins of life has nonbelievers and Christians wringing their hands.

Nye, host of a beloved television science series, and Ham, president of a creationist apologetics ministry, will meet at the Creation Museum, where Ham is also the president, on Feb. 4. In what some wags are calling “the Ham-on-Nye debate,” they will weigh this question: “Is creation a viable model of origins?”

In truth, both sides answered that question long ago — Nye with Charles Darwin’s work on the origin of species and Ham with the first book of the Bible. Yet many observers — both religious and nonreligious — say the debate is a very bad idea.

“Scientists should not debate creationists. Period,” wrote Dan Arel on the Richard Dawkins Foundation’s website. “There is nothing to debate.”
Arel, a secular advocate, is echoing the position of Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and outspoken atheist who has long refused to debate creationists.

“Winning is not what the creationists realistically aspire to,” Dawkins said in 2006. “For them, it is sufficient that the debate happens at all. They need the publicity. We don’t. To the gullible public which is their natural constituency, it is enough that their man is seen sharing a platform with a real scientist.”

In a twist that might surprise Ham and Nye, some Christians find themselves agreeing with Dawkins.

“It is this huge stereotype that all Christians reject science and an event like this reinforces that stereotype,” said Deborah Haarsma, president of the BioLogos Foundation, an organization whose motto is “science and faith in harmony.” ‘’It looks like science versus Christianity and it ignores the people who have accepted the science of evolution and have not let go of their faith.”

And that is a considerable number of people. A 2013 Pew Research Center poll found 60 percent of Americans believe “humans have evolved over time” while 33 percent reject that statement. Of those who believe in evolution, 24 percent say they also believe “a supreme being” used evolution to create life forms.

“A debate like this sets up a false choice” between science and religion for viewers, Haarsma said. “We don’t want them to have to choose.”

Other Christians are concerned that Nye, an inexperienced debater with a background in engineering, will not perform well against Ham, a skilled debater. Tyler Francke, a 25-year-old Christian who writes about the intersection of science and religion at the blog The God Evolution, said he knows many “young Earth creationists,” as Ham and his supporters are called, and that the presentation of scientific evidence alone is not enough to persuade them.

“Young-Earth proponents like Ham have all kinds of tricks they play to make their view seem reasonable,” he said. “They claim they don’t ignore evidence they just look at it with a different lens. . Bill Nye seems to be a very smart man, and I’m confident that he’ll come prepared. But if he shows up expecting a fair fight purely on the basis of what the available evidence most reasonably indicates, I think he’s going to be sorely mistaken.”
Nye may be an inexperienced debater, but he has a background in entertainment. He has hosted six popular science television shows — including the irreverent and informative “Bill Nye the Science Guy” — and appeared on “Dancing with the Stars” — where he was the first contestant to get the hook in its 17th season.

“Bill Nye is not a professional scientist; he is an entertainer and a science communicator,” said Joshua Rosenau, policy director at the National Center for Science Education, an advocacy group that discourages scientists from debating creationists. “So I am optimistic this could turn out better than some others. But don’t try this at home, kids.”

Both men have described their reasons for engaging in the challenge. Nye, an agnostic, told The Huffington Post he hopes “to show people that this belief (creationism) is still among us and it finds its way onto school boards.”

Indeed, there have been four laws introduced at the state level that challenge evolution in public school science curricula just this year — two in Missouri, one in Virginia and one in Oklahoma, according to the National Center for Science Education. Currently, laws in Texas, Louisiana and Tennessee permit the teaching of “alternatives” to evolution.

As for Ham, he has said he extended the debate invitation to Nye out of concern that young people are too quick to dismiss creation in favor of evolution. But critics note another reason — the financial rewards of increased media attention. The Creation Museum is up against a deadline for raising $29 million in municipal bonds to construct a proposed replica of Noah’s Ark. Even if he loses the debate, critics say, Ham wins at the bank.
In fact, the debate, which will be held in the Creation Museum’s 900-seat Legacy Hall in Petersburg, Ky., sold out its $25 tickets within minutes. The museum will stream the event live and for free.

But while some of the strongest voices against the debate have come from the non belief community, some nonbelievers are looking for a silver lining.
Maggie Ardiente, director of development and communications for the American Humanist Association, went to so far as to say she wishes the debate had been her idea.

“It is very simple,” she said. “I am looking at statistics (like the Pew Research Center’s poll) and they tell me people like Ken Ham and other creationists are being very effective and that is a serious problem. We can’t just ignore that. We have to challenge people like Ken Ham so I support the debate 100 percent.”

Debbie Goddard, director of outreach for the Center for Inquiry, another humanist organization that supports science education, is less certain. She said she was “originally on the fence” when she heard about the debate, concerned it would only attract the already convinced, but has reconsidered.

“If we don’t let their ideas see the light of day we can’t develop the tools to address them,” she said. “And we don’t just need the tools of facts and evidence, but also of understanding their views and compassion for them if we want to be effective at changing their minds.”

Copyright: For copyright information, please check with the distributor of this item, Religion News Service LLC.

[britrock88]

This was mentioned at church today. I'm scared to see what kind of ammunition YECs might try to derive from this.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I just don't see anything good coming out of it.

This. This statement possibly applies to this thread as well.

[nol]

Originally Posted by Radii

This. This statement possibly applies to this thread as well.

Yeah. On another note, I think Bill Nye is a bit overrated because of the Pavlovian response he triggers (teacher doesn't feel like teaching/assigning homework in science class that day -> puts in a Bill Nye video).

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by nol

Yeah. On another note, I think Bill Nye is a bit overrated because of the Pavlovian response he triggers (teacher doesn't feel like teaching/assigning homework in science class that day -> puts in a Bill Nye video).

[cartman]

I misread the title, thinking this thread was going to be about Kosher foods.

[Julio Riddols]

I'm not excited about this either. It won't resolve anything and will probably make things between evangelicals and mouthy atheists even more contentious. I hope I am wrong.

[PilotMan]

Well given where I live and surrounded by a number of people who are genuine YEC believers (which I think is one of the biggest crock lies out there and totally debases an entire church if they believe that crap) I'm sure I'll hear how God came down and smote the scientist with The Truth.

What I want to ask then is, "Did he get away on a dinosaur then?" Because I'm sure that'll improve the situation.

[Qwikshot]

I'm still wondering how we got so stupid. Will there be a Scopes Monkey trial rematch someday?

[Kodos]

This time, it's personal!

[cougarfreak]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Well given where I live and surrounded by a number of people who are genuine YEC believers (which I think is one of the biggest crock lies out there and totally debases an entire church if they believe that crap) I'm sure I'll hear how God came down and smote the scientist with The Truth.

What I want to ask then is, "Did he get away on a dinosaur then?" Because I'm sure that'll improve the situation.

If you're been through the museum, you know he did indeed get away on a dinosaur. I went through it last year, one of my students works there and gave me free passes. I'm shocked anyone can believe what that museum depicts with regard to man being here with dinos, etc.

[Easy Mac]

So how is the museum? I'm hoping to stop by on the way to a wedding this summer. I think it sounds utterly ridiculous, but I'm hopeful it's ridiculous in a completely awesome way. I mean, people and dinosaurs living in harmony, how can it be bad?

[Lathum]

IIRC we have a board member who is a YEC and tried to explain his thoughts to us in a thread a while back.

[lighthousekeeper]

revrew

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

revrew

thats who I thought. Was an interesting thread, I need to go find it sometime

[sterlingice]

Every time I see this thread bumped, I keep thinking "Alright, give me a Hamm on five, hold the Mayo."

SI

[cougarfreak]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So how is the museum? I'm hoping to stop by on the way to a wedding this summer. I think it sounds utterly ridiculous, but I'm hopeful it's ridiculous in a completely awesome way. I mean, people and dinosaurs living in harmony, how can it be bad?

It's not bad, but I think it's kind of impossible to think that way, but that's how I'm wired. There were a couple exhibits that were not real kid friendly (abortion is murder kind of thing), but there was some cool stuff for the kids as well (noah's ark, my son loved the dinosaurs, etc). I can tell you this, their outdoor light show is pretty cool at Christmas time.

[PilotMan]

Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham - HD - YouTube

This is live right now.

[PilotMan]

25 minutes in.

Listening to Ham use his "science" the idea of making a theory around evidence and calling it science. Using observation bias as a way to justify his entire stance. The last 10 minutes were a sermon.

It's utterly fucking ridiculous.

[PilotMan]

The debate itself is actually very well done. It's a good format. Each side gets their time. Both men are fair and it's all very professional. I think it's pretty one sided in terms of who is winning, however I certainly have an slanted opinion going in of who I think is right.

[EagleFan]

WTF is a YEC?

[PilotMan]

Young Earth Creationism

From

Young Earth creationism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Young Earth creationism (YEC) is the religious belief^[1] that the Universe, Earth and all life on Earth were created by direct acts of the Abrahamic God during a relatively short period, between 5,700 and 10,000 years ago.^[2] Its primary adherents are those Christians and Jews^[3] who, using a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative as a basis, believe that God created the Earth in six 24-hour days.^[4][5] Young Earth creationists differ from other creationists in that they believe in a strict-literal interpretation of the Bible regarding the age of the Earth. This contrasts with Old Earth Creationists who believe that the Book of Genesis may be interpreted metaphorically, and who accept the scientifically derived age of Earth and the universe.^[6]

[EagleFan]

I'll say what got me a rather stern lecture in school (went to a Christian school)...

Why do creation and big bang have to be mutually exclusive?

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

25 minutes in.

Listening to Ham use his "science" the idea of making a theory around evidence and calling it science. Using observation bias as a way to justify his entire stance. The last 10 minutes were a sermon.

It's utterly fucking ridiculous.

Still has to be better than the debate Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort were involved in. I honestly don't know of a good debate of this type where the Christian did a good job of representing their side but then I haven't really gone out and looked for one. It is basically two people talking with no real resolution.

[PilotMan]

Full Debate

[nol]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I'll say what got me a rather stern lecture in school (went to a Christian school)...

Why do creation and big bang have to be mutually exclusive?

They don't unless you believe that the Bible is a 100 percent literal account of the history of the universe.

[AENeuman]

I find it interesting that religion can be argued emotionally, intellectually and spiritually to achieve the same conclusion. It's Schrödinger's Cross

[Julio Riddols]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

I find it interesting that religion can be argued emotionally, intellectually and spiritually to achieve the same conclusion. It's Schrödinger's Cross

That's the key to a great product. Versatility.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by nol

They don't unless you believe that the Bible is a 100 percent literal account of the history of the universe.

Not on this same subject but the wife and I were having a debate on The Bible the other day. I am Catholic and she was raised Indepedent Baptist. She was taught the Bible is it. I believe in the Bible and the truths that it teaches however I also believe that since it was written by humans who are not perfect. Therefore not everything is 100% accurate. Also you can make the arguement that 5 people can witness the same event, write about it, and all have different views, and you can see that in the Gospels.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

Not on this same subject but the wife and I were having a debate on The Bible the other day. I am Catholic and she was raised Indepedent Baptist. She was taught the Bible is it. I believe in the Bible and the truths that it teaches however I also believe that since it was written by humans who are not perfect. Therefore not everything is 100% accurate. Also you can make the arguement that 5 people can witness the same event, write about it, and all have different views, and you can see that in the Gospels.

Not to mention that 5 people can tell a story passed down to each and end up with a totally different story then what it started out as. Yet in this case, every version and interpretation is supposedly correct. It just doesn't work that way.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Not to mention that 5 people can tell a story passed down to each and end up with a totally different story then what it started out as. Yet in this case, every version and interpretation is supposedly correct. It just doesn't work that way.

Exactly and there are words in the Hebrew language that are not directly translatable to English and vice versa.