Bill Nye Obliterats Ken Ham

[Fluffington]

In case you didn't know, it's over now. Here's the full debate

And oh man, I cannot believe how much Bill Nye the science guy ripped apart Ken Ham while being knee deep in creationist territory. It was so hard to watch Ken spew lies, logical fallacies and just verbal diarrhea from his mouth whenever he spoke, but it was just so satisfying to watch him fumble around later in the video as Bill Nye completely and utterly demolishes him to a molecular level.

I was actually completely against him debating Ken Ham at first since even paying them attention would imply that their beliefs were anything but completely absurd, but in the end Bill completely proved that he lived up to his rightful title of being my childhood hero.

Ken Ham is a piece of shit that literally lies to children for a living, and he needs to be shown to the world as the fraudster and charlatan he is.

[MrPlinkett]

I remember when Bill Nye used to be fun to listen to... Then he became a typical scientist.

[Fluffington]

At 2/5/14 12:20 PM, I-Raped-You wrote: I remember when Bill Nye used to be fun to listen to... Then he became a typical scientist.

You can always just re-watch old episodes of Bill Nye the science guy though.

[MrPlinkett]

At 2/5/14 12:22 PM, Fluffington wrote:

At 2/5/14 12:20 PM, I-Raped-You wrote: I remember when Bill Nye used to be fun to listen to... Then he became a typical scientist.

You can always just re-watch old episodes of Bill Nye the science guy though.

Meh, I'm just disappointed that the fun scientist portion of him quickly dies away.

[Antilogical]

I wouldn't say Bill Nye obliterated Ham. They both presented fairly solid arguments for each of their side. In the beginning Ken Ham did as well as you could expect of anybody coming from his side of the debate. It kind of fizzled later on (i.e. after the pre-formed speeches) when he had to continually resort to his "There's a great book ..." line, which doesn't answer anything. Overall, I think he could have done much worse, and he stood his ground well (though that's to be expected, he being a seasoned debater against Nye, who is "only" a scientist/TV personality).

[ConeyHighlander]

At 2/5/14 12:33 PM, Antilogical wrote: I wouldn't say Bill Nye obliterated Ham. They both presented fairly solid arguments for each of their side. In the beginning Ken Ham did as well as you could expect of anybody coming from his side of the debate. It kind of fizzled later on (i.e. after the pre-formed speeches) when he had to continually resort to his "There's a great book ..." line, which doesn't answer anything. Overall, I think he could have done much worse, and he stood his ground well (though that's to be expected, he being a seasoned debater against Nye, who is "only" a scientist/TV personality).

This.
He did well enough to make it seem an actual debate, while before I'd have discounted his side of the argument completely. When it comes down to brass, Nye had the easier job here, not that he isn't brilliant.

[Gobblemeister]

Literally Upworthy

[Forte]

This pretty sums up the debate for me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU

[MrPlinkett]

At 2/5/14 02:16 PM, Forte wrote: This pretty sums up the debate for me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU

So what he's saying is that religious people are not intelligent enough to become engineers?
Has he never heard of the Egyptian or Roman empire? It was because of religion andreligious people that we have engineering techniques same as the Romans.

[Boomstick]

At 2/5/14 12:20 PM, I-Raped-You wrote: I remember when Bill Nye used to be fun to listen to... Then he became a typical scientist.

That sounds like Walter Bishop in a way.

[Forte]

At 2/5/14 02:19 PM, I-Raped-You wrote: So what he's saying is that religious people are not intelligent enough to become engineers?
Has he never heard of the Egyptian or Roman empire? It was because of religion andreligious people that we have engineering techniques same as the Romans.

No, he's not saying that religious people are unintelligent. He is saying that one facet of religion, Creationism, does more harm than good because the theory of evolution is the building block to all of life sciences. A point to which I agree. Yes, engineers can be religious, many are, but if future generations are taught to discredit science from an early age and raised to be blind to actual, supported scientific data and evidence, then they will be a lot less useful in the future. Especially since today (and inevitably the future) jobs and problems are ones that deal with science.

[Antilogical]

At 2/5/14 02:19 PM, I-Raped-You wrote:

At 2/5/14 02:16 PM, Forte wrote: This pretty sums up the debate for me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU

So what he's saying is that religious people are not intelligent enough to become engineers?
Has he never heard of the Egyptian or Roman empire? It was because of religion andreligious people that we have engineering techniques same as the Romans.

He wasn't saying that at all. And he definitely clearly stated that religious belief can live alongside evolution. The debate was specifically about creationism. Both sides went over how teaching creationism affects the logical thought process (Ham said positively, Nye said negatively, of course). Ham spent a lot of his time (too much, really) showing accomplished creationism PhDs and listing their inventions and achievements, and Nye didn't try to discredit them in the slightest in his rebuttals. Both sides were very respectful throughout the entirety of the event. There was no venom at all.

[MrPlinkett]

At 2/5/14 02:33 PM, Antilogical wrote:

I was talking about Fortes video.

[Darthdenim]

Anybody who denies creationism if a fucking moron.

[Antilogical]

At 2/5/14 02:37 PM, I-Raped-You wrote:

At 2/5/14 02:33 PM, Antilogical wrote:

I was talking about Fortes video.

Yes, I understood. I was just clarifying that the thoughts you extracted from the video were not those displayed in the debate.

[Evark]

I think the picture somebody shared on my facebook homepage summed it up quite nicely.

But, yea. I just watched the whole thing (snow day boredom, wooo) and it was patently obvious that Ken Ham would rather ignore inconvenient problems with his theory and avoid making any predictions Bill asked for than actually answer questions and seriously consider where the other side is coming from in order to rebut.

[naronic]

congratulations

[SuperElroy]

Bill Nye, he will eat you alive.

[Sekhem]

Ken Ham cynically used it as a platform to promote his commercial museum. He won.

[Zachary]

Bill Nye did a good job. I do not think he went in there with the intention of changing any hardcore creationist's views, but to gain the attention of some creationists that may be on the fence or more willing to accept science.

[DarkMatter]

At 2/5/14 12:20 PM, I-Raped-You wrote: I remember when Bill Nye used to be fun to listen to... Then he became a typical scientist.

Bill Nye will always be the Science Guy

and will always get more babes than me =(

[X-Gary-Gigax-X]

At 2/5/14 08:36 PM, Zachary wrote: Bill Nye did a good job. I do not think he went in there with the intention of changing any hardcore creationist's views, but to gain the attention of some creationists that may be on the fence or more willing to accept science.

We've been discussing this in the politics forum. You're absolutely right about hardcore beliefs remaining constant. It is a fact of life that some people would sooner die than change their world view. Asking even a minor shift is a big request. A complete 180 shift is something else, and requires extraordinary effort on the pitchman's front.

Overall, an hour long debate like this will merely preach to the choir for both sides. What I think really changes people's minds is friendship with another person, slowly testing their world view piece by piece and bit by bit rather than a rapid discharge of information all at once.

[JRob]

At 2/5/14 08:34 PM, Sekhem wrote: Ken Ham cynically used it as a platform to promote his commercial museum. He won.

^^^

[X-Gary-Gigax-X]

At 2/5/14 09:08 PM, DarkMatter wrote: Bill Nye will always be the Science Guy

and will always get more babes than me =(

Bwahahaha

[GrizzlyOne]

wait

people actually give that much of a shit about this

[Aethos]

At 2/5/14 08:36 PM, Zachary wrote: Bill Nye did a good job. I do not think he went in there with the intention of changing any hardcore creationist's views, but to gain the attention of some creationists that may be on the fence or more willing to accept science.

But at what cost?......

[Spedmallet]

At 2/5/14 09:16 PM, JRob wrote:

At 2/5/14 08:34 PM, Sekhem wrote: Ken Ham cynically used it as a platform to promote his commercial museum. He won.

^^^

P. much this

Not that it wasn't great to listen to on a snowy day though.

[supergandhi64]

How Nice To See That Bill Nye Finally Has Finally Come To His Senses . . . Deciding To Promote The Creation Museum Can Only Have Good Consequences

--supergandhi64

[Little-Kinky]

I just finished the debate~ Ken Ham was an excellent speaker, but I could never quite tell what he was going for. Bill Nye's way of speaking does not give itself to public speaking, but I found him easier to follow.

[TheKlown]

I seen Bill Nye the science guy growing up watching his tv show and shockingly he is on Fox News quite often talking to the viewers about stuff. He seems like a leftist nut to me which is a shame because I really enjoyed his show as a kid and thought he was quite intelligent. I do not understand people that believe the world just magically created itself. I also, don't like people that seem to want to shove their views down your throat. If someone believing in god, heaven or hell makes someone happy, than let it be. I'm not going to pretend I know that there's an after-life, but I'm not going to come out and say that 100 percent there isn't.