Get an Extra 20% Off Sale Items - Use code: EXTRA20
February 5, 2014 @ 08:13 PM
.jpg

Post: 254

Join Date: Oct 2012

Location: SPACE




An extremely good debate. Good watch.
February 5, 2014 @ 08:38 PM
Isuke Inukai

Post: 241

Join Date: Nov 2011

Location: THE ANIME WORLD

The slew of ignorant ass creationist tweets I saw was enough to make me not want to watch tbh

CHOPZZ : then again i used to say k-nock, k-nock @sndgms

February 5, 2014 @ 08:45 PM
nightwalker

Post: 515

Join Date: Nov 2011

Location: Toronto

February 5, 2014 @ 09:07 PM
REVS

moderator

Post: 3428

Join Date: Dec 2011

Location: Philadelphia, PA

What was this shit I heard Nye saying about people still believing the earth is only 6,000 years old

I prefer carcinogens to endorphins.

February 6, 2014 @ 01:39 AM
chief

Post: 6530

Join Date: Feb 2008

Location: WA

I tried to make this thread and it got deleted -__-

•••

February 6, 2014 @ 02:50 AM
shnoosetheboose

Post: 798

Join Date: Aug 2012

What was this shit I heard Nye saying about people still believing the earth is only 6,000 years old
My little brothers ex girlfriend believes this. Very, very hardcore christian girl.
February 6, 2014 @ 02:54 AM
bjornvan

Post: 1113

Join Date: Sep 2012

how can you debate a evolutionary theory against faith? you cant logically explain faith... its kind of like trying to explain what color is to a blind person ..but im sure it was eye opening for creationist and evolutionist at the end of the day.
February 6, 2014 @ 02:57 AM
backlikethat

suspended

Post: 5231

Join Date: Feb 2009

how can you debate a evolutionary theory against faith? you cant logically explain faith... its kind of like trying to explain what color is to a blind person ..but im sure it was eye opening for creationist and evolutionist at the end of the day.

Did you even watch the video?
February 6, 2014 @ 03:10 AM
bjornvan

Post: 1113

Join Date: Sep 2012

how can you debate a evolutionary theory against faith? you cant logically explain faith... its kind of like trying to explain what color is to a blind person ..but im sure it was eye opening for creationist and evolutionist at the end of the day.

Did you even watch the video?
the first 5 minutes
why?
February 6, 2014 @ 03:26 AM
We Outchea

Post: 162

Join Date: Jun 2013

People actually believe Noah's ark was real?

But they know Snow White is a story?
Some do, some don't. 

No matter what side you take, the best thing to do while watching the debate is to listen carefully to what each person says and respect their views, whether you believe what one person or the other believes. 
February 6, 2014 @ 03:31 AM
Bet

Post: 2085

Join Date: Nov 2011

Location: California

Very interesting to listen to, currently at an hour and a half in. Very well made production does anyone know of any other debates of this quality?
February 6, 2014 @ 03:57 AM
backlikethat

suspended

Post: 5231

Join Date: Feb 2009

how can you debate a evolutionary theory against faith? you cant logically explain faith... its kind of like trying to explain what color is to a blind person ..but im sure it was eye opening for creationist and evolutionist at the end of the day.

Did you even watch the video?
the first 5 minutes
why?


because the video/debate has nothing to do with faith
February 6, 2014 @ 04:39 AM
reversal

Post: 883

Join Date: Jul 2010

how can you debate a evolutionary theory against faith? you cant logically explain faith... its kind of like trying to explain what color is to a blind person ..but im sure it was eye opening for creationist and evolutionist at the end of the day.

Did you even watch the video?
the first 5 minutes
why?


because the video/debate has nothing to do with faith
Ham quotes scripture. How is that not faith? 
February 6, 2014 @ 04:49 AM
RiFF RaFF

Post: 1295

Join Date: Jan 2012

Location: San jose

i love how he keeps saying that the scientific proof is assumption while the first thing he talks about is the assumption that if you let god into your life than he will present yourself. And also the assumption that he wrote the bible. This debate was hard to watch tbh.

Be about it

February 6, 2014 @ 04:50 AM
goldANDsacks

Post: 3151

Join Date: Jul 2009

this debate isn't about the existence of God. Bill Nye is not trying to disprove Christianity or Intelligent Design.

he's disproving a specific theory of Creationism. the Ken Ham Scientific Model is based on a literal interpretation of Genesis and states that the universe is no more than 6,000 years old. Man did not evolve from a lower lifeform, and co-existed with dinosaurs.

the "faith debate" is something completely different. 
February 6, 2014 @ 04:57 AM
poobie

Post: 81

Join Date: Feb 2013

I remember when people didn't like how religion is pushed upon people but when I browse the internet it's almost always atheist bashing people who believe in religion.  It seems that they can't stand to see people believe in what they don't. 
February 6, 2014 @ 05:13 AM
reversal

Post: 883

Join Date: Jul 2010

I remember when people didn't like how religion is pushed upon people but when I browse the internet it's almost always atheist bashing people who believe in religion.  It seems that they can't stand to see people believe in what they don't. 
In before religion vs. atheism shitstorm. 

It's mostly likely because the internet community is mostly dominated by progressive young people. Whereas in real life religious people are most likely to be older. In that sense religion is almost always pushed upon people more than atheism when it comes to real life. Ever wonder why you don't see a lot of pro-religious stuff on the internet, compared to the pamphlets, people at your door, and picketers? 
February 6, 2014 @ 05:29 AM
bjornvan

Post: 1113

Join Date: Sep 2012

how can you debate a evolutionary theory against faith? you cant logically explain faith... its kind of like trying to explain what color is to a blind person ..but im sure it was eye opening for creationist and evolutionist at the end of the day.

Did you even watch the video?
the first 5 minutes
why?


because the video/debate has nothing to do with faith
when you talk about creationism, its basis is off faith of what the bible teach, not theoretical or logical proof..

@goldandsacks Its not "the faith debate" but it is essentially a debate about faith.
February 6, 2014 @ 06:09 AM
goldANDsacks

Post: 3151

Join Date: Jul 2009


Did you even watch the video?
the first 5 minutes
why?


because the video/debate has nothing to do with faith
when you talk about creationism, its basis is off faith of what the bible teach, not theoretical or logical proof..

@goldandsacks Its not "the faith debate" but it is essentially a debate about faith.
i see what you mean. as a whole, you could say that creationism vs evolution is about faith. but that's not what this video was about. the video was about specific claims and topics (the viability of the Ken Ham Scientific Model). 

at one point Bill Nye specifically asks Ken Ham something like "what about devout Christians who don't believe that Man co-existed with dinosaurs? what is to become of them?" and Ken Ham avoids the question. because that's not what the debate was about. 
February 6, 2014 @ 06:51 AM
Ruthless

Post: 2063

Join Date: Oct 2012

I feel like I should get high before watching this

Let me see those downvotes

February 6, 2014 @ 07:42 AM
bjornvan

Post: 1113

Join Date: Sep 2012

the first 5 minutes
why?


because the video/debate has nothing to do with faith
when you talk about creationism, its basis is off faith of what the bible teach, not theoretical or logical proof..

@goldandsacks Its not "the faith debate" but it is essentially a debate about faith.
i see what you mean. as a whole, you could say that creationism vs evolution is about faith. but that's not what this video was about. the video was about specific claims and topics (the viability of the Ken Ham Scientific Model). 

at one point Bill Nye specifically asks Ken Ham something like "what about devout Christians who don't believe that Man co-existed with dinosaurs? what is to become of them?" and Ken Ham avoids the question. because that's not what the debate was about. 
Yea I understand that,thats what it was suppose to be about (& rather or not they should teach kids evolution or creation in schools).Ken did have some sort of scientific theory for creationism, but the questions he received goes back to ultimately questioning his faith, because his scientific theory is based on his faith.

There are other scientific theories that could support creationism, like the theory that time itself is slowing down, which could basically make what looks like millions of years of formations and fossils, now, actually be thousands of years.. or in other words. It took thousands of years to make formations and fossils back then but now that time has slowed it would take millions of years, since evolutionist are basing those findings off the present.. this would also mean that eventually time will stop lol. But I feel they should still teach both evolution and creation at schools, because it will promote growth in both fields, and hopefully for the new generation of religious, it would spawn less idiots that believe everything the preacher or priest say , because they will do their own research..
February 6, 2014 @ 07:53 AM
goldANDsacks

Post: 3151

Join Date: Jul 2009

I feel like I should get high before watching this
i did
February 6, 2014 @ 07:56 AM
ak

Post: 1344

Join Date: Apr 2008

I watched this whole thing earlier today.

I think the debate was over when Ham said NOTHING would change his mind and Nye said solid evidence would.

Nye challenged kids to grow up and be scientist and engineers to figure out the things Nye couldn't explain where as Ham was just preaching that if you let God into your life than He will reveal Himself to you.
February 6, 2014 @ 08:06 AM
goldANDsacks

Post: 3151

Join Date: Jul 2009



because the video/debate has nothing to do with faith
when you talk about creationism, its basis is off faith of what the bible teach, not theoretical or logical proof..

@goldandsacks Its not "the faith debate" but it is essentially a debate about faith.
i see what you mean. as a whole, you could say that creationism vs evolution is about faith. but that's not what this video was about. the video was about specific claims and topics (the viability of the Ken Ham Scientific Model). 

at one point Bill Nye specifically asks Ken Ham something like "what about devout Christians who don't believe that Man co-existed with dinosaurs? what is to become of them?" and Ken Ham avoids the question. because that's not what the debate was about. 
Yea I understand that,thats what it was suppose to be about (& rather or not they should teach kids evolution or creation in schools).Ken did have some sort of scientific theory for creationism, but the questions he received goes back to ultimately questioning his faith, because his scientific theory is based on his faith.

There are other scientific theories that could support creationism, like the theory that time itself is slowing down, which could basically make what looks like millions of years of formations and fossils, now, actually be thousands of years.. or in other words. It took thousands of years to make formations and fossils back then but now that time has slowed it would take millions of years, since evolutionist are basing those findings off the present.. this would also mean that eventually time will stop lol. But I feel they should still teach both evolution and creation at schools, because it will promote growth in both fields, and hopefully for the new generation of religious, it would spawn less idiots that believe everything the preacher or priest say , because they will do their own research..
you sound like a reasonable person. sure. maybe time is slowing down. maybe there is some kind of unknown middle ground that explains everything. but that's not what Ken Ham was saying. he was saying this is how it is. there's no need to teach creationism AND evolution. only creationism because the Bible says so. done.  

so yes, if we were talking about creationism vs evolution in general, then sure we can postulate different theories and talk about how faith can play a factor in science. but if we're talking about this debate/video, then we should stay on topic.

IF creationism were to be taught in schools (with accompanying scripture from the Old Testament as Ken Ham recommends), then wouldn't it be fair/logical to teach the origin of the universe as interpreted by other religions too? should they also caveat all science lessons with "unless there is magic involved"? 
February 6, 2014 @ 08:18 AM
db_cooper

Post: 2307

Join Date: Feb 2006

Location: Los Angeles

I have no problem accepting the unknown, until something is proven to me.
February 6, 2014 @ 09:20 AM
bjornvan

Post: 1113

Join Date: Sep 2012

when you talk about creationism, its basis is off faith of what the bible teach, not theoretical or logical proof..

@goldandsacks Its not "the faith debate" but it is essentially a debate about faith.
i see what you mean. as a whole, you could say that creationism vs evolution is about faith. but that's not what this video was about. the video was about specific claims and topics (the viability of the Ken Ham Scientific Model). 

at one point Bill Nye specifically asks Ken Ham something like "what about devout Christians who don't believe that Man co-existed with dinosaurs? what is to become of them?" and Ken Ham avoids the question. because that's not what the debate was about. 
Yea I understand that,thats what it was suppose to be about (& rather or not they should teach kids evolution or creation in schools).Ken did have some sort of scientific theory for creationism, but the questions he received goes back to ultimately questioning his faith, because his scientific theory is based on his faith.

There are other scientific theories that could support creationism, like the theory that time itself is slowing down, which could basically make what looks like millions of years of formations and fossils, now, actually be thousands of years.. or in other words. It took thousands of years to make formations and fossils back then but now that time has slowed it would take millions of years, since evolutionist are basing those findings off the present.. this would also mean that eventually time will stop lol. But I feel they should still teach both evolution and creation at schools, because it will promote growth in both fields, and hopefully for the new generation of religious, it would spawn less idiots that believe everything the preacher or priest say , because they will do their own research..
you sound like a reasonable person. sure. maybe time is slowing down. maybe there is some kind of unknown middle ground that explains everything. but that's not what Ken Ham was saying. he was saying this is how it is. there's no need to teach creationism AND evolution. only creationism because the Bible says so. done.  

so yes, if we were talking about creationism vs evolution in general, then sure we can postulate different theories and talk about how faith can play a factor in science. but if we're talking about this debate/video, then we should stay on topic.

IF creationism were to be taught in schools (with accompanying scripture from the Old Testament as Ken Ham recommends), then wouldn't it be fair/logical to teach the origin of the universe as interpreted by other religions too? should they also caveat all science lessons with "unless there is magic involved"? 
I didnt say that thats what Ken said.Thats just what I was thinking when bill asked him that question..Faith playing a factor in science was a topic in the video... so was different scientific theories supporting creationism. soo im on topic... When I said they should teach creationism in school, im saying that because there are scientific theories that can support creationism.If someone can come up with theories to support other religions origin of the universe then why the hell not? I said they should teach both to keep it objective, therefor teaching creation wouldn't necessarily be teaching faith in that instance, or teaching only evolution wouldn't be teaching, atheism.
February 6, 2014 @ 09:55 AM
commandoption

Post: 7

Join Date: Jan 2014

I watched this whole thing earlier today.

I think the debate was over when Ham said NOTHING would change his mind and Nye said solid evidence would.

Nye challenged kids to grow up and be scientist and engineers to figure out the things Nye couldn't explain where as Ham was just preaching that if you let God into your life than He will reveal Himself to you.
this
February 6, 2014 @ 10:05 AM
iggyhaxor

Post: 1541

Join Date: May 2007

Religion makes me not want to live on this planet anymore

It might have been great for keeping the dirt farming serfs from tearing each other apart but this is the 21st century

It makes me sad
February 6, 2014 @ 12:17 PM
gersh

Post: 76

Join Date: Feb 2012

Location: US

if you guys are pro evolution in general, you would love Athiest Experience. Matt Dellahunty is without a doubt the best atheistic debator.

But im curious why do people still hold on to a theory as fact when they cant teach it themselves. Rocking people for believing the Earth is 6-7k years old but cant explain how radiometric dating works (in before people googling to find out). If you take into account the environmental changes in the past 1000 years including; storms, typhoons, fires, plant cycle, animanl corpse. Then how do you know the material being measured is the exact same 1000, 2000, 3000 years ago and would calculate the same earth age per millennium? 

In short, test it yourself if its true else you are practicing "faith" in what a science teacher says. I'm all for knowledge and reason, but faith is that extra bit above testable stuff, just like paradoxes.
February 6, 2014 @ 12:18 PM
Vancouver

Post: 1654

Join Date: Jan 2008

Everytime ma dawg Bill would talk I felt like I was getting smarter, then Ken Ham would chime in and it all went to waste. Guy is an idiot. 

"actually, theres a chapter where god says he created matter so that's where we came from"

Please login first to reply.
Back To Top