Jump to content

Menu
Giving You and Your Child a Road Map to the Best Possible Education
The Well-Trained Mind Community

Anyone watching the debate tonight?

Iskra

By Iskra,
in The Chat Board

 Share

Recommended Posts

elfgivas

elfgivas

Posted
Posted

dh isn't too keen to watch it, because he's afraid Bill Nye will not do well.  its hard to talk science when the other person is talking faith (its a false dichotomy, but it is a different language, and different things are considered valid.)

 

and its probably a good thing if he doesn't watch it live.  if just One MOre Person makes a "there are no transitional fossils" comment, it will not be pretty.  there are transitional fossils All Over the Place.  It is an untrue statement.  but if the person saying it thinks it is true, what is one to do?  in our house, one walks over to the fossil area, picks up a fossil and starts observing.  this is unlikely to be possible in the creation museum, kwim?

 

and my loving, kind, peaceful scientist husband starts to lose it....

 

i may watch it if he's not home.... or watch it when i can pause it and recover.

 

maybe i'm wrong about the outcome; i sure hope so.

ann

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GailV

GailV

Posted
Posted

I remember a thread about this a few weeks ago, as OhElizabeth said.

 

I've already been rolling my eyes enough at some of the pre-debate comments I see on my facebook feed. I think my eyeballs would roll right out of my head if I watched the actual debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterPan

PeterPan

Posted
Posted

dh isn't too keen to watch it, because he's afraid Bill Nye will not do well.  its hard to talk science when the other person is talking faith (its a false dichotomy, but it is a different language, and different things are considered valid.)

 

and its probably a good thing if he doesn't watch it live.  if just One MOre Person makes a "there are no transitional fossils" comment, it will not be pretty.  there are transitional fossils All Over the Place.  It is an untrue statement.  but if the person saying it thinks it is true, what is one to do?  in our house, one walks over to the fossil area, picks up a fossil and starts observing.  this is unlikely to be possible in the creation museum, kwim?

 

and my loving, kind, peaceful scientist husband starts to lose it....

 

i may watch it if he's not home.... or watch it when i can pause it and recover.

 

maybe i'm wrong about the outcome; i sure hope so.

ann

I'm sorry, but the bolded part doesn't make sense to me.  There are public fossil hunting areas near Cincy.  There are plenty of active fossil hunters within a 2 hour drive, and plenty of creationists are looking at them.  Whatever, just saying your comment doesn't make sense.  Just because someone interprets the evidence differently doesn't mean one isn't looking at it.

 

Are you trying to say they won't let Bill Nye *present* his evidence???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KrissiK

KrissiK

Posted
Posted

No! I am a creationist (haven't decided really about the young earth/old earth thing), but I take offense at Ken Ham's dogmatism. And like has been said before, it's not going to change anyone's mind. Do debates like this change people's minds? Or maybe that's not the point of the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catwoman

Catwoman

Posted
Posted

No! I am a creationist (haven't decided really about the young earth/old earth thing), but I take offense at Ken Ham's dogmatism. And like has been said before, it's not going to change anyone's mind. Do debates like this change people's minds? Or maybe that's not the point of the debate.

I'm thinking the point of the debate is that it's a great way for Ken Ham and Bill Nye to get some television airtime and a lot of publicity for themselves, but I'm kind of cynical that way. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TechWife

TechWife

Posted
Posted

I'm thinking the point of the debate is that it's a great way for Ken Ham and Bill Nye to get some television airtime and a lot of publicity for themselves, but I'm kind of cynical that way. ;)

 

It's a great way for AiG to make money, too. $24.99 for a DVD and video download is quite a profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PachiSusan

PachiSusan

Posted
Posted

No.  What is the purpose of the debate anyway?  Will either side change his mind?  I have no desire to hear the same old stuff rehashed and for them to bash each other.

 

I have enough drama going on IRL right now.

 

 

No! I am a creationist (haven't decided really about the young earth/old earth thing), but I take offense at Ken Ham's dogmatism. And like has been said before, it's not going to change anyone's mind. Do debates like this change people's minds? Or maybe that's not the point of the debate.

 

 

I'm thinking the point of the debate is that it's a great way for Ken Ham and Bill Nye to get some television airtime and a lot of publicity for themselves, but I'm kind of cynical that way. ;)

 

 

It's a great way for AiG to make money, too. $24.99 for a DVD and video download is quite a profit.

 

 

I can't stand Ken. There is real science to support creation. A lot of it. But that's not his focus, and he makes the rest of us seem ignorant. I hope he proves me wrong tonight.

 

 

All these pretty much sum it up for me. I will watch it, if only to see what happens. No one will "win" because as an earlier poster said, it's set up a false dichotomy.  If it were a dialogue on the "Genesis of Life", I would be more apt to believe it might be a better debate. Creationism and Evolution aren't even talking about the same things. Creationism is that God created the heavens and the earth and all that it contains, and evolution is talking about how life might have worked once it's already there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slache

Slache

Posted
Posted

 Creationism and Evolution aren't even talking about the same things. Creationism is that God created the heavens and the earth and all that it contains, and evolution is talking about how life might have worked once it's already there. 

 

The debate is about whether creation is an acceptable view of origins (don't quote me on that).

 

A creation/evolution debate should focus on the interpretation of scientific evidence, which is not what he does. A logical creationist would address the holes in an evolutionists worldview. Kent Hovind and Jason Lisle both do the creation/evolution thing very well. I could read The Ultimate Proof of Creation once a month, and not become bored with it. It's fantastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PachiSusan

PachiSusan

Posted
Posted

The debate is about whether creation is an acceptable view of origins (don't quote me on that).

 

A creation/evolution debate should focus on the interpretation of scientific evidence, which is not what he does. A logical creationist would address the holes in an evolutionists worldview. Kent Hovind and Jason Lisle both do the creation/evolution thing very well. I could read The Ultimate Proof of Creation once a month, and not become bored with it. It's fantastic.

 

Hmmm, someone should probably tell my 3,999 million friends who think it's about the whole shebang, NOT the origins of life. They think Ken Hamm is going to wipe the floor with Bill Nye. 

 

I have no such beliefs about either man. No one is gonna win. 

 

I'm watching it on BIll Nye's site. I've seen all the ramp up from the Creationist side ever since it was announced...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slache

Slache

Posted
Posted

Hmmm, someone should probably tell my 3,999 million friends who think it's about the whole shebang, NOT the origins of life. They think Ken Hamm is going to wipe the floor with Bill Nye. 

 

I have no such beliefs about either man. No one is gonna win. 

 

I'm watching it on BIll Nye's site. I've seen all the ramp up from the Creationist side ever since it was announced...

 

 

 

The Two Science Guys

Bill Nye and Ken Ham, two men who love science, debate the question, “Is creation a viable model of origins in today’s modern scientific era?â€

 

http://www.answersingenesis.org/

 

"No one is gonna win" Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ecclecticmum

Ecclecticmum

Posted
Posted

I'm watching the debate and the pre & post talks (I'm currently watching whilst listening). But then again, I don't get to see any debates like this, or heard of any. Considering I constantly debate myself on similar subject (and my debates/talks with myself are long drawn out affairs) it would be nice to hear it from outside my head LOL.

 

All I have seen before this is generalized pages or news articles from either side, but no-one talking together from opposite sides.

 

Right now I believe in micro, but not macro evolution, and I believe somewhere near the beginning (whether that is old or young earth) God created us. The only thing that has not changed throughout my various forays, research and changing of mind is my faith in God. I believe in God. The rest is always up for discussion in my noisy mind. Funnily enough the few times I have wavered, my 8yo brought me back, she's a beautiful soul who has a child's innocence & love for God. It's amazing to see.

 

So I'm looking forward to the debate and perhaps it shall straighten out a few things on my own head, or make it more noisy, nevertheless, it shall prove interesting.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PachiSusan

PachiSusan

Posted
Posted

I'm watching the debate and the pre & post talks (I'm currently watching whilst listening). But then again, I don't get to see any debates like this, or heard of any. Considering I constantly debate myself on similar subject (and my debates/talks with myself are long drawn out affairs) it would be nice to hear it from outside my head LOL.

 

All I have seen before this is generalized pages or news articles from either side, but no-one talking together from opposite sides.

 

Right now I believe in micro, but not macro evolution, and I believe somewhere near the beginning (whether that is old or young earth) gods created us. The only thing that has not changed throughout my various forays, research and changing of mind is my faith in God. I believe in God. The rest is always up for discussion in my noisy mind. Funnily enough the few times I have wavered, my 8yo brought me back, she's a beautiful soul who has a child's innocence & love for God. It's amazing to see.

 

So I'm looking forward to the debate and perhaps it shall straighten out a few things on my own head, or make it more noisy, nevertheless, it shall prove interesting.

 

This is me too. I stopped watching the Pre show because it was all one sided. I can't watch it live, so I have to stay offline until I can watch it on a replay...forgot I am to take Melissa to the library for her weekly dose of public school kid socialization...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slache

Slache

Posted
Posted

Thanks. :) Good to know it is at least going to be talked about more apples to apples. 

 

 

Just because that's the original topic doesn't mean they won't end up arguing about the mating rituals of chickens. That being said, I'm still going to watch it. Probably with Kettle Corn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SunnyDays

SunnyDays

Posted
Posted

I have to uh, er...wash my hair.

 

Or do pretty much anything but watch a couple of egos in need of stylists and a reality check "debate".

 

I'll wait for the YouTube parodies. It won't be long.

Yeah, my hair is already washed... But we're going to watch the Biggest Loser from last week instead. Then the finale!!

 

I admit that as much as I don't really want to watch the whole thing, I'd love to see a five minute highlight reel with the most notable statements from either side!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tammi K

Tammi K

Posted
Posted

I admit that as much as I don't really want to watch the whole thing, I'd love to see a five minute highlight reel with the most notable statements from either side!

 

So far, nothing noteworthy on either side

...and they are already on the rebuttal section.

 

 

EDIT: I just turned it off. Too boring to hold my attention. No one is saying anything of value. I have other things to do............

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dbmamaz

dbmamaz

Posted
Posted

I'm watching it.  I'm big on evolution.  I found it interesting to hear some of Hamm's points which I hadnt heard before.  Not anything that would sway me, but its good to know what his angle is.

 

I felt like Hamm's first presentation (which I admittedly came in late too) was smooth and easy to follow and enjoyable.  I felt like Nye's original presentation was less organized, less smooth, and a little harder to follow.  Hamm was more like a motivational speaker and Nye was more like a science teacher, so I suspect the audience was glazing over.

I felt like the rebuttals were both fairly disorganized

 

I feel like Nye is doing better with the Q and A

Link to comment
Share on other sites
unfrumpable.

unfrumpable.

Posted
Posted

I have to uh, er...wash my hair.

 

Or do pretty much anything but watch a couple of egos in need of stylists and a reality check "debate".

 

I'll wait for the YouTube parodies. It won't be long.

 

I'd love to see an Epic Rap Battle of History of it. I even considered emailing Nice Peter and asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChocolateReignRemix

ChocolateReignRemix

Posted
Posted

The debate is about whether creation is an acceptable view of origins (don't quote me on that).

 

A creation/evolution debate should focus on the interpretation of scientific evidence, which is not what he does. A logical creationist would address the holes in an evolutionists worldview. Kent Hovind and Jason Lisle both do the creation/evolution thing very well. I could read The Ultimate Proof of Creation once a month, and not become bored with it. It's fantastic.

 

Wait...you take Kent Hovind seriously?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redsquirrel

redsquirrel

Posted
Posted

I am really glad I watched it. It was good. Well, I should say I listened to it because I was knitting and not looking at the computer screen at all.

 

I don't feel like either one was particularly 'egoistic' or doing it for attention.

 

And for people wondering what the point of it is, there is a very long standing tradition of people from opposing sides to come together to debate on important issues. I think that saying that either side expects to change minds is missing the point of debate. It gives both sides a chance to be seen side by side, to let them be evaluated in the presence of the other. I don't think of debates as things one wins or loses, really. Sometimes there is an obvious winner or loser, but mostly they are educational. That is a good thing. It is good for me to hear what Ken Ham says. If someone asks my why I disagree with him at least I can say that I have given him some of my time and attention and listened to his arguments. I am thinking about everything he said. I am not going to change my understanding and acceptance of science, but I am thinking about what he said. I also learned some new stuff from Bill Nye.

 

I liked it. I will have my older son watch it tomorrow if it is up on youtube or whatever

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slache

Slache

Posted
Posted

I don't feel like either one was particularly 'egoistic' or doing it for attention.

 

I agree. I think they're both generally concerned about the consequences of an incorrect worldview.

 

 

Kent Hovind? Apparently you have never read his *cough cough* "dissertation."

 

 

Nope. Thanks to you I just emailed it to my Kindle. For now, however, I'm getting a bath. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FaithManor

FaithManor

Posted
Posted

Kent Hovind is currently in a federal prison for 10 years on over 50 counts of funny accounting. I do not recommend holding him up as a spokesperson for creationism.

 

It's a draw. Neither one even adequately addressed the questions put to them, though at least they refrained from the usual ad hominem attacks. It is sad, but those two guys don't know how to debate, focus the topic, or exploit the poor debate skills of the other. So, in the end...each side clapped for their favorite guy like they were rooting for their pet sports team.

 

However, I don't think those individuals on either side of the question who really thought about these two particular individuals,  their character, their abilities, their skills, etc. believed it would be any different.

 

So, it was like a fender bender...just not enough incident to be worth slowing down and gawking imo, but I readily acknowledge that others may have found it to be more deep or well done than I did.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Iskra

Iskra

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I felt like they weren't really debating each other.  Each one came with his own speeches prepared in advance, and neither one bothered to truly answer the questions posed by the other.  I am glad they kept it civil and respectful, and that there were jokes thrown in here and there to lighten up any tensions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...