Bill Nye the science guy, debated Ken Ham, the founder of Kentucky's creation museum the other night. Both sides say they won the debate. While I admire Bill Nye for taking on a creationist in a public forum, I also think it was kind of pointless. This sums up my feelings.
While Nye believes that the earth was created billions of years ago, Ham believes God created the earth 6,000 years ago. Simply put, Ken Ham is a zealot. Nye, who I regard as a extremely smart man, is capable of changing his mind, however, a zealot such as Ham is someone who refuses to change his mind and won't change the subject.
Bill Nye brought up Geology, Astronomy, even the fossil record and the Grand Canyon. He brought facts and empirical evidence.
Ken Ham purposely put blinders on. Every fact, every point Bill Nye made, was countered with the equivalent of putting fingers in his ear and saying, 'la-la-la, I can't hear you, the bible says so, la-la-la. This is where you lose me. Like any reasonable man, I've listened to both sides of the argument. The more I hear from scientists who are out there discovering our world, the more it makes sense. By telling me it's in the Bible, doesn't end the matter. Even as a kid, I couldn't reconcile myself to accepting 'because the Bible says so' . I change my mind to fit the evidence, I don't change the evidence to suit my theories.
It's a long debate, just shy of two hours, and while I think Bill Nye did something he felt he needed to do, there was no way he was going to change Ham's mind. My hope is people watching the debate see how ridiculous the young earth argument is.
Here are the highlights from NPR.
As I watched, I believe Bill Nye had a trick up his sleeve. By engaging in this debate (and keeping his cool), he made Ham and his whole creationist movement look stupid.
At the end of the debate, Nye was asked if there was anything that would make him change his mind. Bill's immediate response was; 'evidence'. When asked the same question, Ham replied; 'Nothing.'
The very definition of a zealot.
Does this mean I don't believe in God? Perhaps not. As I've stated before, we are not the highest rung on the evolutionary ladder. I like the concept of a superior being, I don't agree with the Christian interpretation. What pope Francis is doing is phenomenal in my opinion. I'm a big fan, and that's something you don't get me to admit very often.
I suppose what I like best about science is this: Lie, deny, or erase the evidence, but that doesn't change the facts.
Like they say in that Mother Jones article I linked: perhaps this will upset the status quo and get us back on track as critical thinkers. At the very least, it made Ken Ham look like the charlatan he is.
While Nye believes that the earth was created billions of years ago, Ham believes God created the earth 6,000 years ago. Simply put, Ken Ham is a zealot. Nye, who I regard as a extremely smart man, is capable of changing his mind, however, a zealot such as Ham is someone who refuses to change his mind and won't change the subject.
Bill Nye brought up Geology, Astronomy, even the fossil record and the Grand Canyon. He brought facts and empirical evidence.
Ken Ham purposely put blinders on. Every fact, every point Bill Nye made, was countered with the equivalent of putting fingers in his ear and saying, 'la-la-la, I can't hear you, the bible says so, la-la-la. This is where you lose me. Like any reasonable man, I've listened to both sides of the argument. The more I hear from scientists who are out there discovering our world, the more it makes sense. By telling me it's in the Bible, doesn't end the matter. Even as a kid, I couldn't reconcile myself to accepting 'because the Bible says so' . I change my mind to fit the evidence, I don't change the evidence to suit my theories.
It's a long debate, just shy of two hours, and while I think Bill Nye did something he felt he needed to do, there was no way he was going to change Ham's mind. My hope is people watching the debate see how ridiculous the young earth argument is.
Here are the highlights from NPR.
As I watched, I believe Bill Nye had a trick up his sleeve. By engaging in this debate (and keeping his cool), he made Ham and his whole creationist movement look stupid.
At the end of the debate, Nye was asked if there was anything that would make him change his mind. Bill's immediate response was; 'evidence'. When asked the same question, Ham replied; 'Nothing.'
The very definition of a zealot.
Does this mean I don't believe in God? Perhaps not. As I've stated before, we are not the highest rung on the evolutionary ladder. I like the concept of a superior being, I don't agree with the Christian interpretation. What pope Francis is doing is phenomenal in my opinion. I'm a big fan, and that's something you don't get me to admit very often.
I suppose what I like best about science is this: Lie, deny, or erase the evidence, but that doesn't change the facts.
Like they say in that Mother Jones article I linked: perhaps this will upset the status quo and get us back on track as critical thinkers. At the very least, it made Ken Ham look like the charlatan he is.
2 comments:
Very intelligent and well written. While I didn't watch or listen to the actual debate, I too believe that Bill Nye is an intelligent man and we can't ignore the empirical evidence surrounding the evolution theory. BTW, Where did you get the pigeon picture and how can it be shared? I thought it was extremely funny. - Karin Noel Magnuson
The Pigeon meme I found on Facebook. It was one of the many feeds that I get, so I'm not 100% sure where it came from. When I do see a picture I like, I try and credit the source. Feel free to share the picture. That is the blessing and the curse of the internet. We have vast and fast dissemination of information, but the original creator of the idea gets lost in the shuffle.
Post a Comment