Debate!

[Ungatt Trunn]

I haven't gotten to see it yet.

So, did any one of them "win" the debate?

You have to see it! None of them really won the debate though they both did a pretty good job. In my opinion, Ken Ham did better. If you'd like to know my thoughts on Bill Nye, Pm me.

I'm watching the debate right now...while Bill Nye seems to make logical sense, he doesn't really seem to have any rock-solid foundation to work on. Also, it seems like he tried to disprove events and such that support the Creationism belief, not the belief itself, which is one of the weaker spots of his debate. Ken Ham took on the main Evelutionary ideas, not just paticular events supporting it. Butthey both still did pretty good.

NOTE: I don't want to start any hot argument or debate here. These are just my opinions on the debate and the ideas expressed in it.

[Rusvul]

Hmm.  However, Ken Ham's main foundation was the Bible, and he didn't reinforce it's validity at all. But then he wasn't asked, which would have been a flaw in Bill Nye's debate...

[Tam and Martin]

I haven't gotten to see it yet.

So, did any one of them "win" the debate?

You have to see it! None of them really won the debate though they both did a pretty good job. In my opinion, Ken Ham did better. If you'd like to know my thoughts on Bill Nye, Pm me.

I'm watching the debate right now...while Bill Nye seems to make logical sense, he doesn't really seem to have any rock-solid foundation to work on. Also, it seems like he tried to disprove events and such that support the Creationism belief, not the belief itself, which is one of the weaker spots of his debate. Ken Ham took on the main Evelutionary ideas, not just paticular events supporting it. Butthey both still did pretty good.

NOTE: I don't want to start any hot argument or debate here. These are just my opinions on the debate and the ideas expressed in it.

I noticed that also. He didn't seem to have any foundation or a place where he could base his research off of.

[The Shade]

I watched a bit of it, interesting how both arguments are built, although I was agreeing with Ham most of the time, me being christian and all.

Hmm.  However, Ken Ham's main foundation was the Bible, and he didn't reinforce it's validity at all. But then he wasn't asked, which would have been a flaw in Bill Nye's debate...

True, true. The deciding factor is wether you believe the Bible (or Scripture, as I call it) is true or not. That's what it all comes down to.

[Rusvul]

I haven't gotten to see it yet.

So, did any one of them "win" the debate?

You have to see it! None of them really won the debate though they both did a pretty good job. In my opinion, Ken Ham did better. If you'd like to know my thoughts on Bill Nye, Pm me.

I'm watching the debate right now...while Bill Nye seems to make logical sense, he doesn't really seem to have any rock-solid foundation to work on. Also, it seems like he tried to disprove events and such that support the Creationism belief, not the belief itself, which is one of the weaker spots of his debate. Ken Ham took on the main Evelutionary ideas, not just paticular events supporting it. Butthey both still did pretty good.

NOTE: I don't want to start any hot argument or debate here. These are just my opinions on the debate and the ideas expressed in it.

I noticed that also. He didn't seem to have any foundation or a place where he could base his research off of.

How so? His evidence was mostly self-sufficient. For example, the bit about the ice, or the Ark. It pretty much spoke for itself- Sort of just assisted his point. His point being, as he put it, that 'Ken Ham's creation model is not a viable...' Um, however that sentence ended.

Just my opinion, of course.

[The Skarzs]

True, true. The deciding factor is wether you believe the Bible (or Scripture, as I call it) is true or not. That's what it all comes down to.

It all comes down to a matter of faith.

[Rusvul]

Faith... Which in my opinion, doesn't mix well with science. To quote me, "Faith and science don't conflict unless you try to make one the other"
My opinion, of course.

[MeadowR]

My opinion won't change, one side just can't truly back up its arguments with any real logic. However I am still rather intrigued to watch this as it's had a lot of notice.

[Tam and Martin]

My opinion won't change, one side just can't truly back up its arguments with any real logic. However I am still rather intrigued to watch this as it's had a lot of notice.

And what is your opinion if you don't mind me asking?

[Ungatt Trunn]

Just reminding everybody to be carful...we don't want any fight to break out...

[HeadInAnotherGalaxy]

...Mainly becauze ve dinnae 'ave enough piez tae gae around......

[Leatho Shellhound]

If any one would like to know some of my thoughts on things like the ice build up, or any other Questions you might have please feel free to send me a PM.

[Tam and Martin]

If any one would like to know some of my thoughts on things like the ice build up, or any other Questions you might have please feel free to send me a PM.

I might Pm you then...

[The Shade]

We're not allowed to debate in this actual thread are we?

[Rusvul]

We're not allowed to debate in this actual thread are we?

It's not quite that we absolutely cannot debate, but if it starts to even slightly go sour, the Mods are likely to lock it.