Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Spontaneous Thoughts From the Ham Versus Nye Showdown Throwdown

In Ken's intro, he noted the subliminal contrast of 'scientists' vs 'creationists,' as if they are mutually exclusive. This is a branding effort by secularists to try to exclude creationist views from consideration by definition, but the words are misleading.

In Bill Nye's intro: ... well at least Nye bit the bait, so Ken will get to drive home his point and not be distracted from it. 

"innovation" -- oh now he's making that argument again. ignoring Ken's point that creationism isn't exclusive to 'science'

Ken's longer presentation: 

how do you, Nye, account for laws of nature and logic

difference between what you observe and what you interpret about the past. coconino-burgess boundary as an example

Nye, can you name tech that could only be developed with belief in molecules-to-man evolution?

Ken uses a classical Scientific Method approach, with the idea of disproving hypotheses

main points
'after their kind' --
the word "evolution" has been hijacked too, via 'baitand-switch' to mean both small changes and common descent from a primordial lifeform. You're "baited" with the first example, and then "switched" to the second use of the term, which is a different phenomenon altogether

killer jugular--evolution is teaching religion (naturalism) in schools
jugular 2: evolution justified racism in biology textbooks

connects belief to show it's Biblically supported and that Genesis is "foundational to all Christian doctrine"

the battle is really about authority, is it man or God? truth...---> morals

included Gospel


he assumed the limestone had to be formed aftr the Flood. He'f failing to understand the catastrophe angle

Bill Nye claimed that a layer of snow and ice had to form in Ant/Arctic ice cores at the rate of one per year. My idea: just 170 day night cycles of windblown snow. The idea is that the oxygen isotope ratios are different in each layer. Surely they can be different from day to day, why not?

evolutionists use the "fossils rarely form" excuse to justify lack of transitional forms, even! (land bridge) Nye had asked where the fossils were of the animals that migrated to Australia from the middle east.

he's not getting the "kind" thing.... he's equivocating with species again

lake Missoula and sex are arguments for Creation...he doesn't seem to get that.

and many arguments from incredulity

distant starlight tripe


horizon problem.

No comments:

Post a Comment