Comments on: Bill Nye talks about the upcoming debate

By: Dale

Dale — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 00:20:06 +0000

“I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father, but by Me.” …Jesus (John 14:6)

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 05 Feb 2014 15:15:18 +0000

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/02/05/who-won-the-bill-nye-ken-ham-debate-bill-nye/

By: Joe

Joe — Mon, 03 Feb 2014 19:08:55 +0000

I hope Nye brings his riding boots as he’s in for a Gish gallop. Can’t teach all of Bio 1 in one sitting. Also, it’s difficult to retort when people say things that are so mind blowingly wrong they’re not even wrong…

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 22:49:08 +0000

Annette I don’t think he says that.

By: Annette

Annette — Sun, 02 Feb 2014 21:36:37 +0000

Come on Bill! You can be science literate and a Christian!!! It is 2014…..wow what a cop out he is.

By: David

David — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 22:30:45 +0000

@Bryan @Jim I have to agree with Bryan and Jim. Based on the facts available Ken Ham with win this debate. It is area of expertise and life’s work. He knows his bible and has refuted or called into question much of evolution’s subject matter.
Bill Nye trained as a mechanical engineer ( I am one too!) Watching the video Bill Nye comes across as naive as to what approaches him. Furthermore, evolutionist’s track record is pretty poor for wins in this type of a debate. It seems pride overtakes sober analysis when being drawn into these things. Bill may prove me wrong but it does not look good.
Many of Ken Ham’s contemporaries and colleges have debated evolutionists and have either won the debate or watched the evolutionist self-destruct on the stage. A classic case is Ian Plimer (an Australian as I am) who embarrassed himself on stage. Some evolutionists think he may have made a good point but his behavior was so overbearing it was drowned out.
Good luck to both Bill and Ken.

By: Marco

Marco — Sat, 11 Jan 2014 07:35:05 +0000

When people invoke the seond law of thermodynamics to argue against the organisation of the universe, you know they don’t understand the second law of thermodynamics.

I always ask those people why the formation of micelles (‘aggregates’ of surfactant molecules) is usually endothermic, meaning that this organisation is actually causing an increase in disorder. Ordering causing disordering according to the energy flows. Well, Jim, care to show us you actually *do* understand the second law of thermodynamics.

One also wonders what is so “beautiful” about our universe, and why it would not be “beautiful” if it were to look different?

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sat, 11 Jan 2014 04:12:57 +0000

Jim, what does the origin of the universe have to do with evolution? What are you even talking about?

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 11 Jan 2014 03:34:26 +0000

Ken Ham will easily win the debate simply because evolution does not make any sense and provides no bases or motivation for learning–unless of course you fell compelled to believe that nothing, at some point in the distant past, for no reason became matter, energy, light, space, and time at precisely the same moment. The matter part then self combusted itself with such force that it spread itself though out the now known universe and again self organized itself (defying the 2nd Law of Thermo dynamics) to become the extremely beautiful and complex universe we observe today.

The secular evolutionist high priests will respond with holier-than-thou ridicule and will censor the debate results from as many people as possible. They will then devout all their attention to how they can prevent the free exchange of ideas in the future with the intent of minimizing as much future exposure as possible.

Actually, the aftermath will be virtually identical the Chief Priests response to the simple message of Jesus Christ when He walked the shores of the Sea of Galilee.

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 11 Jan 2014 00:59:21 +0000

Learning and engineering is a meaningful and purposeful. Evolution is random and purposeless. Learning and evolution have nothing in common.