(Hot-topic of the year): Ken Ham vs Bill Nye.
- Thread starter Smurfboy
- Start date
Latest update: Looks like the tickets are sold within two minutes. Very fast. And it appears that many people who do not support AiG are making some false accusation against Ken Ham. What a shame.
AiG Blog: http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/b...=Feed:+KenHam+(Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham)
AiG Blog: http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/b...=Feed:+KenHam+(Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham)
Small update: FREE Live video! 
I will definitely watch online for sure. I probably will check out Youtube as well.
*Live Streaming FREE on Feb. 4 at 7 PM ET
*http://debatelive.org/
*Two-and-a-half-hour live stream
I will definitely watch online for sure. I probably will check out Youtube as well.*Live Streaming FREE on Feb. 4 at 7 PM ET
*http://debatelive.org/
*Two-and-a-half-hour live stream
You can find the only blog saying anything about this by googling the quote in Ham's article.
http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2014/01/06/aig-says-ham-nye-debate-tickets-all-sold-out/
There is absolutely no conspiracy presented that they have some technology to filter atheists, or that identification cards will let them tell.
Typical persecution complex BS. The linked blog makes a kind of dumb statement.. but it's just one dude.
Where are all of these other blogs presenting such conspiracies?
The fact that this "debate" is at the Creation Museum in buttfunk Kentucky ensures who most of the audience will be, you don't need a conspiracy to predict most people there will be creationists.
So in short:
Nobody presented any conspiracy theory that they possessed some technology to filter atheists, Ken Ham is a liar.
Less intelligence = more religious.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...201401/more-knowledge-less-belief-in-religion
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...201401/more-knowledge-less-belief-in-religion
It sounds like you're really angry at something.
Bill Nye has agreed to get involve with Ken Ham for debate event. Ken did made an offer to him couple of years ago. And now this is finally happening. Ken Ham has stated couple of times that the debate event is open to everyone, whether they be Evolutionists/secularists or Creationists. It's just that evolutionists (or a group of people who support evolutionists) made false statement about Ken invited-only to believers/creationists. The reason Ken Ham has to force people to show ID is because he tries to prevent people from buying ticket and then sell for $500 to $1,000 on Ebay/Craiglist sites. I've seen people doing like that before. Ken did explained this himself (in case anyone didn't hear it):
It sounds like you're really angry at something.
Angry? No. It sounds like you are ignoring my post and picking out words for your benefit.
Ken Ham is a liar, nobody ever presented the conspiracy theories he has in his blog. He is being condescending and dishonest.
The blogger was also condescending, but wasn't dishonest, and didn't make the accusations Ken Ham is accusing him of, indirectly.. because Ken Ham doesn't even have enough respect to link or actually quote people. Because if he actually linked to the article, he couldn't make things up about it.
Except it was just one blogger that he quoted, and he didn't make the claims in Ken Ham's blog. If there are these "groups of evolutionists" making false claims, where are they?
The blogger made a stupid comment about the ID checking, hence why I said the blogger made a stupid comment in his post.
The entirety of the rest of Ken Ham's condescending blog is totally unfounded however. He condescendingly invents conspiracy theories that nobody made up.
Truthfully, no, I did not ignore all of words you've said. It's just that the quotes I've pulled by you are "louder" than others. Experiences tell me that any time a person is calling names or say things such as "stupid", "dumb", etc. is usually the one who upsets about something. I can clearly see that myself.
He does link to other sites quite a few time if you actually take the time to dig through many of his older blogs. I've been following him for more than 4 years and he does always provide entire sites/blogs whenever he is discussing with other people about issues. Before calling him a liar, I suggest you to dig a bit deeper (including his facebook page, letters from Answers In Genesis site, emails, and such.). In fact, they just discussed about people having some few issues with the event of Bill Vs Ken Ham. Please do yourself a favor and read this link:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2014/01/24/feedback-answering-debate-conjectures
The only thing I called dumb was a statement by the atheist blogger Ham is anonymously mentioning. That isn't calling anyone a name, it was calling a statement dumb, because it was.
There's nothing odd about checking ID's, which was the only thing the blogger suggested was suspect.. the blogger said NOTHING about his web site having a magical atheist filter, or that they'd be able to tell someone was atheist from an ID... the blogger simply suggested Ham probably had a guest list full of supporters, and didn't sell many tickets. A lame suggestion, but nothing to do with most of what Ham then rants about.
What does 4 years of blogs that may or may not have links have to do with the blog I am talking about? The one where he sarcastically rants about strawmen atheist bloggers, and then links to a blog that doesn't say 90% of what he's claiming is being said?
And how would only reading Ken Ham's blog teach you that he's not a liar Smurfboy?
Look at you repeating Ken Ham's unverified claim:
Smurfboy said:
Who are these many people?
The ONE blogger he quotes, who did say something dumb, didn't make any false accusations. He suggested a conspiracy.
Ken Ham then twisted that into several elaborate alleged conspiracies. Rather rudely and sarcasitcally.
BunzHoles,
I'm not exactly sure what you mean that Ken said something that caused you to disagree with something? Do you mind provide a link/quote of what he said? I want to make sure I understand very clearly and that we are on the same page.
I cannot stress enough that this is not the first time Ken has been running into many people who strongly disagree with him. It's been like this for many years, which is why I stated in my previous post that I urge anyone to take the time to go through his older blogs and get the idea what kind of problems Ken is facing with every single day. People attack Ken all the time. The answer to your question "Who are these many people" is that they're actually everywhere. On the news, on Facebook page, on TV, rumors, emails, etc. They're literally everywhere. Impossible to miss.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean that Ken said something that caused you to disagree with something? Do you mind provide a link/quote of what he said? I want to make sure I understand very clearly and that we are on the same page.
I cannot stress enough that this is not the first time Ken has been running into many people who strongly disagree with him. It's been like this for many years, which is why I stated in my previous post that I urge anyone to take the time to go through his older blogs and get the idea what kind of problems Ken is facing with every single day. People attack Ken all the time. The answer to your question "Who are these many people" is that they're actually everywhere. On the news, on Facebook page, on TV, rumors, emails, etc. They're literally everywhere. Impossible to miss.
It bothers me that Nye would give that douche nozzle the time of day. On the one hand we have physical evidence that everyone can experiment with. On the other hand you'll just have to take my word for it that there's an invisible guy floating around out there who made all of this. Creationism would be a funnier joke if there weren't ignorant people willing to treat it like a hard fact.
I'm actually interested in hearing it just to see how he tries to disprove whatever points Nye brings up.
I could see that point of view but Christians quote mine the s*** out of scientists in order to pretend that there are people who agree with their stories. This will be no different. Nye will say something, that will be taken out of context, and Christian ministries will print the s*** out of it as proof that "scientists agree with creationism".
In addition to CNN correspondent Tom Foreman who will moderate the debate, over 70 credentialed media will be in attendance, such as ABC, NBC, Scientific American magazine, Sydney Morning Herald (Australia), Al Jazeera, The New Yorker, etc
Just to clarify a bit, there are several people that work at AiG (AnswersInGenesis.org) that are actually scientists. They strongly disagreed with what Evolutionists teach, based on Historical Science (not Observational Science). See my #17 post of this thread for further explanation on the meaning of the word Science. Historical Science is the major issue between Creationists and Evolutionists. I'm sure Ken Ham, himself, will explain clear in couple of hours from now on live debate. Be sure to check it out.
Cute PowerPoint presentation, but hardly an argument against intelligent design. It's as if he didn't even bother hearing the arguments in favor of intelligent design.
Looks like 8:25 will have a little back and forth. I just feel dirty watching this. Like how I feel after getting McDonalds or something.
