Quantcast

Bill Nye, Ken Ham debate – live TV?

Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2014/01/08 16:14:52
Let me know what channel that will be on!
YGTBK! You're not gonna put THAT on TV?!?
I have another idea.
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Details:

Yesterday, Answers in Genesis were selling subscriptions for a live Internet video stream.

But the interest exceeded not only their expectations but also, and more likely, the capacity of any possible server farm to serve them all.

So, putting it all together with other facts I could gather on the ground, it looks as though the Bill Nye and Ken Ham debate will be on live TV--what channel, I do not know. They were negotiating with someone, but wouldn't say who.


CONSERVATIVENEWSANDVIEWS.COM reports:
The Creation Museum might opt for live TV instead of an Internet video stream to carry the Bill Nye-Ken Ham debate before its sellout crowd.


tv internet video stream carry nye-ken ham debate sellout crowd

Read More: http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2014/01/08...

Add a comment above

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • gracious43 2014/01/11 07:08:15
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    gracious43
    +1
    I keep looking on AIG, but so far, no news.
  • Maria 2014/01/09 18:59:34
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    Maria
    +2
    I like to hear the debate and see why not...
  • Marek 2014/01/09 11:06:18
    I have another idea.
    Marek
    +2
    I will download a video after the debate and may watch it then.
  • Temlako... Marek 2014/01/09 11:23:51
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +3
    AiG were offering that video download, but right now, who knows? They were clearly overwhelmed.
  • Marek Temlako... 2014/01/09 11:28:09
    Marek
    +2
    I'll try to find it.
  • NightRyder 2014/01/09 00:09:49
    I have another idea.
    NightRyder
    +1
    By DYLAN LOVAN
    January 2, 2014 3:30 PM

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Bill Nye "The Science Guy" is set to visit Kentucky to debate evolution and biblical creation with the founder of the Creation Museum.

    Ken Ham wrote on his Facebook page Thursday that he will square off Feb. 4 with Nye, the former host of a popular science TV show for youths.

    The event is likely to attract plenty of attention in scientific and faith circles, as Nye is a high-profile advocate of science education and Ham is a respected leader among Christians who believe the Bible's origin story is a factual account of the Earth's beginnings.

    Ham had been hoping to attract the star of TV's "Bill Nye The Science Guy" to the northern Kentucky museum after Nye said in an online video last year that teaching creationism was bad for children. The video was viewed nearly 6 million times on YouTube.

    Actually, the Bible is more about Salvation than creation. The first eight chapters of the Bible is general dialogue describing the Creation of the earth and it's subsequent destruction due to Adam's Sin. However, the story shows that Adam did mark all of humanity through his original sin. But proving it was something God never intended, because he did not give enough detail to destroy faith, which is more importan...

























    By DYLAN LOVAN
    January 2, 2014 3:30 PM

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Bill Nye "The Science Guy" is set to visit Kentucky to debate evolution and biblical creation with the founder of the Creation Museum.

    Ken Ham wrote on his Facebook page Thursday that he will square off Feb. 4 with Nye, the former host of a popular science TV show for youths.

    The event is likely to attract plenty of attention in scientific and faith circles, as Nye is a high-profile advocate of science education and Ham is a respected leader among Christians who believe the Bible's origin story is a factual account of the Earth's beginnings.

    Ham had been hoping to attract the star of TV's "Bill Nye The Science Guy" to the northern Kentucky museum after Nye said in an online video last year that teaching creationism was bad for children. The video was viewed nearly 6 million times on YouTube.

    Actually, the Bible is more about Salvation than creation. The first eight chapters of the Bible is general dialogue describing the Creation of the earth and it's subsequent destruction due to Adam's Sin. However, the story shows that Adam did mark all of humanity through his original sin. But proving it was something God never intended, because he did not give enough detail to destroy faith, which is more important to Him than people knowing every detail of the Creation and the first destruction of the earth by water. However, the following is my general view of those ancient times;

    Natural or scientific observations cannot be reconciled with heathenism or even polytheism, for scientific observations demand the assumption of one universal law. Solomon expressed this law thus;

    "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done:" (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

    The actual language of science, as expressed by Professor Thiele, a leading Continental astronomer in the early 1900’s, states that;

    "Everything that exists, and everything that happens, exists or happens as a necessary consequence of a previous state of things. If a state of things is repeated in every detail, it must lead to exactly the same consequences. Any difference between the results of causes that are in part the same must be explainable by some difference in the other part of the causes."

    The law stated in the above words has been called the Law of Causality. It is used in Engineering and many other scientific occupations. It cannot be proved, but must be believed; in the same way as we believe the fundamental assumptions of religion, with which it is closely and intimately connected. The law of causality forces itself upon our belief. It may be denied in theory, but not in practice. Any person who denies it, will, if he is watchful enough, catch himself constantly asking himself, if no one else, why this has happened, and not that. But in that very question he bears witness to the law of causality. If we are consistently to deny the law of causality, we must repudiate all observation, and particularly all prediction based on past experience, as useless and misleading.

    There are other stories of the creation, but none as complete as that of Genesis. But problems with science will always remain in the mind of mankind. Why?

    Well, there are several reasons, but one is the fact that scientific reasoning and scientific observation can only hold good so long and in so far as the Law of Causality holds good. We must assume a pre-existing state of affairs which has given rise to the observed effect; we must assume that this observed effect is itself antecedent to a subsequent state of affairs. These facts also includes the Creationist. Their science nor any science can go back to the absolute beginnings of things, or forward to the absolute ends of things. It cannot reason about the way matter and energy came into existence, or how they might cease to exist; it cannot reason about time or space, as such, but only in the relations of these to phenomena that can be observed. It does not deal with things themselves, but only with the relations between things.

    Science indeed can only consider the universe as a great machine which is in “working order,” and it concerns itself with the relations which some parts of the machine bear to other parts, and with the laws and manner of the “working” of the machine in those parts. The relations of the various parts, one to the other, and the way in which they work together, may afford some idea of the design and purpose of the machine, but it can give no information as to how the material of which it is composed came into existence, nor as to the method by which it was originally constructed. This includes the “Cell”, the “Atom” and all the parts and counterparts that have been discovered through medical research. Like the Universe, the Body is a machine, though that may offend many, nevertheless, it is the truth. Once started, the machine comes under the scrutiny of science, but the actual starting lies outside its scope. And here we find a great difference between the science of God, and the science of man. God has the far greater power of understanding that man cannot comprehend, because God knows how to perform cosmic scientific creation as easily as folding a piece of material (Hebrews 1:12)

    Men therefore cannot find out for themselves how the worlds were originally made, how the worlds were first moved, or how the spirit of man was first formed within him; and this, not merely because these beginnings of things are outside his experience, but also because beginnings, as such, must lie outside the law by which he reasons. By no process of research, therefore, could man find out for himself the facts that are stated in the first chapter of Genesis. They have been revealed, but science cannot inquire into them for the purpose of checking their accuracy; it must accept them, as it accepts the fundamental law that governs its own working, mainly through faith.

    Nevertheless, this is what has been revealed to man; that the heaven and the earth were not self-existent from all eternity, but were in their first beginning created by God. As the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (11:3) expresses it: “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” And a further fact was revealed that man could not have found out for himself; is that this creation was made and finished in six acts, comprised in what the narrative denominates “days.” It has not been revealed whether the duration of these “days” can be expressed in any astronomical units of time as man understands it.

    Since under these conditions science can afford no information, it is not to be wondered at that the hypotheses that have been framed from time to time to “explain” the first chapter of Genesis, or to express it in scientific terms, are not wholly satisfactory. At one time the chapter was interpreted to mean that the entire universe was called into existence about 6,000 years ago, in six days of twenty-four hours each. Later it was recognized that both geology and astronomy seemed to indicate the existence of matter for untold millions of years instead of some six thousand. It was then pointed out that, so far as the narrative was concerned, there was more than likely a period of duration that is impossible for man to examine between its first verse and its fourth; and some have suggested that the six days of creation were six days of twenty-four hours each, in which, after some great cataclysm of time between each ended 6,000 years ago, in which God shaped the face of the earth and replenished it for the habitation of man, the preceding geological ages being left entirely unnoticed. However, we have some that say man was in parts of the world more than 6,000 years ago.

    Some writers have confined the cataclysm and renewal to a small portion of the earth’s surface; to “Eden,” and its neighborhood. Other commentators have laid stress on the truth revealed in Scripture that “one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day,” (2 Peter 3:8/Psalm 90:4) and have urged the argument that the six days of creation were really vast periods of time, during which the earth’s geological changes and the evolution of its varied forms of life were running their course. Others, again, have urged that the six days of creation were six literal days, but instead of being consecutive were, as stated above, separated by long ages. And yet again, as no man was present during the creation period, save Adam, it has been suggested that the Divine revelation of it was given to Moses in seven successive visions or dreams, which constituted the “six days” in which the chief facts of creation were set forth, and a seventh day on which God rested. All the above is ASSUMPTINS !

    So, until we can answer the above questions with facts instead of assumptions, we will never be able to completely understand the global warming and cooling that brings Ice ages, any more than we can understand the ways of God (Isaiah 55:8-9). All I can say with any known certainty is that God never changes (Malachi 3:6), but man is always chasing Change.
    (more)
  • doofiegirl BTO-t- BCRA-F ~... 2014/01/08 23:49:18
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    doofiegirl  BTO-t- BCRA-F ~PWCM~
    +2
    I don't watch much TV, but this might be interesting.
  • joshBigBoss 2014/01/08 20:25:55
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    joshBigBoss
    +2
    Bill Nye is not that good at debate, and I don't know who Ken Ham is, but I like listening to these kinds of debates. I think John Lennox is one of the best debaters for the philosophical side of creation, but there were a few other guys I enjoyed listening to.
    The creationists don't always win in my view even though I am rooting for them. This would be more interesting to me than a basketball or football game.
  • Temlako... joshBig... 2014/01/08 21:05:53
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +2
    Ken Ham is the head of Answers in Genesis, and the brains behind the Creation Museum. I went out there about five years and nine months ago.
  • joshBig... Temlako... 2014/01/08 21:22:59
    joshBigBoss
    +2
    He should be well equipped for the task then. I have seen a few debates where Christian brothers go in with all the zeal in the world but non of the knowledge needed to succeed, so I'm glad this guy knows what he's up against.
  • Temlako... joshBig... 2014/01/08 21:26:33
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +2
    Oh, he knows. He and Bill Nye know each other well. This is their first time to debate in person, that's all.



  • david abe 2014/01/08 20:14:04
    I have another idea.
    david abe
    I would rather see the SNL satire.
  • Death The Kid 2014/01/08 18:41:52
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    Death The Kid
    +1
    I think it'll be like watching a train wreck. Poor Ken Ham. You can't use dogma in a debate.
  • Temlako... Death T... 2014/01/08 21:06:32
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +1
    Well, tell that to Ben Nye. He's the one who takes it as "given" that everything self-assembled four and a half billion years ago.
  • Death T... Temlako... 2014/01/08 23:11:06
    Death The Kid
    At some point SOMETHING had to of self assembled, or to have simply been. Whether that is a creator or a universe by happenstance.
  • Temlako... Death T... 2014/01/09 01:05:44
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +1
    God is the First Cause of everything.
  • Death T... Temlako... 2014/01/09 17:32:26
    Death The Kid
    +1
    Agree to disagree. n_n
  • Marek Death T... 2014/01/09 11:18:20
    Marek
    +2
    Decades ago I sort of debated existence of God with the priest. I asked him to prove that God exists. It made for very interesting and quite short debate.
  • Death T... Marek 2014/01/09 17:36:51
    Death The Kid
    Yeah? Do tell.
  • Marek Death T... 2014/01/09 21:23:55
    Marek
    +1
    The priest got angry then told me I am supposed to believe That is all there was to it.
  • gracious43 Marek 2014/01/11 07:06:27
    gracious43
    +2
    Good grief!
  • gracious43 Marek 2014/01/11 07:06:00
    gracious43
    +2
    This debate should be excellent, but it doesn't prove or disprove the existence of God. The evidence of God comes from the reliability and historical accuracy of scripture. I could be biased, but I don't think so.
  • rand 2014/01/08 18:19:11
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    rand
    +1
    I enjoy watching people offer convoluted rationalizations to justify impossible Biblical dogma. Will it change any minds? Nope. Fearful people cling to their delusions.
  • Temlako... rand 2014/01/08 21:07:23
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +1
    I enjoy watching people offer convoluted rationalizations to justify impossible...naturalistic dogma. Will it change any minds? Hopefully some. But rebellious people will cling to their self-delusions.
  • Elleryqueen 2014/01/08 17:14:08
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    Elleryqueen
    +2
    Let me know where/when please.
  • Old Guy 2014/01/08 17:09:07
    I have another idea.
    Old Guy
  • Cognito22 2014/01/08 16:56:22
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    Cognito22
    +2
    Yes, please keep me updated.
  • Dwight PWCM 2014/01/08 16:41:38
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    Dwight PWCM
    +2
    Definitely want to see that debate.
  • david abe Dwight ... 2014/01/08 20:21:49
    david abe
    Do you also enjoy cockroach races?
  • Dwight ... david abe 2014/01/08 20:32:29
    Dwight PWCM
    +3
    I enjoy killing them.
  • david abe Dwight ... 2014/01/09 15:35:08
    david abe
    The problem is it is illegal to do that to Bill Nye and Ken Ham.
  • Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2014/01/08 16:15:56
    Let me know what channel that will be on!
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +2
    Not to worry. I *will* let you know what channel that will be on.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/10/21 20:19:24

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals