by mind blown 41 Replies latest watchtower bible
The gist of Ham's arguement -
I know this scientist (quotes long list of qualifications) and he goes to church - so there !
"You weren't there so you don't know" .... closely followed by "but we can know because there's a book that was written" (forgetting the book was also written when we weren't there so how does he know it is right)
Good Afternoon Angharad!..
.
......................Using Hams own Reasoning..
If Ham wasn`t there,how does he know the Bible is right?..
.
................................You nailed it..
............................
............................................................
...OUTLAW
I could not pay attention. There are enough debates on this forum. I am so sick of creation vs. evolution all the time. There is never any resolution nor will there be any resolution. School boards, a conservative group, decided that evolution, not creation, would be taught i n science class. We were taught evolution many decades ago.
Human ignorance is an indisputable fact, anyone who denies that is a provable idiot or is intellectually dishonest, subsided in their own ignorance.
Ham used scientists with PhDs to show well these guys are well educated in science so that proves and
supports the bible is right in what it says.
Unfortunately those people who he selectively pointed out who had Phds on one or
two subjects of scientific knowledge and probably don't have much acquired knowledge of ancient mythological
beliefs. (theology)
They don't have is a broad spectrum of the many known applied sciences, such astrophysics, geology,
paleontology, biology ... etc.
These sciences are based on evidence NOT theoretical story telling out of ancient human history .
.
People with Phds can be very brilliant intelligent people but they have notably focused their
knowledge on one specific study, which makes them quite knowledgeable on that
one specific study alone by itself.
Yeah, Finkelstein, the old saying is that the smarter someone is, the more facile they are at coming up with elaborate excuses to support their beliefs. Rings pretty true, IME.
That said, I was surprised to learn that Bill Nye holds a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering from Cornell, so he's not a life sciences guy (the rates of grads who believe in evolution are typically higher in the life sciences than in the physical sciences, since evolution is more-directly related to the life sciences (like biology); engineers are grouped into the physical sciences, and they don't get exposed to principles of evolution in more than a general biology course, since it's not relevant to engineering work).
Of course, Bill obviously made up for his lack of exposure to biology and geology in his undergrad studies via the 'Science Guy' gig he did for years. In contrast, Ken Ham earned a bachelor's in environmental science. We had a Xian creationist in my upper-division level course on evolution (which you don't formally take until your Junior year as a bio major, since you need tons of prerequisites in order for it to make any sense), and it was interesting to watch the guy struggle with examining evidence which he really didn't want to see, since he didn't want to believe evolution was true. Defo cognitive blinders on....
Here's evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne's take on the debate:
Great quote from Coyne...
"Ham’s brain has been so deeply marinated in his faith that that organ has simply become impermeable to facts."
cognitive blinders on....
Boy you've got that right adamah
I don't know how many times I witnessed that from JWS who were presented with information on evolution
in biology or geology. Where is their own investigative query of possibility or probability ?
Answer = its been intensionally blocked by religious indoctrination, thanks to religionists
Doug I don't think you understood what I said. My point was that Ham acknowledged that many if not most christians (JW's included for sure), believe in the age of the earth being for billions of years and a non literal rendering of Genesis.
His arguement was that for the bible to be accurate, you HAD to believe the earth was 6000 years old.
I think that is an interesting reasoning point. If the bible does not allow for anything other than a young earth view.....it simply has even more to answer for.
See my point now?
BOTR said- I could not pay attention. There are enough debates on this forum. I am so sick of creation vs. evolution all the time. There is never any resolution nor will there be any resolution. School boards, a conservative group, decided that evolution, not creation, would be taught in science class. We were taught evolution many decades ago.
I wouldn't rest on those laurels just yet (unless you're in a liberal State like NY), since that's kinda the point: science education in the US is under attack in Bible Belt States, where a Xian governor can 'stack the deck' by appointing "conservative" Bible-believing creationists on the State Education Board so they can influence the curricula of science education, including the choice of textbooks.
It's an ongoing challenge, and some Xians would "turn back the clock" by appealing to the average citizen's sense of fairness (i.e. equal time), saying intelligent design deserves equal consideration with evolution.
That's exactly what was so problematic with the debate, since even by agreeing to participate, Nye was legitimizing Ham's YEC creationist views. In many viewers minds, the debate supports a false equivalency merely by taking place, by legitimizing creationism as worthy of public discussion. The tacit message is that it would be OK to teach BOTH, to "teach the controversy".
However, there is NO controversy within the scientific community: intelligent design IS religious teaching, only wearing a scientist's lab-coat.
It's an insidious threat, and considering that some States currently ARE teaching creationism, it would likely spread to others, if types like Ham had their way....
From the article:
According to Gallup, nearly half of the country rejects evolution. Forty-Six percent of Americans believe humans were created in their present form, by God, in the last 10,000 years. Over the past 30 years, belief in creationism has remained relatively stable, despite creationism's repeated court losses.
In schools across America, creationism remains a problem. According to a report in Science magazine (pdf), 13% of public school biology teachers are teaching creationism instead of evolution and another 60% are avoiding endorsing either.
Ham should have been honest and said creationism comes from human ignorance told through ancient mythology.
.
Of course the difference between the two ideologies is established upon the fact that one is set and created out of human
ignorance of the world the ancients lived in 2000 years ago and the other made from continuing evidential discoveries
through scientific investigation from that era of human history, right up to are own time.
