I just watched this thing and hit pause when I had to hammer something down on paper
Using the time on this specific video which still has like 13-14 mins of pre-broadcast waiting screen in it.
Pause @ 21.13
Oh fuck… the face palm begins… this is going to be a bumpy ride. At least he didn’t deny all science which is actually progressive for a lot of creationists watching… but now creating the first gap (observational vs historical) which I can definitely see him leading to the denying of archeological and DNA validity. Saying we weren’t there and we can’t observe that. Already the logic/evidence denying is wall starting to be built brick by brick… lets see what he does.
Bill calls him out immediately on the historical/observational distinction that Ken created. Starting to think that creationism is less applicable to an origin story than it is to the practice of coming up with creative ways of creating non-existent data gaps.
Great meet these other great science minds who invented stuff. SEE SEE, there’s people that think like me! Yes Ken, we already know there’s people that think like you… that’s the point of this debate. More people subscribing to a belief system does not mean that that belief system is more inherently valid in and of itself in the absence of data enabling that belief system.
Pause @ 30.24
Astronomer saying that there is nothing that contradicts creationism in space. Well of course! The evidence for evolution is on the planet Earth… fossils… DNA.
Pause @ 34.21
Must resist urge to throw laptop. I need it to make music.
Pause @ 35.20
Going in the exact direction I predicted… we can only know the present… implies denying but he hasn’t explicitly invalidated fossil DNA record yet but I see it coming.
Pause @ 35.26
Ken is on fire, question for bill nye “can you name one piece of technology that could only have been developed starting with a belief in molecules-to-man evolution?” This isn’t about technology. He keeps making this connection. Yes you can have someone who properly applies the scientific method to technology with a certain belief system… but I could just as easily believe that I was made by an alien 10 days ago and I’m in a simulation. Because I can practice good science doesn’t mean that whatever belief system I have is any more valid. But it is interesting how he hasn’t yet addressed fossils and DNA… getting an Astronomer to speak, now zero-ing in on technology.
Pause @ 36.45
Yes fine, believe in God and the bible. Have a religious belief. By all means. But don’t tout it as science… and then try and force schools too teach it to kids as science. That is not science.
Pause @ 40.06
So he is enabling same species evolution but not cross species evolution. This is confirmation bias at its finest.
Pause @ 43:34
So science is imposing it’s belief on students but his religious belief system is not a religious belief system and children need to be taught it. FACE FUCKING PALM
Pause @ 45;45
Another colleague, yes you do great science that’s awesome. Your works are cited because it sounds like you do good science. You doing good science does not mean creationism is real. Separate issues.
Pause @ 46.17
Okay I gave him too much credit… bacteria evolution is not evolution… it’s just a switch turning on or off but that is NOT an evolutionary switch. How long until Bill speaks… I need reprieve.
Pause @ 46:59
Citing the 100 year old textbook which I have seen creationists do before… yes it was 100 years old. Period. Its 100 years old. Scientific understanding has developed obviously in the past 100 years.
Pause @ 48:00
Your case hinges on the bible, it’s the cornerstone of your position. Fine. Again, its not science. Belief in the bible is religion. Bringing the bible into science is called Pseudoscience and “Bullshit”. Starting with a belief and making the data conform to the belief is bad science. Confirmation bias. Okay Bill seriously need ya here, I’m starting to loose it.
Pause @ 51:11
He believes that creationists are teaching people to think critically. Creationists are teaching kids the right way to think. The irony is palpable.
Pause @ 54:57
Yep, basically what every supposed scientific discussion with creationists come to bible this bible that Jesus, Jesus, JESUS! OMG JESUS!
Yes Ken, Jesus. Creationism is religion trying to masquerade as science.
And then again saying that there is a Scientific indoctrination out there…
Yep this debate is going pretty much the way I expected.
Pause @ 56:37
Nope, cant have moral humans without religion. Throwing in the abortion stance. Honestly Ken’s entire rant speaks for itself. Hardcore christian belief system. To someone who is just becoming aware of the creationist/evolution debate… this is the perfect picture of why creationism is a problem. Its biblical Christian belief trying to force its way into scientific education of youth. If you want to practice your religion that’s fine, I mean whatever faith you are, whether I don’t subscribe to it as an Agnostic Secular Humanist that’s fine, practice your faith. But don’t then call your faith science, and edge that faith into science textbooks. That’s where your religious freedom starts to really edge into indoctrination and affecting the free-thinking abilities of youth. This hits home for me as a former indoctrinated opus dei rooted catholic whos own mother in my teens said if I don’t go to church on Sundays then I am kicked out of the house. Can’t stand indoctrination.
Bill, you are an oasis in a desert of chaotic thinking. My subjective well-being is recovering by the second.
The ken ham model cannot make predictions.
Bill Nye with the jaw shattering uppercut!
30 minutes of awesome
now Ken is going to speak again… dammit
But the bible says…
But the bible says…
BUT THE BIBLE SAYS! OMG THE BIBLE!
CREATIONISM BECAUSE BIBLE!
BILL NYE WITH THE HAYMAKER!
Logic, natural laws, only make sense within a creator god biblical framework.
Really Ken? That is how you lead your counter rebuttal? Just nailing that coffin shut.
“LOTS OF US KNOW THAT MANBEARPIG IS REAL! ITS HALF MAN HALF BEAR HALF PIG!”
Again, we know you aren’t the only one who thinks this way, doesn’t mean it is any less rooted in belief than in fact.
This is THE 5 minute case for why Creationism is not science rather than a counter-rebuttal to Bill
The biblical explanation is the only one that makes logical sense. This is called CONTRADICTION Ken. That’s when you say something and then say the opposite or something that cannot exist at the same time. A paradox.
Yes Ken, majorities have been wrong before. You know how they ended up being refuted and proven wrong? Even in the specific examples you gave? With Data. The question was, evolution brings data like fossil records and what not, what does creationism bring other than the literal word of the bible? Classic creationism non-answer sidestep.
Oh no you answered it. If the bible was right then adam and eve, if the bible was right then you have kinds. No Ken, you created “kinds” and “historical science”. You started your studies with the conclusion and warped and raped the data until it fit your conclusion. CONFIRMATION BIAS, THAT IS NOT SCIENCE
He keeps talking about how we can be great scientists in the present. Okay. So what does that mean for the future? Are the laws of nature going to change again?
DID HE JUST SAY WHAT I THINK HE SAID!?!? He just said that they use models of how things happen in the current world to model how the Noah’s Ark event unfolded?!?!? While simulataneously condemning evolution’s interepretations of Historical Science!!?!?!
I’m done with the commentary, it’s all been said. Confirmation Bias. Don’t do it. The End.