Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NCSE)   Smoked Ham; or How Bill Nye won the debate. Hint: science   (ncse.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, smoked ham, nuclear medicines, Ken Ham, speciations, age of the universe, National Center for Science Education, fundamental science, Wheaties  
•       •       •

8714 clicks; posted to Geek » on 05 Feb 2014 at 9:11 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



500 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-02-05 01:25:27 PM  
ken ham:  god made the billions of stars and planets and universes to show how great he is.
bill nye: when was the bible written?
ken ham: 2,000 years ago.
bill nye: how many stars were they aware of 2,000 years ago?
ken ham: hundreds...maybe thousands... also they thought the earth was the center of our solar system and that the earth was flat.
bill nye: you might want to consider just pleading the 'fif'.
 
2014-02-05 01:25:59 PM  

lennavan: Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?


Yes.  Getting into the details of the bible as a book isn't good for "keeping the faith" and it tends to not be brought up much.  So a lot of people end up believing exactly like Ham says(who I suspect is just a sociopathic manipulator and doesn't believe what he's saying)
 
2014-02-05 01:26:01 PM  

sprawl15: reading terry goodkind


At first I thought you were referring to Terry Pratchett and I was worried I was going to have to kill you to keep you from infecting the others.

/no offense.
 
2014-02-05 01:26:41 PM  

GameSprocket: In a way, this proves the existence of God. In the naturalistic mindset, if making a sacrifice meant you would have a good harvest, it would happen every time. The fact that it doesn't work every time proves that you are dealing with an intelligent force (AKA God).


Or, more likely, it suggests that sacrifice has no bearing on the out come of harvest.

Some people seem to have an intrinsic need for a sense of control even when they have none.I have a friend (a creationist no less) who doesn't like to fly. She told me that she would feel more comfortable in a plane if she was in the pilot seat even though she doesn't know how to fly a plane.
 
2014-02-05 01:27:06 PM  

RedPhoenix122: sprawl15: reading terry goodkind

At first I thought you were referring to Terry Pratchett and I was worried I was going to have to kill you to keep you from infecting the others.

/no offense.


oh no terry goodkind is the author of ayn rand fantasy edition starring rape
 
2014-02-05 01:27:36 PM  

lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."


I do not know of a single christian that believes the gospels were written by god.  Now the old testimate.......
 
2014-02-05 01:27:55 PM  

RedPhoenix122: lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."

He was only transcribing what God told him to.

/according to them.


That's not what they actually believe.  See for instance - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source
 
2014-02-05 01:29:07 PM  

ikanreed: lennavan: Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?

Yes.


Got a source for that?  Because everything I was ever taught at my Catholic High School says otherwise.
 
2014-02-05 01:29:13 PM  

sprawl15: oh no terry goodkind is the author of ayn rand fantasy edition starring rape


I've read some of them.  The first ones aren't as bad, but they do get worse.
 
2014-02-05 01:29:37 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: Exactly why you do my approach of arguing from THEIR position and make them have to argue against the bible. It's not one they like at all. And yes, they'll attempt the "begone satan!" trick to which you pull out multiple Paul verses. Force them into a corner and remind them about false prophets and hypocrisy.


So you concede the Bible is a credible source, and "prove" you lack the faith to understand it by "cherry picking" Paul, who wasn't even Jesus.  Remember, these folks are preconditioned to reject certain speakers as soon as keywords or tactics are hit, and that's one of them. When you argue that, you're Alinsky flippingyourself.

You  just don't argue with these people.
 
2014-02-05 01:30:00 PM  

lennavan: That's not what they actually believe.  See for instance - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source


It's what some of them actually believe.

Source:  Raised as a Jehovah's Witness.
 
2014-02-05 01:30:57 PM  

lennavan: ikanreed: lennavan: Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?

Yes.

Got a source for that?  Because everything I was ever taught at my Catholic High School says otherwise.


As a Southern Baptist we were told that the bible was written by God directly using man as his hand.  It didn't matter if men were involved, they were simply instruments of God's almighty hand.  Also, there are no mistakes and no contradictions.
 
2014-02-05 01:31:12 PM  

lennavan: RedPhoenix122: lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."

He was only transcribing what God told him to.

/according to them.

That's not what they actually believe.  See for instance - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source


It's not possible to pin down every distinct belief here, because while you can take a observational approach to the content of the bible, many people don't.
 
2014-02-05 01:31:29 PM  

SewerSquirrels: Some people seem to have an intrinsic need for a sense of control even when they have none.


Wouldn't sewer squirrels be eaten by sewer gators?
 
2014-02-05 01:32:15 PM  

lennavan: ikanreed: lennavan: Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?

Yes.

Got a source for that?  Because everything I was ever taught at my Catholic High School says otherwise.


Not by the literal hand of God, but by the guidance.  Catholic....well my Mom is Catholic
 
2014-02-05 01:33:16 PM  

lennavan: That's not what they actually believe.  See for instance - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source


Fundies reject the synoptic problem altogether.
 
2014-02-05 01:34:29 PM  

lennavan: Got a source for that? Because everything I was ever taught at my Catholic High School says otherwise.


Since you're asking for evidence of the relatively tame claim that at least one person does, I'm just going to say I've spoken to people who believe that.  And an anecdote(unless you're calling my personal experience into question here) is sufficient for that kind of claim.

Try being raised in the rural south.  Try looking at polls asking people if they think the bible is "the literal word of god"(this is as opposed to "inspired word of god")  It's not even remotely uncommon.
 
2014-02-05 01:36:58 PM  

meat0918: Ham is delicious.

And now it comes in Kosher flavors.


(roll back the time machine to the late 70s)
In a moment straight out of a sitcom, my roommate once convinced another roommate that there was such a thing as Kosher Ham, and had him ask the hostess (Jewish, naturally) for some. Our time living together wasn't all as hilarious as this one off stunt, but there are times when I see shows like That 70s Show or New Girl (the victim's girlfriend lived with us, and she could pass for the character of Chrissie on Three's Company) that I think must have got most of their ideas from spying on all our shenanigans.
 
2014-02-05 01:37:03 PM  

that bosnian sniper: Fundies reject the synoptic problem altogether.


The problem is that fundies aren't a unified group either.  The particular backwards beliefs that turn them into "fundies" varies from group to group, though they're pretty united in their overall degree of social conservationism.
 
2014-02-05 01:38:50 PM  

lennavan: China White Tea: BeesNuts: What if that grown ass adult demands your children be taught santa is real in science class. And then built a business around attracting people to a North Pole Museum?

Does that warrant a debate?

A grandstanding circle-jerk of a debate that will have no bearing on anyone's beliefs, nor on the setting of public/social/educational policy in the US?

If anything, it actually gave more credibility to the Creationists.  We went from "Creationism isn't worth debating because of X, Y and Z" to "Creationism is worth debating."


Precisely.  "Debate" implies that there is an argument between two positions, and that they both have at least a marginal degree of credibility.  You can't "debate" science Vs. delusion without implying that the delusion warrants at least some degree of consideration.
 
2014-02-05 01:39:15 PM  

scarmig: scottydoesntknow: Creationists believe something so monumentally stupid that no amount of facts could sway them. They've already had to dismiss the mountain of facts available, so why would anyone believe a debate with a former children's TV star would make them rethink anything?

Not everyone in the world who is alive or will ever be born already has an unchangeable opinion of everything.

/ex-christian.  At some point, something changed my mind.  Without debates, that wouldn't have happened.


Wouldn't unhindered critical mocking work just as well?
 
2014-02-05 01:40:36 PM  

lennavan: BeesNuts: What if that grown ass adult demands your children be taught santa is real in science class. And then built a business around attracting people to a North Pole Museum?

Does that warrant a debate?

No.

BeesNuts: It's like none of y'all are aware that people watch these things. And that the speakers' audience isn't the other speaker.

Did you watch it?  Watch just the moderator's introduction.  Part of his introduction is that Ken Ham debated this very topic at Harvard long ago.  What happened in the debate doesn't matter, Ken Ham added that to his resumé, now he touts it.  After last night, Ken Ham will be able to say he has engaged in a second debate.

If scientists constantly debate him, he will be able to say "he travels the world debating scientists" and yet it's still in question.  That will give his followers reason enough to continue to believe him.  That will give the board of education in various states reason enough to want to teach creationism as a viable alternative.  If this guy can travel the country debating top scientists and we haven't reached consensus, then clearly this merits discussion in classrooms.

You don't get it, the audience is the general public and understanding the key arguments and major scientific findings supporting evolution requires at minimum a college biology degree.  To the audience "hey, look at the similarities in DNA sequence" has significantly less impact than "hey, look at this Piltdown Man scientists used to LIE to us."


Ignore is not an option -- they claim victory by virtue of no challenge and have the best chance of getting the "I have an Open Mind (that should be "closed for repairs") and don't trust "The Man" to tell me the truth" types that way.  Or the "Life sucks I'm desperate to find a solution" types.
Silencing is not an option -- Help, Help, we're being Oppressed!  (which inevitably turns into "Praise the Lord and Pass the ammunition")

Debating, sure it gives them street cred for the already faithful.  But more importantly, it gives the best chance at keeping them from getting more adherents, when compared to the above.
 
2014-02-05 01:40:42 PM  

NebTheWise: Ken Ham made two good points the entire night: that everyone approaches the act of scientific research with presuppositions about the nature of the universe, and that those different "world views" may influence the way one interprets scientific data. He really should have expounded on these points, rather than try to discredit the evidence for evolution itself.


Your handle is well earned, good sir.

And while Nye did slip up a few times, his debating skills were much better than Ham's. That being said, both sides did make valid points about each others flaws: Radiocarbon dating DOES have issues (which actual scientists in the fields of Geology and Archeology freely admit), which is why most dating methods today use more stable isotopes less prone to environmental variances.  Then there are the issues of calibration, namely that the oldest verified non-clonal trees are less than 6000 years old, and the so-called annular ice layers have been shown to be not always annual as freeze-thaw cycles can skew the layers.

On Nye's side though, were the arguments he made regarding the grand canyon theory that Ham was backing (created by the great Flood), namely that there should be multiple Grand canyons worldwide. The funny bit is, the current thinking is that the Canyon was probably created by a process similar to the Missoula Floods, only the damming was caused by lava instead of ice, resulting in several flood pulses as lava dams broke carving through massive amounts of rock in a geologically short time (current estimates place this time around 700,000 years). Of course Ham hasn't kept abreast of the current research so he didn't know that. Nye also was correct in pointing out the argumentative flaw that Ham's model is based on an appeal to authority, and not so much on actual research.

Both sides could have argued better, but it was altogether quite entertaining.
 
2014-02-05 01:41:37 PM  

SewerSquirrels: Or, more likely, it suggests that sacrifice has no bearing on the out come of harvest.


Well, yeah. I didn't think anyone would take my comment seriously, I guess I need to be more outlandish next time. Poe's Law got me again.
 
2014-02-05 01:42:13 PM  

eraser8: SewerSquirrels: Some people seem to have an intrinsic need for a sense of control even when they have none.

Wouldn't sewer squirrels be eaten by sewer gators?


Well, yes, but only until they're big enough to be in a cheapo Syfy flick. Thankfully we are prodigious breeders.
 
2014-02-05 01:42:14 PM  

China White Tea: delusion


I'm not sure how I feel about the word "delusion" in the context of creationism.  I mean, the core idea "thing believed in spite of evidence" stands, but there's also the elaborate lengths the defenders go to to "explain" it, which is less consistent with the behaviors of sufferers of an actual mental disorder.
 
2014-02-05 01:45:25 PM  

wildcardjack: scarmig: scottydoesntknow: Creationists believe something so monumentally stupid that no amount of facts could sway them. They've already had to dismiss the mountain of facts available, so why would anyone believe a debate with a former children's TV star would make them rethink anything?

Not everyone in the world who is alive or will ever be born already has an unchangeable opinion of everything.

/ex-christian.  At some point, something changed my mind.  Without debates, that wouldn't have happened.

Wouldn't unhindered critical mocking work just as well?



Not at that point in my life, no.

All the little bits of science the people pointed out to me that didn't fit into the Christian theology weakened the foundation.  Take the standard Christian response to a scientific problem, and actually do the science, and it all falls apart.  The believer must resort to "because magic", which then leads to the question of why a god would ever need to alter it's own rules of physics, just to prove a book that it divinely inspired.

And then to be told I'm not to question gods motives.  I can't know that.      Pulling threads.
 
2014-02-05 01:46:43 PM  
Late to the party here, but while I think Bill Nye's effort is worthy (although he didn't deliver the 1,000 cuts to Ham that I would have liked him to do since he was constantly being set up for it) how is debating with a man, whose continual fallback is on a premise that cannot in his mind be unproven, serve much purpose?

Ken Ham's mind, and that of his followers, will always be made up since they don't think Creationism can be unproven (since all evidence of it is intangible).  Bill Nye is, unfortunately, likely fighting a losing battle here, with my fingers crossed that enough young people get instilled enough skepticism to actually talk about it.
 
2014-02-05 01:47:21 PM  

JusticeandIndependence: CJHardin: And this is one from their side.

[wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com image 850x291]

"You have to read the bible naturally"


www.woodworkingtalk.com
 
2014-02-05 01:48:23 PM  

scarmig: Take the standard Christian response to a scientific problem, and actually do the science, and it all falls apart.


can you give an example?
 
2014-02-05 01:48:33 PM  

lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."


according to 'answers in genesis' people... who claim the bible is the inerrant word of god...
from their website... they claim moses wrote the first 5 books of the OT (pentateuch)

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2011/06/28/did-moses-write- ge nesis

There is abundant biblical and extra-biblical evidence that Moses wrote the Pentateuch during the wilderness wanderings after the Jews left their slavery in Egypt and before they entered the Promised Land (about 1445-1405 BC). Contrary to the liberal theologians and other skeptics, it was not written after the Jews returned from exile in Babylon (ca. 500 BC). Christians who believe Moses wrote the Pentateuch do not need to feel intellectually intimidated. It is the enemies of the truth of God that are failing to think carefully and face the facts honestly.
As a prophet of God, Moses wrote under divine inspiration, guaranteeing the complete accuracy and absolute authority of his writings. Those writings were endorsed by Jesus and the New Testament apostles, who based their teaching and the truth of the gospel on the truths revealed in the books of Moses, including the truths about a literal six-day creation about 6000 years ago, the Curse on the whole creation when Adam sinned, and the judgment of the global, catastrophic Flood at the time of Noah.
The attack on the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is nothing less than an attack on the veracity, reliability, and authority of the Word of Almighty God. Christians should believe God, rather than the fallible, sinful skeptics inside and outside the church who, in their intellectual arrogance, are consciously or unconsciously trying to undermine the Word so that they can justify in their own minds (but not before God) their rebellion against God. As Paul says in  ,"Let God be true and every man a liar."
 
2014-02-05 01:51:19 PM  

GameSprocket: Poe's Law got me again.


No, it got me. I took the bate; you should have set the hook.

Next time: "Yeah, but if I'm right, when I die, I go to heaven."
That one gets me every time.
 
2014-02-05 01:51:37 PM  

washington-babylon: it was altogether quite entertaining.


The only thing Bill Nye has going for him is his ability to be entertaining.  I've known more than a few debaters who loved to shred Creationist types.

One geologist dude I knew would go to Dinosaur Valley State Park in the early 80s and pack a lunch... and wait ... for the Creationists to come out to view the imprints that kind of look like they're not dino caused (thus proving Man walked with Dinos) and he would strike up a conversation and his extensive knowledge of the Bible as well as Science allowed him to mercilessly shred the poor Creationist in front of his flock.
 
2014-02-05 01:53:41 PM  
i thought the best (best being most interesting) part of the debate was the Q&A question afterward that asked [paraphrased because i dont remember the actual wording] "What, if anything, would change your mind, Mr. Ham?"  his response was nothing could, that his belief is so strong it cant be changed.  and then he asked Nye what could change his and he said, "evidence of xxx could" (xxx being several different things).  it showed the incredulity of creationists in spite of evidence of anything, fully justifying the silliness of an actual debate with them.
 
2014-02-05 01:55:55 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-02-05 02:02:04 PM  

colon_pow: scarmig: Take the standard Christian response to a scientific problem, and actually do the science, and it all falls apart.

can you give an example?



The amount of water actually required to cover the surface of the earth up to the peak of Mt Everest
Vestigial organs, and otherwise "just enough" biological design as opposed to "perfect" designs.
Yearly mutation of influenza virus.
Faulty understanding of 2nd law of thermodynamics w/ regards to evolution.
Homosexual behaviors in non-human animals.
 
2014-02-05 02:10:29 PM  

JusticeandIndependence: I drunk what: so in other words the typical YEC methodology of one step forward two steps back, which the foxnews crowd eats right up


Fish are sinners!


31.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-02-05 02:11:05 PM  

Sofa King Smart: lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."

according to 'answers in genesis' people... who claim the bible is the inerrant word of god...
from their website... they claim moses wrote the first 5 books of the OT (pentateuch)

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2011/06/28/did-moses-write- ge nesis

There is abundant biblical and extra-biblical evidence that Moses wrote the Pentateuch during the wilderness wanderings after the Jews left their slavery in Egypt and before they entered the Promised Land (about 1445-1405 BC). Contrary to the liberal theologians and other skeptics, it was not written after the Jews returned from exile in Babylon (ca. 500 BC). Christians who believe Moses wrote the Pentateuch do not need to feel intellectually intimidated. It is the enemies of the truth of God that are failing to think carefully and face the facts honestly.
As a prophet of God, Moses wrote under divine inspiration, guaranteeing the complete accuracy and absolute authority of his writings. Those writings were endorsed by Jesus and the New Testament apostles, who based their teaching and the truth of the gospel on the truths revealed in the books of Moses, including the truths about a literal six-day creation about 6000 years ago, the Curse on the whole creation when Adam sinned, and the judgment of the global, catastrophic Flood at the time of Noah.
The attack on the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is nothing less than an attack on the veracity, reliability, and authority of the Word of Almighty God. Christians should believe God, rather than the fallible, sinful skeptics inside and outside the church who, in their intellectual arrogance, are consciously or unconsciously trying to undermine the Word so that they can justify in their own minds (but not befo ...



i59.tinypic.com
 
2014-02-05 02:12:38 PM  

SewerSquirrels: Exposing people to rational thought is never pointless.


LELZ

welcometofark.jpg

lots o noobs on today...
 
2014-02-05 02:16:13 PM  

RedPhoenix122: vactech: I drunk what: can any butt hurt anti-theist evolutionists admit they can recognize the difference between observational science and historical science yet?

 It's a cute little philosophical thought, but ultimately a self defeating distinction.  From what I've observed people will intuitively reject it, for obvious reasons.  What is "historic", ten minutes ago? The time it takes for light to reach us from the sun?  Should crime scene investigators simply throw their hands?  "Well, we weren't here! No use in using a 'less powerful' scientific 'method' to determine what happened.  We'll never be able to discount magic being the culprit!"

It's the kind of argument children make.

Especially since you can claim that the book was written by men and there's no way to prove if the authors are who they claim.

The "Were you there?" argument doesn't look as good from the other side.


I often wonder if the historians Tacitus and Josephus used historical science when they reported on Christ/Jesus.

maximumtrolling.jpg
 
2014-02-05 02:18:46 PM  

I drunk what: JusticeandIndependence: I drunk what: regardless of ham making better points

What better points were made by Ham?

the ability of creationists to admit they are using highly biased views of religion to influence their "science" and their opponents inability to honestly do the same

the rest just sounded like soundbites and filler, with neither side listening to the other

though for all the good ham did, he did twice as much damage for his cause going full "jebus compels you derp" at the end of almost every chance he got to speak

so in other words the typical YEC methodology of one step forward two steps back, which the foxnews crowd eats right up

nye did a decent job of just shilling for "MORE SCIENCE EDUMUCATION", meanwhile pretending to "debate" ham... *rolls eyes*

though i've seen much much much worse, a la  hovind vs sam harris types

overall this debate was way too much vanilla, and too little too late, this bipolar derp country-world won't take a single thing away from it other than

YEEHAW nye smoked ham, HEEHAWW  YEEEEEEAAAH, for science!!!1!

i would have liked to have seen more points addressed and MUCH less snarky comments made at each other, which is why i said nye won, simply because he used less smug/snark

good jorb lad, now debate someone who isn't of the hovind/ham flavor, and let's make some actual progress


Debate what? How? With whom?
 
2014-02-05 02:20:35 PM  

Sofa King Smart: There is abundant biblical and extra-biblical evidence that Moses wrote the Pentateuch during the wilderness wanderings after the Jews left their slavery in Egypt and before they entered the Promised Land (about 1445-1405 BC).


Uh-huh.

So when, over those 40 years, did Moe set pen to paper? Was it between when they fled Egypt and hit the Red Sea? Probably not, since that's a short time and they were being pursued by a raging army. Was it before one of the many desert rebellions the Israelites waged? One would think that Moe, reading what he'd been inspired to write, might have used the benefit of forethought to try and stop those before they started - or at least, Moe might have avoided the misstep of hitting the magic rock (as opposed to speaking to it), which kept him from achieving his life's goal.

// though there is a tradition that Moe wrote it on top of Mt Nebo (where he died) just before he died, and handed the book off to Josh to finish
 
2014-02-05 02:23:19 PM  

wademh: Nye's handicap is that he had to present intelligent science while Ham merely had to score rhetorical points.
Ham presented  examples of young earth creationists who nevertheless manage to be successful scientists, inventors or engineers.
So Nye is not completely right that creationism teaching creationism will prevent the US from succeeding in scientific innovation.
The fact that he is mostly right, and that the success stories are few and far between is too subtle a point for a debate, so Ham wins the rhetorical game. And that's all he ever needed to do. To top it off, he'll make a great deal of money off the circus.


Agreed - also neither of them is truly adept in articulating their positions with confidence and technical accuracy (from an earth sciences/biological sciences perspective for Nye, and from both an overall Science and Theological perspective from Ham).

I'd much rather see a debate from someone who is familiar with both theological positions and sciences. However, said folks are almost always atheist by virtue of their search for 'the truth'.

Additionally the audience in attendance are only really going to understand bible thumping. Nye jumped around from over-complex (for the audience) example to example with disjointed segues between anecdotes and topics.

Bill Nye should feel bad for even agreeing to this 'debate' This was obviously a huge PR stunt for both Nye and Ham with red meat thrown to their followers ('her, der Jesus wants to live in your literal heart' from Ham and 'American excellence in STEM' from Nye).

I award neither of them any points and may the FSM have mercy on their souls...
 
2014-02-05 02:24:14 PM  

RedPhoenix122: lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."

He was only transcribing what God told him to.

/according to them.


What's a cubit?
 
2014-02-05 02:29:19 PM  
Oh, and eyeballs.   Someone once made a statement to me that human eyes are so complex they had to be created.  Considering all the different kinds of eyes in the world, and the many weakness and fallibilities of human eyes... it didn't fly with me.  Why create a perfect eyeball with a blind spot, when there are other eyes in the world without blind spots?  Bad design.  Not perfect.  Not god.
 
2014-02-05 02:31:49 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Sofa King Smart: There is abundant biblical and extra-biblical evidence that Moses wrote the Pentateuch during the wilderness wanderings after the Jews left their slavery in Egypt and before they entered the Promised Land (about 1445-1405 BC).

Uh-huh.

So when, over those 40 years, did Moe set pen to paper? Was it between when they fled Egypt and hit the Red Sea? Probably not, since that's a short time and they were being pursued by a raging army. Was it before one of the many desert rebellions the Israelites waged? One would think that Moe, reading what he'd been inspired to write, might have used the benefit of forethought to try and stop those before they started - or at least, Moe might have avoided the misstep of hitting the magic rock (as opposed to speaking to it), which kept him from achieving his life's goal.

// though there is a tradition that Moe wrote it on top of Mt Nebo (where he died) just before he died, and handed the book off to Josh to finish


At what point do Larry, Curly, and Shemp enter  the picture?
 
2014-02-05 02:40:41 PM  

Fano: RedPhoenix122: lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."

He was only transcribing what God told him to.

/according to them.

What's a cubit?



i59.tinypic.com
 
2014-02-05 02:42:15 PM  

costermonger: It's also hard to accept that a debate between creationism and science was held and people feel the need to seriously discuss who "won".


This.  Religion gets ugly when (among many many other situations) it regards science as a competing philosophy/worldview.  Science in its purest form does not make assumptions that it must then defend.
 
2014-02-05 02:42:18 PM  
Well at least the debate against IDW was a success, He is to the point of just angry luz mock posting because hes got nothing.
 
2014-02-05 02:45:23 PM  

vrax: Fano: RedPhoenix122: lennavan: Sofa King Smart:
Bill Nye:  who wrote the bible?
Ken Ham: god.

Are there any Christians that believe God wrote the Bible?  I mean, the book of Matthew was written by... Matthew.  That's why it's referred to as "The Gospel According to Matthew."

He was only transcribing what God told him to.

/according to them.

What's a cubit?


[i59.tinypic.com image 256x300]


I LOL'ed.
 
Displayed 50 of 500 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report