The day draws Nye—for the Nye-Ham debate
|January 29, 2014||Posted by News under Creationism, Culture, Darwinism, News|
FAQs here. Including:
Is the live stream really free?
Yes, the live stream is really 100% FREE of charge on debatelive.org as well as Google+ Hangouts On Air powered by YouTube, and will be available to re-watch on our YouTube channel immediately following the debate. (We are unsure how many days following the event the video will remain available on YouTube to re-watch.)
Is there a limited number of live streams available?
No, the live stream is through YouTube with no known stream limits.
Can I ask questions of the moderator during the event?
This may be a possibility on the night of the debate. We may allow a certain number of questions for those watching through theGoogle+ Hangout On Air event.
Nye is strolling into a well-tuned, battle-tested, apologetic war machine.
A guy over at Richard Dawkins’s site says Nye shouldn’t debate Ham:
Creationism vs. evolution however is not worth debating. Why? Simple, there is nothing to debate. Evolution is a scientific fact, backed by mountains of evidence, peer-reviewed papers you could stack to the moon and an incredible scientific community consensus. Creationism is a debunked mythology that is based solely in faith. It has zero peer-reviewed papers to back up its claims, it has absolutely no scientific consensus and is not even considered science due to the fact it cannot be tested.
He then attacks Nye as unqualified. Nye must be feeling the love just now, he deserves points for that alone. Here’s his view: “I’m going in as a reasonable man.”
David Klinghoffer at Evolution News & Views says he’ll watch:
More seriously, I would like the world to get a good look at a genuine creationist: what he says, how he argues, what questions animate him. It’s been among the more dishonest tactics of ID’s critics to paint intelligent design as just another shade of “creationism.” The more people watch Ham debate Nye, the better they will be able to appreciate the stark contrast between advocates of intelligent design and those of creationism.
Creationists themselves are honest about saying what that distinction is. As Mr. Ham’s “Answers in Genesis” colleague Georgia Purdom has candidly said, the main difference is that creationists insist on faith’s directing the conclusions that science reaches. Devout materialists, while reaching opposite conclusions, come at the question of life’s origins in much the same manner. Naturalism demands an answer to the mystery of evolution that excludes intelligent direction. So that’s what it gets and what it offers.
Useful clarification that. Ken Ham doesn’t have that much use for the ID folk, but there’s no way a debate between him and them would generate this kind of drama.
The rumours that UD News is selling mugs and tee shirts, and running a betting pool are—by the way—highly scandalous.
Follow UD News at Twitter!