CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:48
Arguments:25
Total Votes:53
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (22)

Debate Creator

LittleMisfit(1749) pic



Creationists, now that the Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham debate is over....

Who do you think won the debate and why?

What do you think were Ken's strongest arguments?

Were there any arguments presented by Ken that you don't think Bill had a good rebuttal to?

Here is the debate in case you missed it.

BE NICE. IF YOU CAN'T MAKE YOUR POINT WITHOUT BEING ABUSIVE YOU WILL BE BANNED

Add New Argument
3 points

It was really hard to take in a lot of the information that was being displayed them. I know some of what Bill said was very confusing and it didn't make sense. I got a lot of the stuff that Ken was talking about, but I felt that Ken could have done better really.

westernslave(694) Disputed Banned
1 point

are you a believer? maybe thats why bill's words seemed confusing

Srom(12206) Disputed
4 points

Yes, I am a believer. It's not because I am believer that makes me seem confused. I could educate myself about some of the things but science is a very confusing topic for me.

LittleMisfit(1749) Clarified
1 point

If there is anything specific he said that you would like clarification on just let me know.

0 points

I already saw what you quoted on the Bill Nye Vs. Ken Ham debate, but thanks for letting me know! I will keep that in mind. :)

1 point

kens strongest argument was probably..."well it says blablabla in the bible"

if you like that delusional moron, you deserve cancer.

that video doesnt allow comments...which is very common with the believer's uploads. they dont like atheists showing up and making them look retarded.

1 point

if you like that delusional moron, you deserve cancer.

LOL

1 point

BTW...your title starts out with"creationists"...does that mean you dont want to hear what the smart people think about the debate?

LittleMisfit(1749) Clarified
3 points

No, I created the debate for a few reasons. To see if they realize that Ken did a terrible job at presenting his side of the debate, and to help creationists understand some of Bill's points, because he threw a lot of info out there without going into detail.

BTW, if you can't contribute to the debate without being abusive to people you will be banned. You're more than welcome to participate, but please be civil about it.

westernslave(694) Disputed Banned
1 point

go fuck yourself if you dont like how i contribute....

......[2 middle fingers].......

No, I created the debate for a few reasons. To see if they realize that Ken did a terrible job at presenting his side of the debate, and to help creationists understand some of Bill's points, because he threw a lot of info out there without going into detail.

BTW, if you can't contribute to the debate without being abusive to people you will be banned. You're more than welcome to participate, but please be civil about it.

I am personally a Christian and Ken Ham did terrible in the debate but you could tell Bill Nye is not a good speaker.

1 point

i cant wait to see what the hand signal for bible and god is...they should have to roll their eyes while making those jesters

1 point

Bill Nye did a phenomenal job bypassing the rhetoric and attacking the root of Ham's belief structure, to which Ham more or less quoted the the re-defunct bible for evidence.

1 point

I'm not a creationist but can I give my opinion on the debate?

LittleMisfit(1749) Clarified
1 point

You can if you want. However, J-Roc77 already created a debate for both sides and I didn't really want to hijack his debate. This debate is tailored more towards addressing the claims presented by Ken that creationists found convincing and clarifying any misconceptions they had about Bill's claims or any of Ken's claims that Bill didn't address.

DrawFour(2662) Clarified
1 point

Ah yes, thank you. I had discovered that shortly after, and even left a reply to you which illustrated basically what I would have presented on this debate.

If I were a creationist though, seeing the logical fallacy Ham kept making, where he would state "you weren't there" would have disappointed me since obviously Ham wasn't there either, but is asserting that his position is the only correct position.

1 point

This form of open debate versus for or against will get less trolling via multiple accounts, less mass down voting and less butt patting.

I thought of that when I was making the debate but settled on it being pro/con as the debate was structured as that.

This debate here has a better chance of questions and comments getting answered.

1 point

Ken Ham and his "because bible says so" logic.... it's like from special olympics :D

1 point

I think they both won. The whole debate was sparked by Bill Nye creating a video saying that believing in Creation leads to not being capable of scientific advancement. I believe that Ham did a good job pointing out that the Bible does not conflict with the way the world currently works. Ham provided scientists who have success in science who believe in Creation. Nye was able to easily show that the Earth was older than what Ham thinks without using radiometric dating and Ham could only attack dating methods and the idea that nothing can be learned about the past. Bill Nye was not able to demonstrate how believing in Creation is detrimental.

I'm wondering what did Ken Ham mean by observational science? I was getting he was saying evolution was a religion.....?

I would prefer to see a debate involving an old-age creationists viewpoint so currently it has no effect on my views although I felt points of both sides were missed by the opposing side.