Mark L. for Ken here: please read this article, where the writer observes that "Mr. Ham didn’t lose the debate (and the gospel was spread to millions of people) and here is the simple reason why: Mr. Nye never addressed the debate topic. So how could someone win the debate if they never addressed the topic?"
Feedback: Did Ken Ham Lose the Debate?
ANSWERSINGENESIS.ORG
19 comments
Did Ken Ham Lose the Debate?
image
Yes.
Next question, retard.
It just wasn't that big of a deal to Nye. He defended science which was his goal, he countered Ham and out matched him at every corner. Ham had no argument, he relied on "I have this book." And it didn't work. And the final question not only destroyed him. Now if Ham one why is he so obsessed with debating Nye again? Why beg for a rematch if he won?
I'd say that the Hambone never dared to bring up the debate topic, and thereby did neither lose nor win.
So, how could someone lose the debate if they never addressed the topic, right?
@creativerealms
"Ham did win the debate. Having the debate was the win."
I agree. Debating a creationist makes it appear that there are two sides to the question. It provides creationism with a legitimacy that it doesn't deserve.
Debating Evolution with a creationist is like debating History with a Holocaust Denier (thank you Deborah Lipstadt for this insight).
They always play this "Gospel spread/ people brought to Christ" game after every debate. Comfort/ Hovind/ Chick all do this IN HOUSE generated 'fan-mailing' that proclaims they are convincing large numbers of people in Creationism.
I've never seen a convincing creationist argument, you simply have to already believe to even think their claims and pleading to Scriptures is convincing. Even if you don't care to study or inform yourself to understand Evolution, even if you don't care less, the creationist argument is even easier to dismiss.
It is such a part of their con, mega churches and TV ministries do the same "We are bringing so many to Christ" stunt to generate donations. Ham can't talk for five minutes about his 'museum' or Ark Farce without a proclamation of "Converting the unbelievers" or "strengthening the faith". It's this astounding arrogance and overboard dishonesty that first interested me in this creationist propaganda. When I first watched Ham, Hovind and Comfort productions I actually thought I was watching parody, Creation 'science' is to science like Fernwood Tonight episodes is to talk shows. I couldn't believe people actually considered them seriously. Those shows and years of the YouTube rebuttles became a hobby.
Which is why I totally understand Dawkins and others quitting the circuit (they'd done many and there was no reason to repeat, that's when you're pandering to their desire for attention as they're looking to repeat the same sermons) but always welcome new opponents like Bill who I expect will announce his dislike of banging his head against a wall of stupid in a couple years.
"So how could someone win the debate if they never addressed the topic?" "
Creationists debate evolution all the time. They never address it, they just show they don't understand it
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.