For a debate everyone assumed Nye would automatically win without trouble, Ken Ham did surprisingly well. Macro Evolution has little evidence to back it up, and is to some extent a religion.
Actually there is, micro deals with the short term adaptions of a organism to survive, while macro deals with the slow advancement of species from one individual source. Ie the Evolutionary tree. Evidence is not there to solidify the latter as fact.
Yes, ie a wolf evolves from the canine pack to survive the elements and habitat it's in. But not a single cell organism that divides into the animal kingdom. That doesn't have facts to back it up, the former does. Both Macro Evolution and Historical
No it's not, many of our religions today do not believe in a divine being. You have to have faith to believe in the unknown, a loosely based theory is the unknown. There is little difference in what you are doing and what I'm doing.
Religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. That's another definition.
And when Nye went on about the question of where we came from... And ham was just like "well there's a book that explains all that! In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And that's the only thing that makes sense"
You should. I'm learning a lot. Bill Nye is smart, and Ken Ham can't offer a rebuttal for anything he says. He's smart, too, but he's diss regarding facts that Bill Nye is throwing out.
Comments: Add Comment