Show of Hands

macro evolution is micro evolution over time there is really no difference

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.

And eventually, something adapts so much, it is different then when it starts out.

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

Creationism are by definition a religion. Micro Evolution and Observable Creationism are testable theories that can and do coexist.

NO, religion is a belief in a supreme being or beings!

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.

By definition, it is not.

By practically it is, otherwise you have just disbanded over half of the religions in the world.

Religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. That's another definition.

Out of the bible.

I noticed as well.

Me too.

And when ham was talking about the rock over the tree, and bill nye was like "The rock could have just slid over the tree..."

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"

And when Hams about to ask Nye if he's God. Or if he was there.

Ooh, and when Bill asked what a fish done wrong.

You could totally tell a difference in his voice during his opening statements, and his rebbudle against bills.

*rebuttal

I'm going to go ahead and say that you're a biased observer.

The general consensus is that Nye won by a considerable margin.

guardianlv.com/2014/02/bill-nye-ken-ham-debate-in-depth-recap-synopsis-and-who-won/

I'll be the judge of that. I don't trust the media to be unbiased anymore.

It really is.

I meant what station?

Debatelive.org

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.

He really is. I was impressed by ken hams initial statements, but Bill Nye tore them apart with little problem, and little rebuttal.

His last statements were moving. Wow. That was awesome. He makes me wanna continue my engineering degree..... That was cool.

Here is a rebuttal you can't beat. Hockey, even if the isles are rebuilding