(February 6, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote:

Quote: I thought it was funny when he showed Family Felidae as 'cat kind'. It includes civets and hyenas.

Why was that funny?

Because of the oft-repeated demand by some creationists for a cat giving birth to a dog as an example that would convince them evolution is true. Since hyenas are so dog-like, with Ham's model they shouldn't be convinced of evolution if a cat gave birth to a hyena, while if that occurred naturally it would actually disprove evolution.

I'm sure any funniness that may have been present is completely drained away now, though.

I didn't watch any of this, but there have been quite a few funny memes I've seen since the debate. I really don't know who he is, but there seems to be a vast majority of people, christian or not, that really don't like Ken Ham.

You know when the YEC do not understand evolution with natural selection with the question "I've not seen a cat give birth to a dog?"

Actually, the Felidae family came after the Canidae...
So you should have some sort of dog/wolf giving birth to some sort of cat.

(February 7, 2014 at 6:13 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Actually, the Felidae family came after the Canidae...
So you should have some sort of dog/wolf giving birth to some sort of cat.

Well, it would be a very slightly more cat-like dog/wolf, but I pick nits.

(February 6, 2014 at 8:53 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: How do you know what we observe today is what happened in the past? That was Ham’s entire point, you cannot know that, therefore you cannot know how old the Earth is.

Sorry to drag this back up but:


Now that's a head-scratcher.

(February 6, 2014 at 9:41 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Young in comparison to what? I believe that if you start with the axiom that God does not exist you will arrive at an age for the Earth somewhere around 4.5 billion years (for now, this number will probably eclipse five billion soon). On the other hand, if you start with the axiom that God does exist and that the Bible is what it claims to be (as I do) then you will arrive at the conclusion that the Earth is just over 6,000 years old. Same evidence; two very different conclusions. Both of these positions are far more consistent than a Christian who believes it is billions of years old or a materialist who believes it is thousands of years old.

Can you provide an example of the evidence that proves earth is only 6,000 years old?

(February 7, 2014 at 7:30 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote:

(February 6, 2014 at 9:41 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Young in comparison to what? I believe that if you start with the axiom that God does not exist you will arrive at an age for the Earth somewhere around 4.5 billion years (for now, this number will probably eclipse five billion soon). On the other hand, if you start with the axiom that God does exist and that the Bible is what it claims to be (as I do) then you will arrive at the conclusion that the Earth is just over 6,000 years old. Same evidence; two very different conclusions. Both of these positions are far more consistent than a Christian who believes it is billions of years old or a materialist who believes it is thousands of years old.

Can you provide an example of the evidence that proves earth is only 6,000 years old?

Can he even provide one example of a materalist who is stupid enough to say the earth is "thousands of years" old?

Unfortunately, he probably can, and likely thinks it's evidence of the veracity of a belief. There is, after all, still a Flat Earth society.

(February 7, 2014 at 11:26 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: Unfortunately, he probably can, and likely thinks it's evidence of the veracity of a belief. There is, after all, still a Flat Earth society.

Being an atheist or materialist doesn't mean your rational about everything. There are still plenty of non-god crazy things to believe in.