BILL NYE VS KEN HAM: TONIGHT AT 7 PM

[Jackalope]

[Esquilax]

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.

Hey Stat, glad your surgery went alright and you're doing okay. You do understand that the age of the earth doesn't speak to a god actually existing, and so you can examine the evidence for it without beginning from a position on the non/existence of god, right?

Given this possibility, where the question of divine origins doesn't even enter into the picture, what conclusion would you say one would draw from the available evidence?

[DeistPaladin]

Divine regulation would imply tacit approval of the practice.

How?

Regulation of a practice by any authority is an indication of acceptance or approval by the authority of the practice. Conservatives are usually the ones making that point whenever anyone talks of legalizing pot or prostitution.

This is especially true if said authority had the power to forbid the practice if it chose to do so. All Yahweh had to say is "one man and one woman" and it would be Yahweh's law. Yahweh certainly wasn't shy about laying down the law on sexual matters in great detail on far more uncommon practices, so why not? Instead, Yahweh chose to regulate the practice of polygamy, including how the children of different wives were to be treated.

David took many wives and the Bible specifically calls him a righteous man who always did the will of Yahweh, save for the matter of Uriah. It doesn't say "save for the matter of Uriah and taking multiple wives."

What evidence can you present that Yahweh disapproved of polygamy, yet somehow allowed it to be common practice by his chosen people?

[Mudhammam]

How?

Regulation of a practice by any authority is an indication of acceptance or approval by the authority of the practice. Conservatives are usually the ones making that point whenever anyone talks of legalizing pot or prostitution.

This is especially true if said authority had the power to forbid the practice if it chose to do so. All Yahweh had to say is "one man and one woman" and it would be Yahweh's law. Yahweh certainly wasn't shy about laying down the law on sexual matters in great detail on far more uncommon practices, so why not? Instead, Yahweh chose to regulate the practice of polygamy, including how the children of different wives were to be treated.

David took many wives and the Bible specifically calls him a righteous man who always did the will of Yahweh, save for the matter of Uriah. It doesn't say "save for the matter of Uriah and taking multiple wives."

What evidence can you present that Yahweh disapproved of polygamy, yet somehow allowed it to be common practice by his chosen people?

Yahweh, you mean the guy who says beating slaves is permitted so long as they can get back to work within two days? The same guy who said stone the apostates? I think polygamy is the least of his problems.

[Mystical]

[Esquilax]

You seem to be skipping a few steps. If you believe that all that exists is matter in motion and there is no transcendent governing agent then how can you possibly know that the Universe operates the same now as it did in the past?

Wow, how did I miss this?

If you're a young earther, you already believe that there's some weirdness going on with starlight, right? It was either created in transit, or was faster in the past, or some shit. And you've got a god whose main communication to mankind is full of accounts of how he suspended or altered the physical laws of the universe to his own whims, and an ancient evil in the form of the devil whose whole deal is finding ways to trick people:

How do you possibly know the universe operates the same now as it did in the past? Science, at least, has consistent observations of these things.

[EvolutionKills]

[DeistPaladin]

You seem to be skipping a few steps. If you believe that all that exists is matter in motion and there is no transcendent governing agent then how can you possibly know that the Universe operates the same now as it did in the past?

Wow, how did I miss this?

If you're a young earther, you already believe that there's some weirdness going on with starlight, right? It was either created in transit, or was faster in the past, or some shit. And you've got a god whose main communication to mankind is full of accounts of how he suspended or altered the physical laws of the universe to his own whims, and an ancient evil in the form of the devil whose whole deal is finding ways to trick people:

How do you possibly know the universe operates the same now as it did in the past? Science, at least, has consistent observations of these things.

I'd add that Statler has presented a classic case of how the ad hoc hypothesis can be abused, mixed with a dash of argument from ignorance.

Paraphrasing slightly:
"The light in the night's sky from Andromeda is 2 million years old."
"Maybe the laws of physics worked differently in the past." (ad hoc)
"What do you base that on?"
"It coulda happened." (argument from ignorance)

[Minimalist]

If there is one thing waldork has in abundance it is ignorance.

[JuliaL]

Simple, an all powerful Genie made the entire universe 25 minutes ago;

Great rebuttal. May I suggest you missed a point:
That the Evil Genie included in its simulation a prevalent though false memeplex represented by a collection of ancient documents. This 'bible' was edited by committed priests and described a creator God who brought the universe into existence 6000 years ago. Coincidentally there is also record that this collection of documents provided thousands and thousands of man-years of gainful employment free lunches for clerics up until the present. Though they've only been real free lunches for the last 25 minutes.


Sheesh last Tuesdayism is hard to deal with. I can't do the mental gymnastics needed to make up (implausible) explanations why such a preconception is True when it differs from observation. I guess I'll just stick with reality.