What Bill Nye should have considered before the 'debate' with Ken Ham

Science and Technology
1
Ken Ham announced that the municipal bond offering has raised enough money to begin construction on the wooden ark, estimated to cost about $73 million..."It did help," Ham said of the Feb. 4 debate with Nye. "We obviously had a big spurt toward the end (of the bond deadline)....Reached by phone Thursday, Nye said he was disappointed the project would go forward and said he hoped it "goes out of business."...Ham has said the debate with Nye also introduced to a wider audience his ministry's views that the Bible's creation story is a true historical account.
http://news.yahoo.com/noahs-ark-project-spurred-evolution-debate-015004964.html What the heck did Nye think the whole farce was actually about? :-/
2

What I want to know is, why are these idiots trying to build an ark at all? Do they think if they waste a crap ton of wood building some vaguely defined mythical boat God will show up and show everyone how he Kandored all the world’s thousands of species into a zoological storage locker thus proving the veracity of the Epic of Gilgamesh once and for all?

3

If they manage to raise enough money, and I doubt they will, all Ham and his minions will prove is that you cannot argue with mathematics. That ark will fall apart of its own weight long before anyone tries loading animals onto it.

4

If they want it to be accurate instead of conducting some kind of massive religious publicity stunt, they would also bring in two each of all the creatures in the world. Let’s see how they’d do it. Wasn’t that the point of the ark in the first place? Why are they playing around with another empty religious symbol? I want to see those animals, how they might be managed by one small family of humans, how they were fed, how the waste was managed, and how they kept the predators from killing and eating their prey. And when they were let off the ark, how they found their way to their natural habitats. They should want to do this as a scientific experiment to show the world that it was possible, since their claim is that it was possible and that it did happen. Bring it on, creationists, but make sure you do it right instead of making it into another Christian farce.
Lois

5
If they want it to be accurate instead of conducting some kind of massive religious publicity stunt, they would also bring in two each of all the creatures in the world. Let's see how they'd do it. Wasn't that the point of the ark in the first place? Why are they playing around with another empty religious symbol? I want to see those animals, how they might be managed by one small family of humans, how they were fed, how the waste was managed, and how they kept the predators from killing and eating their prey. And when they were let off the ark, how they found their way to their natural habitats. They should want to do this as a scientific experiment to show the world that it was possible, since their claim is that it was possible and that it did happen. Bring it on, creationists, but make sure you do it right instead of making it into another Christian farce. Lois
And that's the best type of approach to take with any of this stuff. Don't disagree, that only makes them feel persecuted and emboldened. Agree with them, spur them on, BUT take them at their word and get them to do the same. Building an ark? Great, go all the way and fill it too! Jesus is your co-pilot? Great, let go of the wheel. Contact Nye to encourage him to push Ham to carry out your idea. Email is bnsg at billnye dot com
6

The humane society already nixed the animals and cruel and inhumane. They couldn’t come up with a way to keep and care for them in a humane or sanitary manner. On an ark. Imagine that. All the animals will be fake. Just like the original story. Go figure.

7
If they want it to be accurate instead of conducting some kind of massive religious publicity stunt, they would also bring in two each of all the creatures in the world. Let's see how they'd do it. Wasn't that the point of the ark in the first place? Why are they playing around with another empty religious symbol? I want to see those animals, how they might be managed by one small family of humans, how they were fed, how the waste was managed, and how they kept the predators from killing and eating their prey. And when they were let off the ark, how they found their way to their natural habitats. They should want to do this as a scientific experiment to show the world that it was possible, since their claim is that it was possible and that it did happen. Bring it on, creationists, but make sure you do it right instead of making it into another Christian farce. Lois
And that's the best type of approach to take with any of this stuff. Don't disagree, that only makes them feel persecuted and emboldened. Agree with them, spur them on, BUT take them at their word and get them to do the same. Building an ark? Great, go all the way and fill it too! Jesus is your co-pilot? Great, let go of the wheel. Contact Nye to encourage him to push Ham to carry out your idea. Email is bnsg at billnye dot com Thanks, I will. Lois
8
The humane society already nixed the animals and cruel and inhumane. They couldn't come up with a way to keep and care for them in a humane or sanitary manner. On an ark. Imagine that. All the animals will be fake. Just like the original story. Go figure.
I expect Beshear would override any Humane Society concerns if the people behind the Ark wanted to do it. Anyway, wouldn't god be on the side of the modern-day Ark builders, just as he was the first time? He wouldn't want his true believers to look bad, would he? Lois
9
If they want it to be accurate instead of conducting some kind of massive religious publicity stunt, they would also bring in two each of all the creatures in the world. Let’s see how they’d do it. Wasn’t that the point of the ark in the first place? Why are they playing around with another empty religious symbol? I want to see those animals, how they might be managed by one small family of humans, how they were fed, how the waste was managed, and how they kept the predators from killing and eating their prey. And when they were let off the ark, how they found their way to their natural habitats. They should want to do this as a scientific experiment to show the world that it was possible, since their claim is that it was possible and that it did happen. Bring it on, creationists, but make sure you do it right instead of making it into another Christian farce. Lois
Accurate Lois? You mean biblically accurate? Genesis Ch 7 refutes the "two by two" claim by stating that there should be Seven pairs of each animal, not two. And where is Hamm going to put all of those giants who mated with god's women? Will there be a first class accommodation for the "special" people? And if Noah had them collected by pairs (clean and unclean BTW) what happened to the species when one of them was offered as a sacrifice for sparing him and his incestuous family? Where is that answer in Genesis? And where will the Apatosarous be kept as it's about as long as the whole boat? Can't people see that this is nothing more than an elaborate publicity stunt, a Jim and Tammy Baker sideshow. I can't wait to see the media uncover this sham as Hamm runs off to New Zealand with millions of donated dollars tucked in his suitcase and a smirk on his pockmarked face, leaving a slowly rotting hull near a small Kentucky town. Cap't Jack
10
all Ham and his minions will prove is that you cannot argue with mathematics. That ark will fall apart of its own weight long before anyone tries loading animals onto it.
Now wouldn't that be a pretty site. No doubt they will come up with some excuse for not building the whole thing long before the collapse happens when things start groaning , creaking, and leaning in ways they shouldnt
11

I think y’all are missing the point. You look at these things in the same way you look at a display in The Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. You see the display, which educates, but you know that that there are centuries of science behind it and the people who built it are trustworthy because they have passed through many stages and verifications of their skills to be allowed to create such a display. The people Ken Ham wants to reach see that display and look for something wrong with it. They look for how it fits in their Biblical view of the world. They don’t trust the institutions that sanction it.
It doesn’t matter how well the ark display works or even if it gets built. It’s not getting built will only prove the forces of evil are conspiring against it. That someone who claims to believe in the Bible and says they can explain how it all happened has a plan for building an ark is good enough for them. It’s just like the book “God is not a Moral Monster”. They don’t need to read it, they just point to it on the shelf and say that proves its case.

12

I’m waiting for him to use up all the money he didn’t want to give back in the first place, go bankrupt and say, “Oops, my mistake”. Leaving all of the suckers holding the bag.

13
I think y'all are missing the point. You look at these things in the same way you look at a display in The Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago. You see the display, which educates, but you know that that there are centuries of science behind it and the people who built it are trustworthy because they have passed through many stages and verifications of their skills to be allowed to create such a display. The people Ken Ham wants to reach see that display and look for something wrong with it. They look for how it fits in their Biblical view of the world. They don't trust the institutions that sanction it. It doesn't matter how well the ark display works or even if it gets built. It's not getting built will only prove the forces of evil are conspiring against it. That someone who claims to believe in the Bible and says they can explain how it all happened has a plan for building an ark is good enough for them. It's just like the book "God is not a Moral Monster". They don't need to read it, they just point to it on the shelf and say that proves its case.
I ain't missing the point. That's why I keep using snark when talking about that ark display. You're right about the sheeple who follow Ham. The look only for things which validate their world view/
14

Forgot I had commented on this for a couple days. My brain is freezing, along with everything else up here.
I just read a note by PZ Myers. He said if Ken Ham had found a nickel on the street, he might claim God had brought him close enough to the goal to start writing checks. His announcement that the debate helped him is really pretty meaningless.

15

Bill Nye is being criticized unfairly in my opinion. So Ham gets to build another monument to ignorance. He only puts his lunacy more front-and-center for everyone to see and people like Bill Nye to expose. The wackos won’t listen but most people will.

16

I believe that Ham’s “museum” has had a number of financial problems over the years, and somebody who’d looked at the bond issue Ham was trying to do to pay for building the ark described them as less valuable than junk bonds (this was strictly from a financial perspective, and had nothing to do with Ham’s beliefs).

17

It looks like Ham’s blaming the whole debate on god. Seems that skydaddy had already preplanned the debate as, according to Ham the money is rolling in from donations round the World. Please god, if you’re up there would you tell Ham to move the ark to say Missouri or Mississippi, why Kentucky? Why? We’re already dealing with snakehandlers.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/01/us-usa-religion-ark-idUSBREA2000A20140301
Cap’t Jack

18
It looks like Ham's blaming the whole debate on god. Seems that skydaddy had already preplanned the debate as, according to Ham the money is rolling in from donations round the World. Please god, if you're up there would you tell Ham to move the ark to say Missouri or Mississippi, why Kentucky? Why? We're already dealing with snakehandlers. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/01/us-usa-religion-ark-idUSBREA2000A20140301 Cap't Jack
I was going to put a laughie face but that wouldn't be right :red: http://www.kentucky.com/2014/02/16/3092068/jamie-coots-well-known-snake-handling.html
19

I read about that last week, CC. All I could do was shake my head. This is the type of belief that give religion a bad name.
Must resist. Must… resist.
Too bad the guy already procreated.
Darn. Couldn’t resist.

20
I was going to put a laughie face but that wouldn’t be right
Damn, thanks for the reminder CC. We're already labeled as witless hillbillies from those feud stories in the New York newspapers and now this crap. And as Darron mentioned, he's procreated? Maybe he can sail his ark back to Australia and the atheist community there can deal with him. :vampire: Cap't Jack