Quote:
Originally Posted by Red John
Just started watching debate. So far Ken Ham is killing it. Like Bill Nye a lot but he's disappointed so far...his opening statement is ridiculous. Ham opens up by saying there's 2 different kinds of science, and Nyes response is "Well CSI only talks about one kind of science so it must be true." Really Bill?
Can't wait to see the rest here.
|
At the risk of spoiling this for you, I'd like to say the following:
I don't think Nye did particularly well in the debate because he was basically in a no-win situation. There are two ways I look at this debate from Bill Nye's perspective:
1) He directly addresses the ridiculous assertions and semantic arguments that Ham presents as facts; or
2) He ignores Ham's pseudo-science, doesn't engage Ham in a semantics debate and just presents the case for evolution from a scientific perspective without trying to define "what is science
"
I don't think Bill Nye was suggesting that because it's on CSI that it must be true. I think was he was trying to say is that science, real science, is tested every single day and proven to be correct and accurate, CSI is a TV representation of an example of that.