Anyone who challenges the pronouncements of YECs like Ken Ham 'does not understand science correctly'. 'Science' is, of course, undertaking the pursuit of knowledge AFTER first stating that the whole of the (ancient) BIBLE is infallible truth and anything contrary to the Bible, read in a plain and literalistic manner, is automatically false and must therefore be condemned by all means possible (even if you don't have evidence for it being false). Every Christian knows that - don't they?
I hope you enjoy the following:http://christiannews.net/2013/09/16/rel ... -creation/
The Maher-Nye conversation referred to, 7 minutes' worth, can be listened to here; Maher is a loudmouth btw though I didn't notice the 'profanity' that the link warns of. I've added the following comment in the Facebook discussion underneath:
"What Nye said about the moon is true, Bob. It provides light to Earth some nights - but it is not a light source like the Sun is even though Genesis suggests that it is. And where has he 'misrepresented' Christians, creationism or science? And you cannot censor my comments here Cowboy Bob as this is not YOUR Facebook page."
(I have just re-posted this comment as the second time I looked I could not find it.)http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/17/c ... correctly/
The Myers quote hits the nail on head although he does not have appeared to have blogged on this new row so far. Myers stated that the Ken Ham approach to science has "got that delightful combination of arrogant pretense in which the Bible-walloper gets to pretend he understands better than scientists, and simultaneously allows them to deny every scientific observation, ever". (In fact the Raw Story article links to an earlier Myers blog post of 27.07.13.)http://www.christianpost.com/news/bill- ... ck-104738/
This article, written after Ken Ham posted new comments on his Facebook page, points out that Nye has not publicly declared himself to be an 'atheist'. http://facebook.com/aigkenham
"Two atheists attack Christianity--surprise surprise! Bill Nye and Bill Maher continue their attack on creationists. Bill Nye still doesn't understand the difference between historical science and observational science--so he may be known as 'Bill Nye the science guy'--but he doesn't understand science correctly. Bill Nye also falsely thinks origins beliefs build technology! What a load of nonsense. These two mock the Bible and totally distort the Bible's account of the creation of the sun and the moon. Of course, AiG (and probably many others) have answered their false arguments--but Maher and Nye aren't interested in answers that defend Christianity--they've heard so many answers before (I gave many to Maher in an interview--but he didn't want answers)--they they don't want the truth--they continue to 'suppress the truth' as the Bible states in Romans 1 about such people in rebellion against God. By the way, here is the answer to the sun and the moon issue on the AiG website. http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... f-the-moon
This moon business is a bit of a storm in a teacup - what Nye said is true but Ham's Bible literalism, like that of Hovind and Taylor, forces him to deny this. Nye did not 'totally distort' anything about what Genesis says about the moon. Ken Ham is a liar. The AiG article he links to merely shows that Genesis 1 isn't scientific - as I told YEC Jason Petersen only to be censored yet again for speaking the truth - because it confirms that it is written from an 'Earth-centric' position and the moon does (sometimes) light the Earth at night. But who - except somebody making a wrong assumption in good faith as appears to be the case with the writer(s) of Genesis 1 - would call something a 'light' if it does not emit any light of its own (unlike the sun which is also mentioned in the same verse)? The Upchurch article does not refute the criticism of those who insist Genesis 1 is scientifically accurate - it simply wriggles and tries to deny the obvious.