Zwinglius Redivivus

οὐαὶ ὅταν καλῶς εἴπωσιν ὑμᾶς πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι· – Jesus

Not. A. Chance…

And why, why, why is it labelled ‘uncensored’?  Is that some sick cynical marketing ploy?  Will people who want to watch this debate (why anyone would want to is a complete mystery) only do so if they get to see something or hear something ‘uncensored’?  What the DEVIL does it say about the thing that ‘uncensored’ is even seen as a viable selling point?

Furthermore- why would I want to enrich either Bill Nye (who only seems to have helped Ken Ham raise money for his absurd Noah’s Ark Park) or Ken Ham?

No.  And I won’t say ‘no, thank you’, because that would be a lie.  There’s nothing here to say thank you for.  So, just NO!  NEIN!

gross

About these ads

Written by Jim

March 5, 2014 at 20:44

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. You don’t need to be a full-blown conspiracy theorist to think that Ham’s organization _might_ selectively edit the debate to make Nye look bad. So it’s reassuring that didn’t happen, but obviously the UNCENSORED label is a marketing ploy.

    Don

    March 5, 2014 at 23:23

    • Hmmm… So by saying uncensored they introduce the suspicion that something may be altered…..

      Jim

      March 6, 2014 at 05:35

  2. AiG is fairly infamous for editing interviews with non-6 day creationists in their favour.

    whitefrozen

    March 6, 2014 at 08:22

    • seriously? so ham has the ethics of mark driscoll

      Jim

      March 6, 2014 at 08:25

      • Pretty much.

        whitefrozen

        March 6, 2014 at 08:29

      • well that says everything that needs to be said about ham

        Jim

        March 6, 2014 at 08:31


Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,057 other followers