or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › The Grill Room › Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham - Page 2

post #19 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsc123 View Post

A friend just sent me a buzzfeed with messages to bill nye from 22 creationists at the debate.  http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/messages-from-creationists-to-people-who-believe-in-evolutio

I hope some of those were written sarcastically.
post #20 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamo View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsc123 View Post

A friend just sent me a buzzfeed with messages to bill nye from 22 creationists at the debate.  http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/messages-from-creationists-to-people-who-believe-in-evolutio

I hope some of those were written sarcastically.

 

They were randomly chosen people.

post #21 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamo View Post

I hope some of those were written sarcastically.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

They were randomly chosen people.

So???  Are "random" people not allowed to be sarcastic?:-P

 

Also, how are they random?  They all (supposedly) believe very strongly in creation and scoff at science.  Seems like a pretty big coincidence to me.

post #22 of 118

#5 is unassailable.  

post #23 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamo View Post

I hope some of those were written sarcastically.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

They were randomly chosen people.

So???  Are "random" people not allowed to be sarcastic?:-P

 

Also, how are they random?  They all (supposedly) believe very strongly in creation and scoff at science.  Seems like a pretty big coincidence to me.

 

Not everyone really understands science, thus those people who don't, scoff it. That's just a part of human nature.

 

You can go too far with any theory or belief. If you start excluding one for the other, you end up misguided.

post #24 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsc123 View Post
 

#5 is unassailable.  

 

Almost have more respect for that.  The typical apologist quips are sad and seem like more willful ignorance despite acknowledgment of the legitimacy of scientific inquiry and discovery.  

 

#5 ("How do you explain a sunset if there is no God?") is almost better.  Obviously there is no "we didn't observe it" argument against physical explanations of the sunset.  People have been to space and watched the earth spin!  That's more like an explicit declaration that there is no need for argument or discussion of any form of scientific thought or inquiry.  Life and the earth are miraculous.  God creates miracles.  End of discussion.

post #25 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdl View Post
 

 

Almost have more respect for that.  The typical apologist quips are sad and seem like more willful ignorance despite acknowledgment of the legitimacy of scientific inquiry and discovery.  

 

#5 ("How do you explain a sunset if there is no God?") is almost better.  Obviously there is no "we didn't observe it" argument against physical explanations of the sunset.  People have been to space and watched the earth spin!  That's more like an explicit declaration that there is no need for argument or discussion of any form of scientific thought or inquiry.  Life and the earth are miraculous.  God creates miracles.  End of discussion.

 

Actually, it was "How do you explain a sunset if their is no God?"  ;)

post #26 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post
 

 

So???  Are "random" people not allowed to be sarcastic?:-P

 

Also, how are they random?  They all (supposedly) believe very strongly in creation and scoff at science.  Seems like a pretty big coincidence to me.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lihu View Post
 

 

Not everyone really understands science, thus those people who don't, scoff it. That's just a part of human nature.

 

You can go too far with any theory or belief. If you start excluding one for the other, you end up misguided.

These are things that go inside of car engines.  One could also argue that bodies are made up of parts, as are models ... anything that is whole for that matter, probably was made up of parts at some point.

post #27 of 118

Watching it now.....

 

Ken Ham probably thinks the ball starts in the direction of the path ;-) 

post #28 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvmac View Post

Watching it now.....

Ken Ham probably thinks the ball starts in the direction of the path a2_wink.gif  

c3_clap.gif
post #29 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvmac View Post
 

Watching it now.....

 

Ken Ham probably thinks the ball starts in the direction of the path ;-) 

LOL

also #18 is completely false.

 

They've found multiple "Lucy's"

 

one of them is even older than Lucy...named Ardi. 

post #30 of 118

Some of the greatest scientists in history were people of faith.  Darwin himself studied theology.  My point about the cherry pickers apply to people in power in education who want to impose their personal beliefs on the education of our children.  Why can't you believe in an Almighty power and accept every facet of The Theory of Evolution?  Of course you can.  They are not mutually exclusive.  It is not an insult to the religious belief of God to accept evolution as fact. Carl Sagan was quoted to say something like "What greater compliment could you give to a supreme being than creating something as intricate and elegant as Evolution"

 

The Catholic Church accepts evolution.  In fact, it is taught in Catholic schools from Kindergarten.  My son's first science work was on dinosaurs, and they were not around when humans evolved. Evolution is not a theory for atheists only.  And again, people of the fringes of religion (both ends) are always trying to divide us.

 

Lastly, the guy in #4 would have failed Thermo. Diversity created by mutation and natural selection increases the entropy of the system.

post #31 of 118

Creationists:

 

"But evolution is a theory, and since I don't really know what that means at all, all I know is it isn't concrete fact, why can't we teach words from a book with no source or evidence instead?"

 

"YOU CAN'T PROVE IT!!!"

 

"Oh, the Bible said it, so that's fact. Way more reliable than the evidence found from the most brilliant minds on earth."

 

 

 

I've heard these arguments (slightly paraphrased) many, many times. Now, having said that, not all religious people or Christians are creationists. Only the people who take a literal interpretation of the bible (The parts they pick and choose, that is...) 

post #32 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life View Post
 

Creationists:

 

"But evolution is a theory, and since I don't really know what that means at all, all I know is it isn't concrete fact, why can't we teach words from a book with no source or evidence instead?"

 

"YOU CAN'T PROVE IT!!!"

 

"Oh, the Bible said it, so that's fact. Way more reliable than the evidence found from the most brilliant minds on earth."

 

 

 

I've heard these arguments (slightly paraphrased) many, many times. Now, having said that, not all religious people or Christians are creationists. Only the people who take a literal interpretation of the bible (The parts they pick and choose, that is...)

 

 

But you can't prove the Big Bang theory either, that is why it is a theory.  That is what I find so ridiculous in all this fuss.  It is two parties arguing about ones belief in different theories.  At this point in time neither can be proven so you are putting your faith in the belief of one or the other.  Even if scientists prove that a "Big Bang" happened, how would you disprove that it was possibly a work of God?

 

Also, whoever wrote the bible, whether true or not, was also brilliant.  If it is true, they put together a masterpiece of books/stories to help guide humanity.  If false, they put together a work of art that will have fooled billions of people over thousands of years.

post #33 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by SloverUT View Post

 

 

But you can't prove the Big Bang theory either, that is why it is a theory.  That is what I find so ridiculous in all this fuss.  It is two parties arguing about ones belief in different theories.  At this point in time neither can be proven so you are putting your faith in the belief of one or the other.  Even if scientists prove that a "Big Bang" happened, how would you disprove that it was possibly a work of God?

 

Also, whoever wrote the bible, whether true or not, was also brilliant.  If it is true, they put together a masterpiece of books/stories to help guide humanity.  If false, they put together a work of art that will have fooled billions of people over thousands of years.

 

I'll address the two bold portions.

 

1: There's the quote I love seeing. You know what else is a theory? Maxwell's equations, RF Theory, Gravity, pretty much anything scientific besides math. Good luck posting on the internet, turning on your lights, or talking on your cell phone if you can discredit parts of science just because they're attached to that "theory" word. The amount of scientific evidence you need in order to get "just a theory" accepted is astounding. You need almost overwhelming evidence supporting it. Meanwhile, there's no real scientific evidence supporting a 6,000 year old earth or an ark that could hold every species on the planet through a terrible flood built by 8 people with no shit building experience. 

 

2: You wouldn't. That's the thing certain people on both sides don't understand. The big bang is a highly likely scenario. Believing in it does not discredit or disprove their being some sort of "divine being". Is there a chance that God created the big bang? Absolutely! That's the beauty of it. I'm in no way anti-God, there may or may not be one. I don't know. But I am anti-Bible (the majority at least). 

 

Oh, and to the last part...L. Ron Hubbard is brilliant too I guess...;)

post #34 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life View Post
 

 

I'll address the two bold portions.

 

1: There's the quote I love seeing. You know what else is a theory? Maxwell's equations, RF Theory, Gravity, pretty much anything scientific besides math. Good luck posting on the internet, turning on your lights, or talking on your cell phone if you can discredit parts of science just because they're attached to that "theory" word. The amount of scientific evidence you need in order to get "just a theory" accepted is astounding. You need almost overwhelming evidence supporting it. Meanwhile, there's no real scientific evidence supporting a 6,000 year old earth or an ark that could hold every species on the planet through a terrible flood built by 8 people with no shit building experience.

 

2: You wouldn't. That's the thing certain people on both sides don't understand. The big bang is a highly likely scenario. Believing in it does not discredit or disprove their being some sort of "divine being". Is there a chance that God created the big bang? Absolutely! That's the beauty of it. I'm in no way anti-God, there may or may not be one. I don't know. But I am anti-Bible (the majority at least).

 

Oh, and to the last part...L. Ron Hubbard is brilliant too I guess...;)

 

That is the problem.  A theory isn't something that can necessarily be proven, it just means it hasn't been disproven through scientific experiment.  The things you mentioned above are theories simply because they they are the most scientific and elaborate ways to prove them that have not yet been debunked by scientific experimentation.

 

In similar fashion, that is how most ardent believers of faith view things.  Nobody has truly disproven anything taught in the Bible.  Most people simply want to believe in something.  I would argue that many people of faith believe simply because they don't want to believe that we are born, live a few years, and then die in a vicious cycle of nothingness.

 

However, my point is that they are still basically theories and each person can choose to believe in whichever they wish too.  As long as I am not forced one way or the other by an outside source I don't really have a problem with religion, or by people believing in science, evolution, etc.

post #35 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life View Post
 

 

I'll address the two bold portions.

 

1: There's the quote I love seeing. You know what else is a theory? Maxwell's equations, RF Theory, Gravity, pretty much anything scientific besides math. Good luck posting on the internet, turning on your lights, or talking on your cell phone if you can discredit parts of science just because they're attached to that "theory" word. The amount of scientific evidence you need in order to get "just a theory" accepted is astounding. You need almost overwhelming evidence supporting it. Meanwhile, there's no real scientific evidence supporting a 6,000 year old earth or an ark that could hold every species on the planet through a terrible flood built by 8 people with no shit building experience. 

 

2: You wouldn't. That's the thing certain people on both sides don't understand. The big bang is a highly likely scenario. Believing in it does not discredit or disprove their being some sort of "divine being". Is there a chance that God created the big bang? Absolutely! That's the beauty of it. I'm in no way anti-God, there may or may not be one. I don't know. But I am anti-Bible (the majority at least). 

 

Oh, and to the last part...L. Ron Hubbard is brilliant too I guess...;)

 

Yep that is how I pretty much see it. If this so called God turns out to be just the supernatural substance that binds all living things in the universe, then that will be a huge let down. I kinda thing humans are conditioned to believe in something all powerful that gives humans a sense of relief that things are not out of control. Still, just pondering. 

 

The big bang is clearly the best theory so far. Just by how the universe is expanding. Maybe the universe will get sucked into the black hole and blow outward in another dimension who knows. Maybe its like K-Pax with out the replay. Get sucked in the black hole get Big Banged on the other side, rinse and repeat. 

post #36 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by SloverUT View Post
 

 

That is the problem.  A theory isn't something that can necessarily be proven, it just means it hasn't been disproven through scientific experiment.  The things you mentioned above are theories simply because they they are the most scientific and elaborate ways to prove them that have not yet been debunked by scientific experimentation.

 

In similar fashion, that is how most ardent believers of faith view things.  Nobody has truly disproven anything taught in the Bible.  Most people simply want to believe in something.  I would argue that many people of faith believe simply because they don't want to believe that we are born, live a few years, and then die in a vicious cycle of nothingness.

 

However, my point is that they are still basically theories and each person can choose to believe in whichever they wish too.  As long as I am not forced one way or the other by an outside source I don't really have a problem with religion, or by people believing in science, evolution, etc.

 

This is the fundamental problem. The creationists trying to get evolution and science thrown out of the classroom in favor of teaching the Bible. Sure, nobody has disproven anything taught in the Bible...but there's no evidence of any of it being anything other than a book. I could write a book tomorrow about magical dragons and flying monkeys...you can't disprove anything in it, but that doesn't mean it's real.

 

Whether people want to believe it or not, there is a lot of evidence...a LOT of evidence supporting evolution and the big bang theory. Meanwhile, there is no real scientific evidence supporting the majority of the Bible. Matter of fact, again, there IS a lot of evidence that suggests the majority of the Bible is flat out fiction.

 

These people say "you can't prove it" or "it's just a theory", but then want their Bible taken as concrete fact just because it's the Bible.

 

The whole "You can't prove it" line is beyond sad. Just like in science, if you want your Bible taught in schools, it shouldn't have to be disproven, you should have to find real evidence supporting it. Just like evolution...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Grill Room
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › The Grill Room › Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham