ScienceInTheBible.Net - From Cal
-
this should be of interest - Bill Nye debates Ken Ham
this should be of interest - Bill Nye debates Ken Ham
Anybody watch this? It was on after I went to bed.
-
No, but I want to watch it. Bill Nye to me though is still Bill Nye the Science Guy. The guy that tought me about matter, basic physics, etc. It is weird to think of him as some distinguished scientist.
-
Ham tried to push the Earth is 6000 years old horse shit. There was a lot of "because Bible" explanations as well. Ham used the fact that Nye didn't personally know Noah as a defense of the flood story. Ham believes that Noah was a great ship maker thus it is possible that two of every animal was on a boat he created. It was a joke so I turned it off.
-
I am watching it now while I do some homework.
It seems like the creationist guy is debating a lot of points no one on the other side is making and has yet to do anything to try to prove his side...
-
His 30 minute opening is ridiculous. He has done literally NOTHING to try to prove creation. He has just tried to nit pick the definition of science, he is calling "naturalism" a religion, he is just repeating the creationists can be scientists too.
but again, nothing to provide evidence of his point
good end though "all children are special and made in the image of god" aawwwwwwweeeeeeee
-
I read a summary of it, and it did seem like all of Ham's evidence was the bible. He tried to make the point that we can only observe the present, not the past, so we can't know what happened. This is clearly bollocks. We see something falling, we can see where it came from, it didn't just appear. You see an apple tree surrounded by apples, you can draw the logical conclusion that the apples fell from the tree, not that the magical apple maker put them there. And that's not even close to being as conclusive as the evidence supporting the big bang.
-
Wow, Bill Nye's 30 minute segment actually PROVIDED EVIDENCE. What a great concept. Math, science, etc.
-
I don't see how anyone can think Ken Ham won this. He is now reduced to just using the bible as evidence and saying "well you weren't there!" It is like he is just pandering to the creation museum evidence.
Bill Nye is responding now with what I have been saying. Some people are just competent to say "god did it" and be done. Bill said he wants to know more. He looks at the stars and wants to know how they got there. Not just use religion and forget about it.
God, the Ken Ham dude is falling apart in the 1 minute Q+A sessions.
"Well Bill, there is a book out there that does explain where matter comes from. It says so in the first sentence." (talking about the Bible). No you idiot, that proves nothing. You did not make some great point. A fictional story book is no proof. The worst part is the crowds reaction, actually. They just gleeful laugh when he makes his "points" like it is some great rebuttal and Bill is just some stupid atheist. It is sad
One question was actually "What evidence besides the word of god is there for creationism" and he provided the same kind of answer a politician would. He still has given no evidence...
I will watch the last 45 minutes later
-
Okay, we get it Woody. You and others are atheists. You won't change my mind, and I won't change yours. End of story.
-
Okay, we get it Woody. You and others are atheists. You won't change my mind, and I won't change yours. End of story.
Okay, we get it Woody. You and others are atheists. You won't change my mind, and I won't change yours. End of story.
Well that's gonna be taken as a sign of defeat, rightly or wrongly. But I agree, we have opposite and mutually exclusive stances and neither will budge. Fine. You're free to believe what you want, but when people start trying to claim the bible as scientific evidence, that's where the "do what you want" things runs out for me.
-
Amen.
-
agreed - it all depends on what "truth" you believe.
I could only listen to a little over 2 hours of this before I came to the obvious conclusion that you or me arent gonna change our minds.
points scored on each side in my opinion....
the biggest one for me is the misrepresentation that evolutionary science presumes as fact when it is also a matter of faith in many cases.
And when IT hits a roadblock with questions like the second before the big bang, or how does consciousness form from molecules?
is answered with the statement - " that is a mystery" huh I guess so... kinda like faith in God?
-
I will respond to DieHard and FairHooker tomorrow (exhausted now), but look at this
22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution
I asked 22 self-identifying creationists at the Bill Nye/Ken Ham debate to write a message/question/note to the other side. Here’s what they wrote.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/messages-from-creationists-to-people-who-believe-in-evolutio
the highlight:
this article http://www.ibtimes.com/22-responses-buzzfeeds-22-messages-creationists-evolution-origin-life-1553534 also provides a good response to all of these questions.
Some of the beliefs stated in these questions ties in to the reason why I agree with Chris where "do what you want" runs out. If someone wants to bang their head against a wall, go ahead, it only affects them. But when they want to get all the kids to bang their heads against a wall too, or make that some special part of a once non-head banging curriculum, then I have a problem. Negatively affecting the scientific minds and the state of our society's scientific advancement as a whole affects me. Teaching creationism alongside actual science does that. It cheapens actual science, it lessens it. It could weaken our scientific prowess going forward.
Like the question pictured above. That should not even be a real thing. No one should look at a sunset and go "only explanation is god." You would laugh at the idea of a sun god and a moon god, or some other ancient idea. But saying your god causes the sunset, some how that is ok? We as a society should not even have to take a second to think about this. Teaching creationism (not science) alongside actual science breeds this kind of behavior, this kind of thinking.
So yes, DieHard, you won't change my mind (well, you have not even provided any evidence to even try to) and sadly I won't change yours no matter how much evidence I provide. So to each his own there. But when we start putting these fairy tales on even footing as real science, we weaken our society. We as a country continue to fall behind in the world.
(also, never said I was an atheist. If there is a god I doubt it is anything like the Christian idea of a god. Also, more than likely there isn't and I don't think there is any reason why there needs to be one)
Oh, I guess I did reply to DieHard. Hooker tomorrow then
-
I had origin in quotations. Technically you are right, it isnt exactly an origin story kind of explanation, I did not word it very well. My B. More like from this very instant point and on, from the point where are universe started, where time as we know it started. But not necessarily the beginning of everything that ever was or will be.
The Big Bang Theory is the best explanation we have. More than likely, as we learn more, it will become part of a larger theory.
Through our whole back and forth, I will be honest, I am unsure exactly where you stand or what we were debating. At the beginning you seemed to find a lot of fault in the theory as a whole and equated it to a bearded man in the sky. As this thread has continued though you seem to be more and more accepting of the theory. Idk anymore.
Also, I think NDTs fame came because there is an interest out there in what he has to teach us plus the fact he is an interesting and charismatic figure in the field. Being in engineering I know STEM figures like that are not super common. To get to the level he is at you must be incredibly bright, and it seems like some of the brightest minds can be a little off. So to be at his level and a charismatic figure, that is rare and I bet it can take you far.
Through our whole back and forth, I will be honest, I am unsure exactly where you stand or what we were debating. At the beginning you seemed to find a lot of fault in the theory as a whole and equated it to a bearded man in the sky. As this thread has continued though you seem to be more and more accepting of the theory. Idk anymore.
I think I've been pretty steadfast on where I'm at. There is evidence that supports an event that happened 11-ish billion years ago. There is no evidence supporting the cause of the event, nor what existed before the event, nor why the event happened.
I don't see much wrong with attributing the unexplainable to a divine being instead of writing it off as unexplainable (or "we're getting there eventually").
Having opened up and studied intensely at least a dozen of the most complex machines in the history of our 11-ish billion year development (humans) I can't rely on a "minimum of 10trillion series of accidents" as an explanation for how that machine is assembled.
Sure, luck means a lot in football. Not having a good quarterback is bad luck. -Don Shula -
Woody, why have you chosen to debate these people on this subject? Bored much? Your relying on faith......faith that you can logically explain the most credible of possibilities to people who decided long ago the bible is 'fact'. They're really not, no matter the evidence, willing to accept it. Just like your probably not willing to accept thunder is really 'angels bowling in heaven'.
I work in oil and gas......aka geology. Ive seen rocks from all over the world, hell I've seen core samples from the bedrock of the Atlantic that formed before it was under the Atlantic. The 'how the earth was formed?' and 'How long ago?' questions have CLEARLY been answered. However, shale was recently discovered to produce. If you worked for Shell or Exxon in the 80's and told them you wanted to frac a well in the eagleford shale formation you got fired and ridiculed throughout industry.
My point is, when people make the argument that because you are still making new discoveries and theories that your whole understanding of a particular science is wrong and unfounded, then its time to leave the room if you know what I mean. You seem too invested in a debate that is so unnecessary. God has his uses....he helps you spot a dumbass real quick.
“It is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding.” -
I like the point that Bill Nye can't prove Noah wasn't a great ship builder because he wasn't there.
But... even though he was not there when some dudes wrote the Bible, Ken Ham totally knows it is the word of god.
-
Through our whole back and forth, I will be honest, I am unsure exactly where you stand or what we were debating. At the beginning you seemed to find a lot of fault in the theory as a whole and equated it to a bearded man in the sky. As this thread has continued though you seem to be more and more accepting of the theory. Idk anymore.
I think I've been pretty steadfast on where I'm at. There is evidence that supports an event that happened 11-ish billion years ago. There is no evidence supporting the cause of the event, nor what existed before the event, nor why the event happened.
I don't see much wrong with attributing the unexplainable to a divine being instead of writing it off as unexplainable (or "we're getting there eventually").
Having opened up and studied intensely at least a dozen of the most complex machines in the history of our 11-ish billion year development (humans) I can't rely on a "minimum of 10trillion series of accidents" as an explanation for how that machine is assembled.
I think I've been pretty steadfast on where I'm at. There is evidence that supports an event that happened 11-ish billion years ago. There is no evidence supporting the cause of the event, nor what existed before the event, nor why the event happened.
I don't see much wrong with attributing the unexplainable to a divine being instead of writing it off as unexplainable (or "we're getting there eventually").
Having opened up and studied intensely at least a dozen of the most complex machines in the history of our 11-ish billion year development (humans) I can't rely on a "minimum of 10trillion series of accidents" as an explanation for how that machine is assembled.
Why is it unexplainable? Because we just happen to not know the answer now? You know how much would have just seemed unexplainable to humans 500, 200 even 50 years ago? If for all of humankind, everyone always said "Well, we will never know. So I guess god did it. We will leave it at that", well then we would still be drawing on cave walls. We need people to challenge the "unexplainable". We need to people to look for these explanations. Writing this stuff off to a divine being is just lazy. It is lazy and does no good for our advancement.
-
agreed - it all depends on what "truth" you believe.
I could only listen to a little over 2 hours of this before I came to the obvious conclusion that you or me arent gonna change our minds.
points scored on each side in my opinion....
the biggest one for me is the misrepresentation that evolutionary science presumes as fact when it is also a matter of faith in many cases.
And when IT hits a roadblock with questions like the second before the big bang, or how does consciousness form from molecules?
is answered with the statement - " that is a mystery" huh I guess so... kinda like faith in God?
agreed - it all depends on what "truth" you believe.
I could only listen to a little over 2 hours of this before I came to the obvious conclusion that you or me arent gonna change our minds.
points scored on each side in my opinion....
the biggest one for me is the misrepresentation that evolutionary science presumes as fact when it is also a matter of faith in many cases.
And when IT hits a roadblock with questions like the second before the big bang, or how does consciousness form from molecules?
is answered with the statement - " that is a mystery" huh I guess so... kinda like faith in God?
In what ways is evolutionary science a matter of faith?
Also, not being able to answer something at this time is not a point to creationism or a divine being. Again, it is the arguments from ignorance thing I mentioned before. One the scientific side, the theory of evolution and the big bang theory side, it welcomes and explanation for the gaps. If you can come up with a sound reason that agrees with science and math for what happened before the big bang, than that is great. You can expand on the theory. It is not "faith" similar to believing in god or creationism. It states what we do and what we dont know but are trying to find out.
If someone is taking the creationism absolute belief in the bible side, they know the result they want. They know what they want and the cherry pick the science to try to defend their stance. When asked for evidence, it is the bible says so, and that is gods word. Or something. They aren't seeking new info.
The evolutionist scientific side, it seeks these answers. It bases its stance on the information and evidence provided. If new, contradicting evidence comes about, the theory and beliefs are adjusted or added on to accordingly.
The two sides are fundamentally different and I think it is obvious which side we want to be the base of society going forward. It is obvious which side is more akin to developing science and technology.
-
Woody, why have you chosen to debate these people on this subject? Bored much? Your relying on faith......faith that you can logically explain the most credible of possibilities to people who decided long ago the bible is 'fact'. They're really not, no matter the evidence, willing to accept it. Just like your probably not willing to accept thunder is really 'angels bowling in heaven'.
I work in oil and gas......aka geology. Ive seen rocks from all over the world, hell I've seen core samples from the bedrock of the Atlantic that formed before it was under the Atlantic. The 'how the earth was formed?' and 'How long ago?' questions have CLEARLY been answered. However, shale was recently discovered to produce. If you worked for Shell or Exxon in the 80's and told them you wanted to frac a well in the eagleford shale formation you got fired and ridiculed throughout industry.
My point is, when people make the argument that because you are still making new discoveries and theories that your whole understanding of a particular science is wrong and unfounded, then its time to leave the room if you know what I mean. You seem too invested in a debate that is so unnecessary. God has his uses....he helps you spot a dumbass real quick.
Woody, why have you chosen to debate these people on this subject? Bored much? Your relying on faith......faith that you can logically explain the most credible of possibilities to people who decided long ago the bible is 'fact'. They're really not, no matter the evidence, willing to accept it. Just like your probably not willing to accept thunder is really 'angels bowling in heaven'.
I work in oil and gas......aka geology. Ive seen rocks from all over the world, hell I've seen core samples from the bedrock of the Atlantic that formed before it was under the Atlantic. The 'how the earth was formed?' and 'How long ago?' questions have CLEARLY been answered. However, shale was recently discovered to produce. If you worked for Shell or Exxon in the 80's and told them you wanted to frac a well in the eagleford shale formation you got fired and ridiculed throughout industry.
My point is, when people make the argument that because you are still making new discoveries and theories that your whole understanding of a particular science is wrong and unfounded, then its time to leave the room if you know what I mean. You seem too invested in a debate that is so unnecessary. God has his uses....he helps you spot a dumbass real quick.
Bro, I am in my last semester in mechanical engineering. I have my job lined up and I just want to start working and making money. I am pretty much burnt out, done with school. I use this as a way to pass time in lectures, or to procrastinate from doing HW.
I did also find that debate really interesting. I watched the whole thing while knocking out some heat transfer homework.
I open debate on the topic. I open the floor to anyone that can provide evidence for the other side. I want to hear it. I want to see how it stacks up against the side I am taking now. I open that debate on any topic I have a stance on.
This whole thread though, of course, has not done much to persuade me.
-
I think I've been pretty steadfast on where I'm at. There is evidence that supports an event that happened 11-ish billion years ago. There is no evidence supporting the cause of the event, nor what existed before the event, nor why the event happened.
I don't see much wrong with attributing the unexplainable to a divine being instead of writing it off as unexplainable (or "we're getting there eventually").
Having opened up and studied intensely at least a dozen of the most complex machines in the history of our 11-ish billion year development (humans) I can't rely on a "minimum of 10trillion series of accidents" as an explanation for how that machine is assembled.
Why is it unexplainable? Because we just happen to not know the answer now? You know how much would have just seemed unexplainable to humans 500, 200 even 50 years ago? If for all of humankind, everyone always said "Well, we will never know. So I guess god did it. We will leave it at that", well then we would still be drawing on cave walls. We need people to challenge the "unexplainable". We need to people to look for these explanations. Writing this stuff off to a divine being is just lazy. It is lazy and does no good for our advancement.
Why is it unexplainable? Because we just happen to not know the answer now?.
Uh, yes?
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login