Bill Nye vs Ken Ham creationism/evolution debate

[Day]

If you want to have your palm read by someone who is a scorpio while Chiron is in the house of Jupiter and stop off for some acupuncture after, fine, whatever as long as those silly beliefs don't translate into your political beliefs or ideals passed on to children.

I am this scorpio.

[myreality]

Was that before or after "a fish in a pitch black cave which evolves to become blind has lost the ability to do something it previously could"? because I wouldn't want you to miss out on that gem

Must have been after,...... unless i zoned out into the void.

[Waraji]

Was that before or after "a fish in a pitch black cave which evolves to become blind has lost the ability to do something it previously could"? because I wouldn't want you to miss out on that gem

That one was pretty good. Man if Richard Dawkins would have debated this guy, he would have had him in a puddle of ass on the floor. Nye is way too polite for such topic. Would have eaten him with my Bear Teeth, cuz you know those are sharp too.

Spoiler: show

http://www.kutwereld.nl/VLEES/onnatuurlijk02.jpg

Do Fish count as berries?

[Odin'sLaw]

That one was pretty good. Man if Richard Dawkins would have debated this guy, he would have had him in a puddle of ass on the floor. Nye is way too polite for such topic. Would have eaten him with my Bear Teeth, cuz you know those are sharp too.

Spoiler: show

http://www.kutwereld.nl/VLEES/onnatuurlijk02.jpg

Do Fish count as berries?

the ripest berries you'll ever know (still meat )

[Athas]

I had to stop when he said all scientists and engineers are creationists because God created logic.

I would have liked to see Nye be a bit more aggressive but I can understand why not. Though one point I wish he would have raised is if God created natural laws that are always constant, why can't we use these constant laws to infer things from the past. Not that I didn't enjoy hearing 'nope, the past is unknowable, that's your lot, mustn't dwell' five thousand fucking times.

[Ksandra]

Try getting an 18 year old who has never been told god is absolutely real to believe, and they'll stare as if being addressed by a crazy person. Or laugh. Both are appropriate responses.

You can't be serious.

Or at least you know nothing of how born-agains work. Or nothing about teenagers for that matter.

It is very easy to take an atheist 18 year old who just went through all the dramas that high school brings and convince them that there's something else to look for. Whether that's religion, drugs, alcohol, etc.

My first year in college I went to one of those "non-denominational" christian groups, which was really just all baptists with me being the evil Catholic (needless to say I didn't stay for long). That place was chalk full of once atheists-raised kids.

[Jaybar]

That one was pretty good. Man if Richard Dawkins would have debated this guy, he would have had him in a puddle of ass on the floor. Nye is way too polite for such topic. Would have eaten him with my Bear Teeth, cuz you know those are sharp too.

Yelling and demeaning a Creationist (and in any case, just about anyone) does not make them change their mind, but rather close their eyes and ears tighter and embolden their resolve. Nye's approach in the debate was the best case for rebuttal (maybe the basalt..slid over the trees? Critical thinking goes a long way). You (and others who agree with this sentiment that ass-whooping > polite approach) are not encouraging an environment conducive to critical dialogue in debate. It not longer becomes a debate and rather turns into an atheist circle-jerk; nobody wins.

[Meresgi]

And yes, believing the above nonsense is science, or based in fact, does in fact hurt society.

No, what hurts society is when you blindly believe in ANYTHING. People are going to segment themselves into "cliques" with everything. It's like the Wii South Park episode where the future has different sects of science who kill each other over the correct "Truth".

Religion requires believing things without evidence

Religion requires faith. Do I believe in everything the bible says alone? Fuck no, and no one should pick it up and go "this has all the answers", instead they should go "This makes me want to know the answers" but then again I don't consider myself a christian or any other singular denomination because I think all religions are basically the same, just people have fostered animosity towards anything that isn't labeled as their own.

I believe science has all the answers, but I don't believe for a second that the answers we find today arnt going to be dis-proven tomorrow. If you do, then you're no better then a religious zealot.

[Stilzkin]

Though one point I wish he would have raised is if God created natural laws that are always constant, why can't we use these constant laws to infer things from the past. Not that I didn't enjoy hearing 'nope, the past is unknowable, that's your lot, mustn't dwell' five thousand fucking times.

He did kind of address this. He kept saying that scientists wrongly assume that processes, such as tectonic plates and radioactive decay, work today as they did in the past. So he doesn't actually seem to believe there are constant laws and because of this to him the past is unknowable.

[Meresgi]

You (and others who agree with this sentiment that ass-whooping > polite approach) are not encouraging an environment conducive to critical dialogue in debate. It not longer becomes a debate and rather turns into an atheist circle-jerk; nobody wins.

[Tyrath]

If you think ass whooping approach doesn't work, I invite you to watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn0tPRjVBvw#t=1h45m20s


Can watch the whole thing or skip to the end for the results, but I'm linking the best part because it's Hitchens.

[Blubbartron]

There is no critical dialogue that can be had with religious people, and there is no debate about whether or not evolution is scientifically supported. In the great words of House, if you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people.

[Raldo]

There is no critical dialogue that can be had with religious people

Heh, I was glad to see this addressed in the video.

2:04:00
"What, if anything, would ever change your mind?"

"[...] No. No one's ever going to convince me that the word of God is not true."

[Odin'sLaw]

as an atheist i will happily listen to anyone about there religion or there views but i will tell them i can not be "temped" by religion, once its my turn to explain why there "speech" is....."wrong", "NO MY GOD IS THE BEST GOD HE IS SO AMAZING HE JUST DOES LIKE EVERYTHING" it does worry me

[Tyrath]

Their*

Sorry, after the third one I had to.

[Odin'sLaw]

Their*

Sorry, after the third one I had to.

sorry dyslexia 100% messes with the same sounding words :/

[ronin sparthos]

There is no critical dialogue that can be had with religious people.

Pretty sure there are religious people who may not agree with you on the 'God' question but can agree dumb shit like the creation museum, biblical literalism and christian dominion is nonsensical.

[quannum]

dyslexia? are you open-minded about the possibility that it might be satan?

[Odin'sLaw]

dyslexia? are you open-minded about the possibility that it might be satan?

nowai man me and him are tight he's even going to let me borrow his condo in the autumn >.> <.<

[notorious bum]

Repeat after me: "I come in the name of Jesus"