Bill Nye vs Ken Ham
-
Bill Nye the science guy debates Ken Ham the creationist in an hour, gonna be awesome.
-
Well that went as expected, Ken Ham had nothing, talked in circles, Bill Nye won that by a mile.
-
I love Bill Nye, he's an amazing Scientist, and it's always fun to listen to him talk.
There is only one thing I hate in the debate. I don't like how they, the creationalists believe that Earth is 6000 years old. In Bible it says that God created Earth in seven days, but the Bible never insisted of what kind of days. Each day back then could be one billion years right now because Earth back then barely rotated around its axis. Or perhaps, the Bible refered to the days in Heavens. One day in Heavens might be a billion of years up here, or vise versa. Those believers should realize that Bible is not literal in its stuff, its mostly written for lessons, not the historical reference.
-
For those that never saw the debate or do not have two and a half hours to waste, here is what happened in one frame.
-
I copied this years ago and keep it on my computer, to help me keep an open mind when looking at things that have 2 sides
"Big Bang vs. God
Science and religion have long disagreed as to the origin of the Universe. Science says it’s the result of a Big Bang. Religion says it’s the work of God. Each one says the other is full of it. And just like the classic Japanese monster movie, King Kong versus Godzilla, the two of them have been going at it tooth and nail for years, or fang and claw to keep the metaphor in tact. Through the application of higher consciousness, however, a rapprochement may now actually be possible. You see, the problem is not so much in the concepts involved, but in the words being used.
On the positive side, both agree that whatever happened took place a long time ago. And they also agree that though their theory is the right one, there’s still a lot they don’t know about the process. Science, for example, says that even though they can figure out everything that happened after some infinitely minute period of time at the very beginning, there’s still that very beginning they can’t account for. Religion simply says, “Who can account for God?” which is really the same thing.
The problem stems from the fact that they are looking for the answer in different directions. Religion looks inward, relying on a faith that defies description and that needs no verification other than the sacred word. There was a time, in fact, when this sacred word trumped what was evident right before your eyes. Why else would Galileo be threatened with excommunication for preaching that Earth orbited around the sun?
Science, on the other hand, looks outward. Every theory it proposes, every possibility it brings to the table must be proved in a series of measurable, reproducible, unbiased tests. As a result, today’s prevailing scientific paradigm has trained us to believe that our individual internal experiences are subjective and cannot be relied on. They are, we are told, merely the result of our personal interpretations of what is outside and objective. By contrast, the external is absolute, real, and most importantly, true for everyone, if we would only get ourselves out of the way.
This concentration of science in the outer world would not be a problem, except for a built-in assumption, on the part of many practitioners of science, that the inner reality does not even exist. However, denying non-physical existence is no more intelligent than the religious fanatic who swears that only God is real and the material world is illusion. Each is wrong because each is only looking at half the picture.
Meanwhile, quantum physics has recognized the fact that when you get down into the smaller realms, the questions a researcher asks, about the path of a particle or wave for example, will produce different results depending on the answer the researcher is expecting to find. In other words, we cannot get completely out of the way because we are a part of the process itself. And that, dear consciousness researcher, is where the ultimate answer lies, the place where outer and inner meet… in our very own consciousness, our very own ‘I’.
What if Consciousness, itself, were the absolute Ground of Being? What if the feeling of ‘I’ at the very core of our existence were the origin of all there is? What if “out there” and “in here” are each only half the picture? Then both science and religion would be speaking truth, their only flaw being in their denial of the other. What if?
peace……………………….ag"
-
Darn Solo, that cartoon reminds me of Galileo Galilei and the fallacy of settled science. I can't think of one scientific theory that is settled. Even the speed of light is being question in today physics. And lately I hear that infinity may be -1/4.
Good morning Solo. I see you will not be at Base Camp this year. I have had nice conversations with you at the camps and will miss you this year.
Also I miss your rendering. Guess things change over the years.
Ken
-
@unknownuser said:
Darn Solo, that cartoon reminds me of Galileo Galilei and the fallacy of settled science. I can't think of one scientific theory that is settled. Even the speed of light is being question in today physics. And lately I hear that infinity may be -1/4.
Good morning Solo. I see you will not be at Base Camp this year. I have had nice conversations with you at the camps and will miss you this year.
Also I miss your rendering. Guess things change over the years.
Ken
Ken
That is the thing science does not have all the answers, it's an ongoing thing, everyday a new method or new discoveries either debunk or strengthen previous findings. The point here and the reason Bill Nye won last night is simple, it came down to one question "what will it take to change your mind?"
Ken Ham: Nothing as the Bible is the only truth.
Bill Nye: Evidence.
Have fun in Vail, I really wish I could make it, but alas I cannot.
-
@unknownuser said:
I can't think of one scientific theory that is settled. Even the speed of light is being question in today physics.
That is exactly the point of science.
-
@unknownuser said:
Ken wrote:
I can't think of one scientific theory that is settled.Maybe not but gravity seems pretty damned close.
-
@solo said:
@unknownuser said:
Ken wrote:
I can't think of one scientific theory that is settled.Maybe not but gravity seems pretty damned close.
Ahhh.... but that is being questioned also! Is it the result of mass, or is it the result of dark matter, the game is afoot!
-
He should never have debated a creationist in the first place. But hats of to him for thoroughly dealing with it so well.
I have had many argument with family and friends who seems to think that science proves things. That subject x is "just a theory" and not proof.
In reality, science works by failing to disprove a point. It doe not claim omniscience as new data and evidence is always updating new finding. As Karl Popper noted science doe not prove things, but rather disproves things.
The US seems to be the worst at not believing in evolution... it boggles the mind.
-
@arklandesign said:
He should never have debated a creationist in the first place. But hats of to him for thoroughly dealing with it so well.
That was my very first thought when I heard about this "debate." Why lower yourself? Does seem to have acquitted himself well, but still, kinda makes me think of the equal airtime problem when you have fringe or just plain wrong views on things being elevated to equal standing.
-
Why Bill Nye agreed to this debate, he wants to raise awareness that "this belief [in creationism] is still among us" and it is a political issue that cannot be ignored. Creationism still "finds its way onto school boards in the United States".
I heard him on CNN or some channel discussing his reasoning and he said that many Americans do not know these views, yet they have a very strong lobby group that is attempting to lobby politicians in conservative states into adopting this view into schools so he aimed to expose this as absurd with the hopes to get national attention and hopefully push back against creationism being taught in schools.
-
@solo said:
they have a very strong lobby group that is attempting to lobby politicians in conservative states into adopting this view into schools so he aimed to expose this as absurd with the hopes to get national attention and hopefully push back against creationism being taught in schools.
Oh you must mean the Palin's, Bachman's, Jindal's, Perry's & Paul's, of the GOP world, not to mention that guy whose family name sound like a sanatorium.. right?
-
No, Solo means the following Academy Award Winners.
Schumer and Flanken who urges the IRS to investigate citizens because of their beliefs.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/17/flashback-schumer-franken-urged-irs-to-target-tea-party-in-2012/ - whoopie! Sketchup users are next, Autodesk has filed a complaint.Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’ example of class??? And damn why is the government buying so much ammunition lately.
ETHICS COMPLAINT Against Rep. Cummings for Harassment - Yep nothing like using your office to make threats
Hillary Clinton's Benghazi Meltdown: What Difference Does It Make? Not a damn thing, her little girl will always be protected by our government. She will never put herself in harms way. Hey, it only took the military 28 hours after it started to get to the man on top of the building that had his leg shattered. Damn, General Ham should be court-martial for dereliction of duty.
Dem congressman Hank Johnson: If Guam gets too overpopulated, will it tip over - A good example of our education system. Rep. Johnson practiced civil and criminal law in DeKalb County for twenty-seven (27) years. A staunch supporter of public education, he is a graduate of the District of Columbia Public Schools, Clark College and the Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University. Maybe somewhere there should have been a course on islands that would have helped. Just wonder how many innocent people are in jail because of his experience. He would be my lawyer if I ever needed one, not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg
Random examples brought to you to just to put a thumb on the scale to regain some balance.
Note, during phone calls, I always remember to say "hello Mr. Holder". Don't wish him to think I don't appreciate the work he is doing.
As they say at the Olympics, "Let the Names Begin"
To be honest, I not afraid of some jerk telling me I need religion, however, the above supposedly bright people above do put the fear of "God" in me. I try to know the real enemies.
Ken
-
Wow Ken, butt hurt much?
A nerve must have been touched as it seems everyday the right wing nuts resort to their preparation H response "Benghaaaazi", for everything.
Can we keep on topic here and not go on a right wing teabagging tangent? start a Benghazi thread or IRS or Fast and furious thread or anything silly and over reacted...thanks.
- edit, or even better start a new thread called "what does the FOX say", that way you can paste all the silly crazy, exaggerated and untruths from Fox news.
-
Read and weep, this is what Bill Nye is warning us about.
-
Let's just say there's enough ignorance to go around, regardless of political affiliation.
-
aren't religion and science basically the same thing?
i mean, they're both attempts at curbing the human 'need' to explain things.. come up with theories, test them, etc..
the difference seems that with religion, they make it easy by taking the original theories as fact and then being like "phew.. sweet. we don't have to think about that crap anymore"
or something
-
Solo
Will I don't think I am a right wing nut, I am more of a anti government nut. However, if I am going to call someone a name I am man enough to face him and tell him what I think. I find it a cowardly act to use the name "teabagger", which refers to a sick sex act when referring to people who are tired of being taxed, i.e. "tea Party". "Tax Enough Already"
If you were coming to Base Camp, I would walk up to you, look up at you at and call you some childish name, then precede getting my ass kicked.
So now I know why you won't be at Base Camp, you are afraid of me.
In jest, Pete, you have many inches and pound on me. Smash me like a bug.
I do find it very childish, grown people and politicians using the term "teabagger" in what I would call mixed company, women and kids and on TV. They are really disgusting people. But then again, politician and Americans have no pride anymore. The loudest, the most obnoxious people are getting the lime light.
Have a good day. Thumb still on the scale, pushing harder every day.
Ken
Advertisement