Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
901

[quote]OldManJoe wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]OldManJoe wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]OldManJoe wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]OldManJoe wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]OldManJoe wrote:
Please explain more what you mean by remission of sins and contrite prayer. If you tell me what that is then I guess I can probably explain how to falsify them. But the issue may be that they don’t need to be falsified because they aren’t shown to be true anyway.[/quote]

Sir, you implied that science had falsified contact with God. That human testing has shown that there is no contact. And that prayer doesn’t do ANYTHING. How was the forgiveness of sins, following a prayer of contrition, falsified? There’s nothing else to it.
[/quote]

Ok I see. Well it looks like there’s no way to test it…[/quote]

All you needed to say. This goes back to Thunderbolt’s comments. Enjoy your day.
[/quote]

Yup, no way to test it, no evidence that it exists, no reason to believe it exists, and if you do believe it exists without testing it’s existence using existing evidence then…speaks a lot about your mental state.
[/quote]

I can only imagine you’re implying an abnormal mental state. Surely you didn’t mean to compliment me. So, have the psychological/neural sciences shown it to be abnormal? One of the most widespread practices of humanity? Do you have a link for that?

I always enjoy my days, but thank you.[/quote]

I didn’t mean you specifically, but people in general.

Anywho I’m saying anyone who believes something without evidence isn’t making sense because faith is without evidence and people honestly don’t use faith for anything else in life (Seriously try and think of one thing) so why should we use it to answer one of the most interesting and important questions there is? (How we came to be)

[/quote]

We all go to bed every day with the belief/faith that we’re going to wake up in the morning, and live our lives accordingly. We believe. We have no proof.

I think there are plenty of instances in our lives we resort to faith.

[/quote]

WRONGGGG!

The evidence that we will wake up is because we as humans have witnessed/observed animals/people/whatevers going to sleep and waking up over the past thousand of years sleep has been documented and we know a lot about going to sleep there is plenty of evidence out there so that is definitely 100% NOT FAITH![/quote]

That is exactly faith. You have faith that the past will repeat itself, you can’t know for certain the sun will come up tomorrow. You can infer it from past events, but you cannot “know” it. Hume stated that unless you can know all the occurrences of an event, past present and future, you cannot ‘know’ that thing to be an absolute truth. Hume was an atheist.

You are using inductive reasoning, and while it’s generally reliave, it’s far from absolute. The only absolutes are deductive truths. Deductive truths don’t exist in the physical world. What makes the physical world function is the metaphysical laws that control them, and they cannot break that bond.

The physical world is one of inference and correlation. Absolutes DO NOT exist in the physical world.

902

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I don’t usually like to link to other people’s work, but this girl is razor sharp and addresses what we’re talkin about. http://creation.com/genesis-new-testament The affirmation of the evolution of man is by definition to call the new testament writers and Jesus himself liars. This article simply demonstrates that point. She doesn’t try to make you believe the bible per se, but only shows that claiming to take it seriously while embracing macro bio evolution is a manifestly impossible position. If somebody wants to believe in evolution? Go right ahead, but do yourself a favor and leave Jesus out of it. For your own good.
[/quote]Thank you for the answer, Tirib.[/quote]Of course. There’s other more technical pieces out there too if you want more.

[quote]ephrem wrote:

We don’t trust the brain’s reasoning without experiments, tests and research that proves [which means a very large degree of certainty] that something is true, or works a certain way. >>>[/quote]Ephrem my dear old friend. At this late date you continue to miss the point entirely. Don’t feel bad though. You’re not alone. Listen to schmichael again please: [quote]Further, your own worldview must be able to provide the necessary preconditions for doing science by establishing a basis for things such as laws of logic[/quote] Amen my brother. =] That is epistemology, the foundation of thought itself, which as I have been incessantly proclaiming since our very first exchange, IS the key to everything.

Until one of you sneering condescending God haters can tell me how and why you are certain that 2+2=4? Absolutely EVERYTHING you say about ANYTHING is a monumental exercise in what will eventually terminate in tautological circular reasoning. That is, entirely and utterly blind faith. Do you not understand that ALL logic must ultimately be deductive or else even inductive probability has no meaning whatsoever? Probability is the state of being more or less certain. But how can there be more or less of something that doesn’t exist? The mental constructs and processes that literally assault us with the undeniable certainty of 4 being the sum of 2 sets of 2 are the very same ones that your exalted scientists are enslaved to for every last particle of data they report.

They are in unwitting bondage to certainty with every beat of their heart and so are you. WHERE DOES IT COME FROM? It comes from your having been created as a finite replica of the God whose super logical nature you reflect. You have no choice. Your hatred for your creator due to your having been born dead in sin will persuade you of literally ANYTHING but that. Make no mistake my friend. The denial of His existence and hence His Lordship over everything you are and everything you have is a capital crime for which you will pay with your eternal soul if you do not surrender to Him who has taken that sentence upon Himself so you can live. Matty, consider this post to you too.

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Hitchens had a weak mind. >>> [/quote]Hitchens did NOT have a weak mind Pat. He had weak arguments. I don’t need MY opponents to be stoopid to be wrong. The sharper they are the more capacity for spectacular error they posses. Hitchens was a frightening genius who spent his God given gifts tragically denying Him and defending the indefensible.

903

[quote]therajraj wrote:

Nope.

When the US government murdered Bin Laden I didn’t consider it wrong.[/quote]

Yeah, that wasn’t “murder” - thanks anyway. Run along.

904

[quote]ephrem wrote:

We don’t trust the brain’s reasoning without experiments, tests and research that proves [which means a very large degree of certainty] that something is true, or works a certain way.

If we can repeat an experiment and get the same results everytime, a hypothesis is proven to be true with a very large degree of certainty.

To put religous faith on the same footing as scientific endevours because both rely on faith is disinginuous because if you hold religous faith to the same standards as you would scientific theory, there’d be very little left of religious faith.

[/quote]

Religion and science are not the samething, yet people always try to confuse the two or use one against the other and that’s just dumb.
Science tells us about the physical world, religion tells us about God. Not the same, not even close.

905

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Religion and science are not the samething, yet people always try to confuse the two or use one against the other and that’s just dumb.
Science tells us about the physical world, religion tells us about God. Not the same, not even close.[/quote]Pat’s view is very prevalent today. Even among those who call themselves the church. The body of Christ. The bible knows nothing of this fragmented compartmentalized thought. 2nd Corinthians 10:5 for instance. (NASB) [quote]We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ,[/quote] That means including “science” Pat (and Thunderbolt and any other of these modernist heretics). Logically (epistemologically) speaking, religion and science ARE the same thing. In fact EVERYTHING is the same as EVERYTHING ELSE. Go ahead and roll yer eyes at the pathetic fundy ya’ll ,but you ain’t gonna take me up on it are ya?

906

[quote]pat wrote:

Religion and science are not the samething, yet people always try to confuse the two or use one against the other and that’s just dumb.[/quote]

Precisely. If Religion and Science were the same, there would be no use for faith.

907

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Religion and science are not the samething, yet people always try to confuse the two or use one against the other and that’s just dumb.[/quote]

Precisely. If Religion and Science were the same, there would be no use for faith. [/quote]

Well they both rely on varying degrees of faith. After all, it’s the interpretation of the event that give science it’s meaning, not the event itself.

908

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Well they both rely on varying degrees of faith. After all, it’s the interpretation of the event that give science it’s meaning, not the event itself.[/quote]See what that fragmented thinking will do to you Pat. Now ya gotta go n say this which is quite true but totally inconsistent with your last post. The exact same foundational thought processes are brought ultimately to bear on every last thought we think. No matter what it’s about.

909

[quote]pat wrote:

Only fundamentalists and atheists read those passages as literal historic accounts. Biblical scholars do not.
[/quote]

Agreed. I’m specifically referring to fundamentalism here (there are more than a few of them around this forum).

But you are right–I was lucky enough to develop a close relationship with a professor of mine from college, one of the most knowledgeable Biblical scholars in the University system right now, and he is really one of the most intelligent people I’ve ever met. But as such his beliefs are very, very different from the beliefs of the fervent/infatuated/paranoid crowd that hangs around here sometimes.

910

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Only fundamentalists and atheists read those passages as literal historic accounts. Biblical scholars do not.
[/quote]

Agreed. I’m specifically referring to fundamentalism here (there are more than a few of them around this forum).

But you are right–I was lucky enough to develop a close relationship with a professor of mine from college, one of the most knowledgeable Biblical scholars in the University system right now, and he is really one of the most intelligent people I’ve ever met. But as such his beliefs are very, very different from the beliefs of the fervent/infatuated/paranoid crowd that hangs around here sometimes.[/quote]Classic LOL!!! Autonomous intelligence is the kiss of death. Literally.

911

So we’ve talked a lot about non-religious secular moral systems in the past and I’ve fielded answers.

So now I ask: For those of you who believe in universal moral system, what morals do you guys consider universal?

912

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

We don’t trust the brain’s reasoning without experiments, tests and research that proves [which means a very large degree of certainty] that something is true, or works a certain way.

If we can repeat an experiment and get the same results everytime, a hypothesis is proven to be true with a very large degree of certainty.

To put religous faith on the same footing as scientific endevours because both rely on faith is disinginuous because if you hold religous faith to the same standards as you would scientific theory, there’d be very little left of religious faith.

[/quote]

Religion and science are not the samething, yet people always try to confuse the two or use one against the other and that’s just dumb.
Science tells us about the physical world, religion tells us about God. Not the same, not even close.[/quote]

Right, even in this thread people are saying that evolution is “just” a theory and is therefore of the same value as christian “scientific theory” like YEC.

It’s bullshit, that’s what it is.

913

In the physical world death is absolute.

914

[quote]ephrem wrote:

In the physical world death is absolute.[/quote]The physical word itself is not absolute.

915

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Only fundamentalists and atheists read those passages as literal historic accounts. Biblical scholars do not.
[/quote]

Agreed. I’m specifically referring to fundamentalism here (there are more than a few of them around this forum).

But you are right–I was lucky enough to develop a close relationship with a professor of mine from college, one of the most knowledgeable Biblical scholars in the University system right now, and he is really one of the most intelligent people I’ve ever met. But as such his beliefs are very, very different from the beliefs of the fervent/infatuated/paranoid crowd that hangs around here sometimes.[/quote]Classic LOL!!! Autonomous intelligence in the kiss of death. Literally.
[/quote]

Intelligence itself is the kiss of death as far as someone with beliefs such as yours is concerned.

If I wrote you a note and told you I had a talking potato that I kept under my cupboard, would you believe me? I can’t show you any photographic or any other kind of evidence, but my friends and I sat down one day and wrote a little story about it. Will you believe us? Will you not only believe us, but will you change everything about your experience on this planet–your beliefs, your politics, your sex life, your entire existence–in devotion to this one truth? Will you live and die for it, all because it is written down and I promise that it is true?

After all, human life necessitates the acceptance of certain basic, unprovable but extraordinarily obvious and logically coherent truths…so my potato speaks. That’s a logical progression, right?

*Let it be known that I’m attacking a certain brand of obsessive and delusional literalism here, not Christinaity as it is practiced by most Americans.

916

[quote]ephrem wrote:

We don’t trust the brain’s reasoning without experiments, tests and research that proves [which means a very large degree of certainty] that something is true, or works a certain way.

If we can repeat an experiment and get the same results everytime, a hypothesis is proven to be true with a very large degree of certainty.

To put religous faith on the same footing as scientific endevours because both rely on faith is disinginuous because if you hold religous faith to the same standards as you would scientific theory, there’d be very little left of religious faith.

[/quote]

Are you trying to use science to test the presuppositions of science?

917

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

In the physical world death is absolute.[/quote]The physical word itself is not absolute. [/quote]

Please show me conclusively that this statement is true.

918

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

In the physical world death is absolute.[/quote]The physical word itself is not absolute. [/quote]

Please show me conclusively that this statement is true.[/quote]

Nope Tribulus is correct.

The only things we know with absolute certainty are that our thoughts exist and so do logical absolutes.

919

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

We don’t trust the brain’s reasoning without experiments, tests and research that proves [which means a very large degree of certainty] that something is true, or works a certain way.

If we can repeat an experiment and get the same results everytime, a hypothesis is proven to be true with a very large degree of certainty.

To put religous faith on the same footing as scientific endevours because both rely on faith is disinginuous because if you hold religous faith to the same standards as you would scientific theory, there’d be very little left of religious faith.

[/quote]

Are you trying to use science to test the presuppositions of science?[/quote]

Reality is what it is. There’s little we can change about that. We can test and try to find out why or how something is happening the way it’s happening and we can get some results and understanding that way.

The [partial] answers science offers to certain problems, evolution for instance, are to me far more satisfying than saying that god did it in 6 days.

Wouldn’t you agree?

920

[quote]smh23 wrote:<<< *Let it be known that I’m attacking a certain brand of obsessive and delusional literalism here, not Christianity as it is practiced by most Americans.[/quote]Ohhh I’m well aware of that LOL!!! Christianity is not practiced by most Americans and least of all by many who most loudly insist that they are. You are attacking Christianity. Not the powerless counterfeits that guys like you always find quite palatable.
As for your potato question? No.