File: Bill Nye - Creationism is Inappropriate for Children.swf-(8.63 MB, 640x360, Other)
[_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)02:48 No.2419443
i see your random youtuber and raise you a bill nye
Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)02:51 No.2419445
>>2419443
I fold in the name of science
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)02:53 No.2419447
>>2419443
/pol/ hates him now.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)03:00 No.2419454
>>2419447
why?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)03:05 No.2419459
>>2419454
Because he's friends with Obongo.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)03:12 No.2419466
>>2419454
/pol/ reporting in
he's kinda a prick, not much else to say
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)03:24 No.2419473
>This argument on evolution
The problem is that as a Christian, I don't believe this is relevant to our religious doctrine.
Sure, circumstantially the Bible may not agree with evolution, but I'm not going to work too hard
thinking on this question when the argument is beneath intelligent people. Figure it out for
yourself by doing the research you can and stop flinging shit.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)03:31 No.2419478
>>2419473
>doing the research
You meant having a first world education?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)05:32 No.2419568
>>2419478
Being educated and doing the research on a subject are two different things.
>> [_] OP 06/17/14(Tue)05:39 No.2419569
>>2419568
Being stupid and being a troll is two different things as well.
Doesn't mean you can't be both at the same time.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)05:41 No.2419571
I love how Bill Nye is just casually stating his opinion and not trying to sound agressive but is
completely tossing the salad of every Christian forever.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)05:43 No.2419573
Creationism is just Christianity without the faith in an actual god.
It serves no purpose what so ever even for the people who believe in it.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)05:58 No.2419588
>>2419473
except you fail to understand the effect you have as yet "another" person who says "well, it
outright discredits a book that is supposed to be infallible, but I'm gonna ignore it because I'm
not interested" you either pose the notion that it's fine to disregard the bible, in which
case...why the fuck are you christian? or you allow the thought to fester that evolution must be
false, after all. How can it discredit a book that is the word of an infallible being?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)05:59 No.2419591
It really is a shame that Bill Nye said evolution denial is unique to America, because it isn't.
>>2419569
That that anon, but I can see you missed the point. I bet you're educated but you wouldn't know
what are the best brand of speakers to buy without sitting down and doing some research. It's
like that. That's the difference between being smart, i.e. educated, and getting off your
backside and using some initiative, i.e. researching topics. Honestly, anti-christian nutters are
as bad as the christian nutters in that they both want to shove shit down your throat for the
exact same reason: being delusional by believing whatever they're told instead of reaching their
own conclusions. Congratulations, you're now their patron saint.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)06:22 No.2419606
>>2419466
Aren't all smart people?
Probably why you guy's like each other so much.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)06:23 No.2419607
>>2419573
But it is the best way to unify the world through religion because it is the belief that makes
the most sense.
>> [_] friendsofsandwiches 06/17/14(Tue)06:27 No.2419609
At the risk of playing devils advocate, as it were, I do have to wonder how much of science do we
just 'accept', and 'black box' it?
In many ways, we have to take, on faith, what some scientists say as fact.
Granted, supposedly with enough time and resources, we should be able to duplicate any given
experiment ourselves, and correlate various facts of said given experiments.
But by that token, any time a scientist or scientific body comes up with a new theory or
explanation of something that flies in the face of current accepted standards, said
theory/explanation will face an uphill battle to be accepted. Not unlike people of faith being
told their religion is false.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)06:28 No.2419610
>>2419473
Enjoy hell.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)06:31 No.2419613
>>2419609
Eh, not really.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:16 No.2419631
>>2419610
Catholicism denounces the idea of hell. The reasoning is that no all knowing, all loving God
would subject people to eternal torment, and that the idea was only adopted in the 1700's when
the Divine Comedy was released and gained widespread popularity.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:18 No.2419634
>>2419631
>The reasoning is that no all knowing, all loving God would subject people to eternal torment
Untrue. And it is heresy to say that you know more than God, if God deems you go to Hell. Do not
try to presume you have the logic capable of understanding the divine, you will fail.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:19 No.2419635
>>2419631
>in the 1700's when the Divine Comedy was released
1300's moron.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:19 No.2419636
>>2419609
>>2419613
It's really a problem of time management, no single person can know everything and keep up with
the activity in all scientific fields.
Paleontologists have to take some physicists word on stuff, same the other way around.
"You can't shit in every bush", so-to-speak.
The REAL problem begins when politics meets science. When Congressman A has to decide his
position on energy, should he be an expert on physics in order to trust the data he's given and
the advisors who speak with him?
There's a case to be made for science literacy in general, for sure, but just how literate and
knowledgeable does everyone need to be in every subject?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:20 No.2419637
>>2419635
Yeah, it was written then but not published until late 1500's.
But it goes to show the focus on hell is still older than he gives credit.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:20 No.2419638
>>2419443
bill its a jerk
evolution its a joke
im out, im going to see some good anime
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:21 No.2419639
>>2419631
Catholicism is satanist anyway.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:36 No.2419641
The thing is, there are both stupid sides to both arguments.
Evolution has huge missing sections, but the faith that they will have some route that will be
found in the future.
Creationism and faith depend entirely on that faith as well.
Evolution has huge major sections missing from it that we don't fully understand yet.
We have only a slight clue on the genesis of life, mainly being lots of heat, electricity (static
mainly in the chaotic early earth) and millions of years resulted in loads of molecules being
formed, which chained up together with each other, and so on, and so on, until eventually some
patterns were created that could consume resources and produce other resources (at an extremely
basic level).
Most of these biological machines were basic as shit and most never went anywhere at all.
Only some of them were capable of producing the required molecules that yet other basic machines
could use to combine in to other things.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:43 No.2419643
>>2419641
Continued.
This, after another few million years, led to even more complex machines, which led to massive
changes to Earth (namely Oxygen atmosphere), which allowed for multi-cellular life, which allowed
for complex life.
A LOT of life died off during those few billion years that led up to our time, some life which
could have had the chance of becoming intelligent.
From Siberian Traps to the asteroid.
Hell, the collision of the moon wiped out massive chains of evolution as well (simple bacterial
stages at that). Life started on Earth very early.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:47 No.2419644
>>2419643
And again.
People arguing against it argue against it because they cannot comprehend the MASSIVE timescales
and INSANELY fucking huge number of collisions that happen at a planetary scale.
They already cannot comprehend simple things, such as the fact that a human dies every few
seconds, or the fact that quadrillions of insects die every few seconds.
The human mind can't comprehend these things, even when educated. To force such a concept,
somehow, in to a human mind would literally kill said person. It simply has no ability to
comprehend that thing in its entirety. And such a number is infinitely smaller than every single
collision that happens on this planet every second between every atom.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)07:48 No.2419645
>>2419644
And finally,
They forget that Science only gives a damn about the Hows of the world, not the Whys. Religion is
the Why.
Both can co-exist peacefully. Outside of atrocious religions like Shitnianity, that is.
But even, more and more Christians only use it as a basic framework for Doing Good, rather than
give a damn about any of the stupidity in it.
Sadly there are still huge numbers of people that take the Bible literally, word for word.
Will we ever figure out the Whys? Never, it is impossible. But we can certainly go as far as
existence allows to figuring it HOW it exists.
Evolution easily falls under being capable of proving in its entirety.
Consciousness, probably not. That, personally, sounds like a fundamental thing that has no
"beyond".
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)08:19 No.2419660
>>2419606
R E K T
E
K
T
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)08:22 No.2419661
When the followers of Christianity wrote the bible they did not understand how God had created
the universe and the Earth and the animals which live upon it, so they had to speculate to the
best of their ability.
They did not understand the extremely complex machinations that God has built for the Universe to
behave in the way that it does, and because of this the Bibe comes across as a much more
primitive worldview and Creationists are taking it too literally without looking at the reasons
why it is written as it is.
Denying evolution is intellectually bankrupt, but so is suggesting that a being as all powerful
as God could not have created the Universe and the rules which govern its existance.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)08:40 No.2419666
>>2419661
>When the followers of Christianity wrote the bible they just pulled everything out of their ass.
There are so many flaws, fallacies, and straight up untrue things that Christianity
conceptualizes, and all religion, for that matter, that make it impossible to believe that shit.
I don't understand how people can ignore the stupid, untrue parts of their sacred texts, and only
cherry pick the parts they agree with. The whole system is fabricated.
I'm willing to believe there is a possibility of a god, but if there is, humanity doesn't have
the slightest fucking clue about him.
>> [_] BismuthVectoring !FRESHtYylA 06/17/14(Tue)08:42 No.2419667
>2014
>Still arguing creationism vs evolution
Are americans literally primitive?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)08:46 No.2419668
>when people believe something untrue it holds the rest of us back
*le eugenics face
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)08:48 No.2419669
>>2419668
It's true, Americans should all be sterilized.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)08:51 No.2419673
>>2419669
That's what we get for mixing puritans with niggers and mestizos
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)08:58 No.2419676
>>2419666
oh shit it's satan
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)09:01 No.2419680
>>2419666
Christianity isn't doesn't have set beliefs, only denominations do.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)09:15 No.2419684
>>2419668
>Implying Eugenics is flawed
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)09:16 No.2419685
>>2419684
>implying you're not a shitlord
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)09:26 No.2419689
>>2419591
On the scale of how many people believe in creationism it is, sure there are creationists
everywhere, but America has the highest concentration of them.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)09:27 No.2419690
>>2419447
>caring what /pol/ thinks
>> [_] Anonymous 06/17/14(Tue)09:31 No.2419695
>>2419645
They really can't though. Take it from someone who does Philosophy of Science for a living. They
are just not compatible at their fundamental levels. Nobody is saying you can't be both - but
when one revolves around testability in order to be considered viable religion just can't work in
the same framework as science, just like science can't work in the same framework of going off
"faith."
One requires disregarding of evidence, other requires evidence as the bread and butter for
believing what's possible in the Universe.
Untestability =/= "oh it's possible for god to exist!"
