Bill Nye Debates Creationist Ken Ham Live 2/4/2014

Wow the amount of delusional nonsense in here just went through the roof.

I was just point out that the part about light was a little off on how it functions according to hawking, whether thats right or not who knows just throwing it out there. Wasn't tryin to be rude was saying it in a thought you might like it kind of way :).

Read it when it published. It didn't change my life then and isn't now. It's an attempt to rectify what we know about the phenomenon we call black holes. It's not saying the don't exist. It's say they may operate a bit differently than we've been postulating based on the information we've been able to gleen thusfar.

It's science. Ongoing, changing, new discoveries allowing us to shed light on not-entirely-understood universal occurences.

And nowhere here are you proving your God or anyone else's deity.

After several pages you figured it out lol

It would make more sense if you have read Immanuel Kant

I didn't read through the entire thread



Pretty sure this is what dumb people tell themselves to sound smart.

Never ever said it didn't exist I said science does change because our senses and information change was pointing out how faith based it is

Okay then explain how perception works?

It would make more sense if I had a lobotomy.

But thanks again for proving why faith doesn't belong in schools.

Except science doesn't rely exclusively on human perception, especially not in physics. It all uses complex mathematics as proof, which lies outside of the bias of human perception.

If you want to boil everything down to a leap of faith, consider that Science takes faith based on peer review over decades, even centuries. Religion takes faith based on the hearsay of illiterate goat herders in bronze-age Iraq.

It would make more sense if it were time to start drinking for the day to more readily tolerate the supposed logic you're trying to sell.

But what about science class? Kids need to know that stuff?

Ah ad hominem fallacies, hear them roar!

Science has little to do with faith. You're trying to associate two things to prove your personal need to have a deity running things.

No fallacies. Just my own vices for dealing with the world.

You've got your religion.

I've got whiskey.

you need to learn what an ad hominem, science, facts, and faith are as apparently you don't understand any of it.

bring me some

Perception is a thing, but to claim that we can't know/see anything is pretty silly. We live in a reality and it has certain, undeniable rules. The speed of light is about 3x10^8 m/s, acceleration due to gravity on earth is 9.8m/s, and so forth.

Even if you want to wrap it up in 'perception', perception isn't really all that complicated to understand. You can always say that we know for sure what we know for sure when being seen through the lens of perception.

You should probably spend more time thinking about things and less time being wow'ed by them.

Imperial unicorns within the equestrian realm created the universe setting off the Big Bang before they retreated to their sacred realm. Leaving evidence of horses on our planet and sprinkling unicorns and Pegasus in our lore across centuries to enlighten us to the truth.

How is my paragraph above any more or less credible than "God" unless by God you mean the deist interpretation of said entity? Even the deist interpretation has no evidence any God exists outside a desire to place one at the creation of the universe to satisfy a personal desire. The moment you start following a specific god/gods you're now asked to prove your pantheon is real and the thousands of others aren't.

You have faith and that's it. Science works within the realm of evidence and observation. No one has observed a God behind anything simply an infinite construct we dub the universe and rules that apply within it. If we ever do find that elusive God, it most certainly be what the bronze age hatepeddlers were selling us.

Maybe were just a kid's science project. Hi universal overlord, I hope you get an A on your science project before you flush us.

Lol, I would agree the mass of your sunday head bangers yes fo sho. I'm talking about another king of something. And ya I would agree with you again unless you go all Kant,and start questioning all of the universe in which case math would fall apart because all the stuff you were putting together or taking apart simply wouldn't be there. I'm not however going to purpose such an argument because it's silly, either way it doesn't matter though because you still can't trust that the things you are "mathing" act like and are what you think they are. For instances ya 2 + 2 will always be 4, problem would be what if we were wrong and one of the 2 was 3.

Yes. I hope it was sarcasm, but just in case, yes.

And phylophy's point as well is not to prove god, cause again, that's an oxymoron. Phylosophy needs to help find different perspectives to think and approach things. You need questions to find answers.

I studied Kant, as Schopenhauer and most of the other phylosophers. The mayan veil is just something to consider, not a demonstration of anything.

Better be Scotch...

To be fair, Understanding has always been antithetical to religion.

To be fair this thread was doomed from the beginning.

You would be correct if light exists. Please prove it.

Kant was trying to make a point, that saying we can't focus on our own little minds alone.

Burden of proof shifting? Prove God for us all please.

In particular, the God you have decided to throw your lot in with.

Please think about your posts a little more before you click submit.

Try reading Mere Christianity by C.S Lewis its a good start. I wish you guys weren't so negative, just trying to throw out a new way of looking at stuff. I'm not a judging, hateful christian and I'm not trying too.