Bill Nye, Ken Ham Debate Tonight At 7

"Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire" (arch-duke-maxyenko) 02/04/2014 at 18:50 • Filed to: evillution

3

62

Debate will be streamed !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! if embedding doesn't work. I hope Bill Nye just walks over, slaps Ham, and leaves.

Goshen, formerly Darkcode > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 16:07

11

Debate summary:

Destructive Tester > Goshen, formerly Darkcode 02/04/2014 at 16:16

0

I'm stealing that image...

Bad Idea Hat > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 16:31

1

I was hoping this was you.

God hates that museum, which is why he's about to dump $FUCKTONS% of snow on them.

Really, how can anyone justify spending tax dollars on that museum vs schools?

Joe_Limon > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 16:43

2

I am excited about this debate. I have a hard time understanding the justifications creationists have to live by. Perhaps this shall shed some light into that very large percentage of americans.

duurtlang > Joe_Limon 02/04/2014 at 16:59

0

When talking about the general public, isn't it mostly a lack of knowledge about how science works in general and the state of biology of the last 1.5 centuries in particular? That's very different from the frequently intentionally deceitful creationists you see in debates.

Joe_Limon > duurtlang 02/04/2014 at 17:07

2

The way I am approaching the debate is that the most informed opinion on creationism is bound to have a few opinions that would cause the average person to stumble a bit.

If the case is mass ignorance, I feel truly sorry for this planet. "Do dogs have brains" levels of intellect would be far more common then I originally thought.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Bad Idea Hat 02/04/2014 at 17:15

2

Fucking dumb fucking hicks.

ddavidn > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 18:53

5

It's a silly and pointless debate. All we will find out is that nobody's mind is going to be changed by either science or religion.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > ddavidn 02/04/2014 at 18:56

0

Your still gonna watch.

Nobody's mind getting changed is a big deal.

505Turbeaux > Joe_Limon 02/04/2014 at 18:58

0

oh man

ddavidn > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 18:58

0

Oh yeah, totally going to watch. It is of great interest to me.

505Turbeaux > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 19:05

0

the difference in accolades of Bill vs Ken was amusing. No smackage yet though

Dusty Ventures > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 19:06

1

Nobody is a flip-flopper

The Transporter > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 19:09

1

But we can observe the past, Ken! If you point a telescope in any direction you can see back over 13 billion years and if you dig down below the Earth you can see back hundreds of millions of years.

Bandit > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 19:16

0

The pastor at my church is a geologist and he tried to convince me the earth was 6000 years old... yeah... I don't listen to him anymore. He tried to back up his claims by citing the layers of rock in the grand canyon are not straight but were curvy and folded.

Disclaimer: I believe bow ties are badass.

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 19:21

0

All Ken's "argument from authority" strategy is doing is proving that even incredibly smart people can have their heads stuck up their own asses.

Ravey Mayvey Slurpee Surprise > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 19:21

0

I lasted five minutes into Ken Ham's 30 minute segment. I couldn't do it, I couldn't hold on.

The Transporter > 505Turbeaux 02/04/2014 at 19:31

0

That's because Bill has only been able to talk for 5 minutes. I expect a lot more smackage once he gets to lay out his argument yet.

Kailand09 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 19:31

1

Dumb debate, neither side can be proven. On one hand, you have a ridiculously extreme and absurd creationist, on the other you have a "scientist" who speaks for the whole scientific community without all that much authority to back it up.

Bill Nye has done some cool stuff, but I don't really consider him an actual scientist. Pretty sure this is embarrassing for both sides. At least I am. I only got through most of Nye and some of Ham.

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 19:32

0

BTW, I'm keeping a running log of my observations of this debate. Feel free to ignore.

Storz > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 19:32

1

Science doesn't require "faith"

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 19:32

1

Protip: If you're trying to win over scientists, don't quote the Bible.

Dusty Ventures > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 19:38

2

You know that chart Ken used about dog origins that he said backed up his side? I couldn't help but notice it went back 30,000 years, five times what he claims the age of the earth to be

The Transporter > Dusty Ventures 02/04/2014 at 19:41

1

LOL

Dusty Ventures > Kailand09 02/04/2014 at 19:43

3

Well he does have a Bachelor of Science degree from Cornell, worked for Boeing, and developed an element used in the Mars rover missions...

The Transporter > Ravey Mayvey Slurpee Surprise 02/04/2014 at 19:46

0

Nye's on now. Let the smackdown begin!

The Transporter > Bandit 02/04/2014 at 19:53

2

And Bill just used your pastor's "curvy rock layers" to prove that the Earth has to be more than 6,000 years old.

Thisnewformatisrubbish > Kailand09 02/04/2014 at 19:57

2

One side has evidence from multiple scientific sources, disciplines.
The other is a fairy tale.

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 20:01

1

Now that's a slam dunk, Bill!

Thisnewformatisrubbish > Bandit 02/04/2014 at 20:14

0

Worst geologist ever.

Dusty Ventures > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 20:14

1

Bill Nye's one fault so far (to me) is that he keeps geeking out on the massive amounts of SCIENCE! and getting a bit off topic.

Squid > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 20:22

1

Man, I missed the beginning of this. . .

Also trying to discredit radioactive dating due to not knowing about the decay rate. My chemistry professors must be lying to me about decay rates being constant. . . and now youtube is fucking up. . .

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 20:27

2

The word "yom" does mean "day" in modern Hebrew. In ancient Hebrew, "yom" could mean "day" or it could also mean "an undefined period of time," like how scientists use "epoc," "era," or "age."

It boggles the mind how a bunch of people can believe with absolute certainty in the infallibility of a text in modern English that was translated from ye olde English, which was in turn translated from Latin, which was translated from Greek, which was translated from ancient Hebrew.

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 20:30

2

So Ken, words have variable definitions when they come to observational science, but they only have one meaning when we're talking about a book that was translated from a translation of a translation of a translation of a translation.

The Transporter > Dusty Ventures 02/04/2014 at 20:46

3

That's the problem with modern science. It's not a mountain of evidence, it's a continent. There's so much evidence to prove this, it's hard to know where to start when trying to explain it to the lay man.

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 20:55

0

What can you really prove, Mr. Ham?

Egg-fucking-zackly

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 21:13

3

Literally literally means literally.

Kailand09 > Dusty Ventures 02/04/2014 at 21:26

0

"Bill Nye has done some cool stuff"

I did acknowledge that. I just don't consider engineers scientists. I suppose that is my own definition, but either way the guy is way more distinguished for his appearances on shows than his actual works.

Kailand09 > Thisnewformatisrubbish 02/04/2014 at 21:30

0

See you're making the assumptions that are wildly "fairy tale" as much as the other argument.

You can not possibly prove there is no God. Ham cannot possibly prove there is .

Also, both sides have "evidence" from multiple sources and disciplines. Extremist creationists are a bit nuts, but so are the extremists that are anti-creation. Unfortunately neither side can really let the other just be.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Kailand09 02/04/2014 at 21:35

1

Engineers are not scientists???????

WTF?????

Kailand09 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 21:36

0

Well I mean we are engineers , not scientists. I generally reserve "scientist" for those with a PhD level degree.

The WB > Squid 02/04/2014 at 21:38

0

Oh man, I so wanted him to go into a simplified understandable version of uncertainty and experimental error.

If you ask twenty thousand people to measure a 10cm board, you'll get lots of 10cm, 9.5cm, 10.5cm, 10.2cm, a slight few of 1cm or 100cm (the guys who didn't how to use a tape measure) and so on, in a normal distribution around the actual length. Just because there are a few cases of people that measured it wrong, doesn't mean as a reasonable man you can't look at it and go "yup, that's 10cm."

Kailand09 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 21:39

0

Also, scientists generally do research, whereas engineers generally are those who apply known sciences. In other words, many scientists search for the currently unknown, and engineers generally use what is already known.

The Transporter > The Transporter 02/04/2014 at 21:39

0

So, to sum it up, that was 80 minutes of appeals to authority and Bible quotations, and 80 minutes of science.

The WB > Dusty Ventures 02/04/2014 at 21:41

1

Yeah, he obviously had so many ideas running through his head that he convoluted a lot of them. I'm worried the average person would rather believe the smooth polished magical story than the lumpy fractures of fact that Nye provided

I really expected more polish from him, he's not the debater I had hoped for.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Kailand09 02/04/2014 at 21:41

0

Those are Doctors. A scientist is

a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Kailand09 02/04/2014 at 21:43

0

Engineers can do both. You have to study things before you can apply them.

Kailand09 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 21:44

0

And I would argue an expert requires more than a bachelor's degree.

Either way it is just semantics. Bill Nye is largely known for his appearances, and I would definitely prefer someone else to argue that side than Bill Nye.

Dusty Ventures > The WB 02/04/2014 at 21:44

0

As it turns out the geeky hyperexcitement that made us all watch and love him as kids wasn't an act and is the real Bill, all the time. And while that makes him awesome for the classroom it doesn't quite work as well in a debate format.

Thisnewformatisrubbish > Kailand09 02/04/2014 at 21:49

1

That's not how science works. You can't claim a thing exists without proof. We can observe evolution in bacteria. We have fossils. We have dna. Poorly translated stories aren't evidence. Sorry, but thems the breaks.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Kailand09 02/04/2014 at 21:49

0

Did you not see the very prevalent "or"?

And Bill Nye is perfect for the job. He knows his shit, and is very good at putting it into simple words and explanations.

Kailand09 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 21:50

0

I'm just going to agree to disagree here. They are simply words and it really doesn't matter... By my internet searching it seems there is just as much variation as our two opinions.

Either way, my whole point is that I dislike Bill Nye getting all the limelight in the scientific community when there are much more intelligent scientists who do a hell of a lot more work and studying within science than Bill Nye does; he just runs around bitching about people who don't get science right and he is ever trying to impose his own views.

The WB > Dusty Ventures 02/04/2014 at 21:52

1

Agreed, you could see him brimming with the awe and wonder of science, and without a script and editing it just turned into a factoid shotgun.

Kailand09 > Thisnewformatisrubbish 02/04/2014 at 21:53

0

Oi, you aren't even trying to comprehend what I've said. There is literally no proof that it doesn't exist either. Did all scientists scoff off the idea of the Higgs because there was no evidence it existed? NO.

Also, it doesn't matter how science "works", when speaking about religion it doesn't even matter. "Science" doesn't get to make all the rules of the universe.

Victorious Secret > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 22:48

2

K,

I get the feeling that amongst all the engineer bros I have on Oppo, I have fewer scientists. Not that I don't love my engineers, but you guys just never had to suffer through critical thought and research like we did (and your sanity is better off for it, I imagine)

No one has never said, 'GTFO religion you aren't wanted'. There are many who say the two have EVERY SINGLE RIGHT to exist as one. Why shouldn't they?

Science, as it is, does not perceive the world as it should be. We perceive the world AS IT IS. We can only judge on WHAT WE SEE. What we OBSERVE. What we can translate into something...solid. Something natural. Something repeatable.

There was this wonderful man known as Theodosius Dobzhansky. You know what he said? "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution". You know what else he said?

"I am a creationist and a evolutionist. Evolution is God's, or Nature's, method of Creation. Creation is not an event that happened in 4004 B.C.; it is a process that began some 10 billion years ago and is still under way."

His point? Religious beliefs and evolution can be compatible, but a LITERAL reading of scripture (referred to as creationism as we know it today) is not right.

In fact, many of our most famous and endearing scientific and mathematical minds have been exceptionally religious. Like...oh...this little known man called ISSAC FUCKING NEWTON. Yes, the father of calculus. The man with the apple. Him. He believed, but he didn't let it interfere his work.

Also, when Creationists blast Evolution as a theory, they are actually complementing it. A Theory is the highest honour any idea can have. It has been tested and stood every test since Darwin and Wallace proposed it. We have tried over and over and over to try and come up with something better, we haven't. We have tried to break the very tenants of evolutionary theory down over the decades, we haven't.

All we've actually done is strengthen it and improve it.

Once again, we scientists have no fucking ambition to SHAPE the world. We simply observe it. We deduce. We figure out. We find the best possible answer and if we can't, we know that (for the moment) what we have so far is good enough.

Religious fundamentalism has been disproven how many times? Not out of bitterness or spite. Out of FACT. The Bible claims one giant flood. The fossil record has how many?

Ussher claimed Earth was born in 4004 B.C. He was only off by some 4 and a half billion years.

Species don't die, they just go elsewhere and are hidden? Well, lets ignore all the fossils (which only encompass around 1% of the total life to have ever lived on Earth period) and lets go find the fucking island that T-Rex and Velociraptor are partying on. I want in on that festival of awesomeness.

Plato and Aristotle? Yea, for whatever reputation they have left lets not burn them further into the ground.

But you know why we can turn around and laugh at those claims? Because we found better. We found more likely. We found more logical. Its what we do. Its what we've always done.

Thats my problem with fundamentalism.

I am not shitting on anyones right to believe in Jesus and in their own God. I'm shitting on their blind desire to tie everything back into a book that was written a few hundred years after the fact. There is my problem. Because I, as Mr. Fucking Awesomesauce Scientist, can't test that. I can't refute that. I have no way to challenge that. How am I supposed to blindly accept that? I can't.

I can have faith. But my faith and my work ethic are two very different things. My faith in how life works is not what I try and see out of life itself. I can't. I shouldn't is the most proper way to put it. I wish more people understood that.

Okay, thats it. Science hat comes off. I'm doing speaking up for my people and our side. As you were.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Victorious Secret 02/04/2014 at 22:52

1

Bill Nye said pretty much all of that.
Minus the colorful language, of course.

Victorious Secret > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/04/2014 at 22:54

2

I have yet to watch, gotta finish up...science notes :(

But honestly, Nye is a better man than any of us simply because he would keep his composure and use words and facts to cut through any nonsense.

I would probably call the other man a narrow minded moron and leave.

Squid > The WB 02/04/2014 at 23:59

0

It is pretty funny about the uncertainty part, it is built into the scientific method so you know the margin of error.

I had class so I'll have to watch the debate at a later time, but with such a subjective matter being thrown against objective matter just seems silly. This guy reminds me of Dr. Dino, who tried to explain the dinosaurs with regards to the bible and all of that.

Did they go over how adaptation is evolution? and how adaptation has readily been observed and documented?

The WB > Squid 02/05/2014 at 00:09

0

No, it was understandably kept on the non-technical side to avoid losing people. They actually didn't debate evolution really. It was Bill saying our current theory is based on what we can observe vs. a generationally re-translated book, asking for evidence supporting creationism and getting the Infant Baby Jeeeeesus as the defense.

Squid > The WB 02/05/2014 at 00:19

0

I think I'll read a synopsis of the debate then. I understand the dumbing down of the content to keep the attention of the public, but I get ridiculously bored when I listen to a watered down lecture.

That stance of what can be observed v. what was possibly lost in translation is probably the best way of tackling this argument though. I doubt anyone had their oppinion changed though. I just don't understand how a strictly religious belief belongs in school being taught as fact with no evidence to back it up other than a book.

The whole concept of evolution has been blown out of proportion by these people. When it comes down to it evolution is just breaking down species by finding the oldest common ancestor and seeing where the split was through the chain of adaptation.

Each and every passing year our world is becoming like that movie Idiocracy. . .

Thisnewformatisrubbish > Kailand09 02/05/2014 at 13:58

0

Creationists want the crap taught in science class. No science is taught in your sunday tax shelters. That sound you here is the point, flying high above your head.
Have fun in Kentucky.

Kailand09 > Thisnewformatisrubbish 02/05/2014 at 14:20

0

I'm not even a creationist, but thanks for laying out the offensive remarks. I'm simply arguing that the entire debate is ridiculous. Pretty sure you are the only one who refuses to understand what I'm trying to say.

You're so dead-set on trying to make the point against creationism when I'm on that side as well.