Aug 29 - Bill Nye The Science Guy Rips On American's Who Teach Creationism To Children

That's not what radioactive decay is. It's not the same as decay. You're talking about 2 different things and mixing them up. Radioactive decay, has to do with how long an atom of an element becomes dest@bilized. So, as long as the thing we are measuring, has atoms of a known element, we use math to apply the rate of decay in order to figure out the age.

Let's say you lose 5 lbs a year. You weigh 100 lbs right now, but originally you weighed 150 lbs. So, how long have you been losing weight? Since we know the Rate of decay(5 lbs/year) we can calculate that you have lost weight for 10 years.

That's just a super simple example, obviously it's more complicated than that, and isn't linear.



Are you serious? You're talking to a BS chem major, now grad student and you're trying to school me on decay. Where do you teach at, professor [pic]

1) what are you talking about? What does that date have to do with anything? Radioactive decay is measurable RATE. We use simple math to calculate it, just like we would use math to calculate the age of a savings account with 5% interest, which is now worth $1000, but originally started with an investment of $500. If the account is now worth $1000, we can calculate how old the account is. Simple, simple stuff.

2) [pic]

First of all, Gravity is a SCIENTIFIC FACT. What you are trying to refer to(i think) is the THEORY of Gravitation. Specifically, Sir Issac Newton's theory of gravitation. A THEORY is used to describe and attempt to explain SCIENTIFIC FACT. Yes, you are right, Newton's theory of gravity was not correct because it did not work in all models, SO now we use Albert Einstein's Theory of gravitation, which may one day be disproven by another, better theory. We know gravity exists, we just don't know the exact mechanism which makes it work.

IN NO TIME WHATSOEVER, DID GRAVITY STOP BEING A SCIENTIFIC FACT. NONE.

And you're highlighting one of the greatest things about science, it is open to change! No absolutes! You can't say the same for Creationism, because it's based on a collection of ancient stories written by men which we know nothing about. Except from the ancient stories, which were written by men....

Are you serious? You're talking to a BS chem major, now grad student and you're trying to school me on decay. Where do you teach at, professor [pic]

.

Perfect my[..].

70% of this planet is uninhabitable by humans.

Meteor strikes wiped out entire species.

Natural disasters decimate entire countries yearly.

And that's from geological/meteorological perspective.

When looking from a biology perspective, diseases, birth defects, disabilities and other run rampant in all families of the biota kingdom.

And from an astronomical perspective, what the !! are the other planets in our solar system then? Was god just !!ing around with making them and said "ehhhh i guess Ill make this ONE PLANET habitable by living organisms and the other ones will just be there so humans can have !! to look at in space" ?

People can't live with the (probable) fact that life is a happy accident. We just have to be "special".

This is a really good post. I see both sides of the coin. I honestly believe the truth is a mixture of the two extreme ideas. While I agree that species do change over time to adapt and survive etc., I also believe that was the "plan". Things are too perfect for them to have just happened by accident. With that being said, I still stand by my argument that creationism is the only way ancient cultures could explain the science behind creating humans. Believing in creationism and believing in a "prometheus" type of explanation are more similar than people want to admit.

The difference (and the argument) comes about when discussing the "divinity" of the Grand Creator. Believing in either extreme is not logical, but believing in a combination of the two does not make a religious extremist or an infidel.

The truth is............................. the answer is within you. Understanding who you are and becoming in tune with your, body, mind, and spirit (energy or soul) will bring you closer to the answer than you think. Understanding that we are ALL connected (EVERYTHING IN NATURE) is to truly understand who you are, where you come from, and where you are going.

Look at it like this: planets are created from the matter resulting from an exploding star. So whether you believe God created you from dust, or you came from a primordial soup, the same stuff that is in a star IS IN YOU.

Energy is the invisible tissue that binds us all together. Putting out negative energy is bad FOR THE PLANET. Put out good energy and watch YOUR ENTIRE LIFE CHANGE.

JUST MY $.02

What the hell does this have to do with anything? You're saying we made a mistake, then realized we made a mistake, and took steps to fix it. Sounds pretty logical to me. [pic]

Scientists, and humans in general, are always changing their idea's and opinion's on things, realizing they were wrong about something and fixing it or coming up with a new solution (Or new theory).

When's the last time creationists saw the flawed logic in something and changed their opinion on it? To them it's "This is how it happened. Nothing you can say or do will change my opinion on it. This is simply what happened".

If some evidence popped up tomorrow discounting Evolution, I would have no problem analyzing the evidence and changing my stance on the subject. That's the whole reason creationists frustrate us. They don't use logic in arguments and it is pointless to argue with them.

I am changing my opinion about the origins of the Universe all the time, constantly. I take in everything I read/watch/hear and it alters my perception of everything.

Logic. [pic]

Uploaded with


Maybe you not as smart as u think u are?

Addax (Light-colored, large Saharan antelope) - Deuteronomy 14:5
Ant - Proverbs 6:6; 30:25
Antelope - Deuteronomy 14:5; Isaiah 51:20
Ape - 1 Kings 10:22
Bald Locust - Leviticus 11:22
Barn Owl - Leviticus 11:18
Bat - Leviticus 11:19; Isaiah 2:20
Bear - 1 Samuel 17:34-37; 2 Kings 2:24; Isaiah 11:7; Daniel 7:5; Revelation 13:2
Bee - Judges 14:8
Behemoth - (A monstrous and mighty land animal; Some say it's a mythical monster of ancient literature; Possible reference to dinosaurs.) Job 40:15
Buzzard - Isaiah 34:15
Camel - Genesis 24:10; Leviticus 11:4; Isaiah 30:6; Matthew 3:4; 19:24; 23:24
Chameleon - Leviticus 11:30
Cobra - Isaiah 11:8
Cormorant (large black water bird) - Leviticus 11:17
Cow - Isaiah 11:7; Daniel 4:25; Luke 14:5
Crane - Isaiah 38:14
Cricket - Leviticus 11:22
Deer - Deuteronomy 12:15; 14:5
Dog - Judges 7:5; 1 Kings 21:23-24; Ecclesiastes 9:4; Matthew 15:26-27; Luke 16:21; 2 Peter 2:22; Revelation 22:15
Donkey - Isaiah 1:3; 30:6 John 12:14
Dove - Genesis 8:8; 2 Kings 6:25; Matthew 3:16; 10:16; John 2:16
Eagle - Exodus 19:4; Isaiah 40:31; Ezekiel 1:10; Daniel 7:4; Revelation 4:7; 12:14
Eagle Owl - Leviticus 11:16
Egyptian Vulture - Leviticus 11:18
Falcon - Leviticus 11:14
Fish - Exodus 7:18; Jonah 1:17; Matthew 14:17; 17:27; Luke 24:42; John 21:9
Flea - 1 Samuel 24:14; 26:20
Fly - Ecclesiastes 10:1
Fox - Judges 15:4; Nehemiah 4:3; Matthew 8:20; Luke 13:32
Frog - Exodus 8:2; Revelation 16:13
Gazelle - Deuteronomy 12:15; 14:5
Gecko - Leviticus 11:30
Gnat - Exodus 8:16; Matthew 23:24
Goat - 1 Samuel 17:34; Genesis 15:9; 37:31; Daniel 8:5; Leviticus 16:7; Matthew 25:33
Grasshopper - Leviticus 11:22
Great Fish (Whale) - Jonah 1:17
Great Owl - Leviticus 11:17
Hare - Leviticus 11:6
Hawk - Leviticus 11:16; Job 39:26
Heron - Leviticus 11:19
Hoopoe - Leviticus 11:19
Horse - 1 Kings 4:26; 2 Kings 2:11; Revelation 6:2-8; 19:14
Hyena - Isaiah 34:14
Hyrax (Coney or Rock Badger) - Leviticus 11:5
Kite - Leviticus 11:14
Lamb - Genesis 4:2; 1 Samuel 17:34
Leech - Proverbs 30:15
Leopard - Isaiah 11:6; Jeremiah 13:23; Daniel 7:6; Revelation 13:2
Leviathan - (Could be an earthly creature, crocodile; Some say it's a mythical sea monster of ancient literature; Possible reference to dinosaurs.) Isaiah 27:1; Psalm 74:14; Job 41:1
Lion - Judges 14:8; 1 Kings 13:24; Isaiah 30:6; 65:25; Daniel 6:7; Ezekiel 1:10; 1 Peter 5:8; Revelation 4:7; 13:2
Lizard - Leviticus 11:30
Locust - Exodus 10:4; Leviticus 11:22; Joel 1:4; Matthew 3:4; Revelation 9:3
Maggot - Job 7:5; 17:14; 21:26; Isaiah 14:11; Mark 9:48
Mole Rat - Leviticus 11:29
Monitor Lizard - Leviticus 11:30
Moth - Matthew 6:19; Isaiah 50:9; 51:8
Mountain Sheep - Deuteronomy 14:5
Mourning Dove - Isaiah 38:14
Mule - 2 Samuel 18:9; 1 Kings 1:38
Ostrich - Lamentations 4:3
Owl - Leviticus 11:17; Isaiah 34:15; Psalm 102:6
Ox - 1 Samuel 11:7; 2 Samuel 6:6; 1 Kings 19:20-21; Job 40:15; Isaiah 1:3; Ezekiel 1:10
Partridge - 1 Samuel 26:20
Peacock - 1 Kings 10:22
Pig - Leviticus 11:7; Deuteronomy 14:8; Proverbs 11:22; Isaiah 65:4; 66:3, 17; Matthew 7:6; 8:31; 2 Peter 2:22
Pigeon - Genesis 15:9; Luke 2:24
Quail - Exodus 16:13; Numbers 11:31
Ram - Genesis 15:9; Exodus 25:5
Rat - Leviticus 11:29
Raven - Genesis 8:7; Leviticus 11:15; 1 Kings 17:4
Rodent - Isaiah 2:20
Roe Deer - Deuteronomy 14:5
Rooster - Matthew 26:34
Scorpion - 1 Kings 12:11, 14; Luke 10:19; Revelation 9:3, 5, 10
Seagull - Leviticus 11:16
Serpent - Genesis 3:1; Revelation 12:9
Sheep - Exodus 12:5; 1 Samuel 17:34; Matthew 25:33; Luke 15:4; John 10:7
Short-eared Owl - Leviticus 11:16
Snail - Psalm 58:8
Snake - Exodus 4:3; Numbers 21:9; Proverbs 23:32; Isaiah 11:8; 30:6; 59:5
Sparrow - Matthew 10:31
Spider - Isaiah 59:5
Stork - Leviticus 11:19
Swallow - Isaiah 38:14
Turtledove - Genesis 15:9; Luke 2:24
Viper - Isaiah 30:6; Proverbs 23:32
Vulture (Griffon, Bearded, and Black) - Leviticus 11:13
Wild Goat - Deuteronomy 14:5
Wild Ox - Numbers 23:22
Wolf - Isaiah 11:6; Matthew 7:15
Worm - Isaiah 66:24; Jonah 4:7

That's me, personally, I really don't have any problems w/anyone believing in God, I don't, but I've seen it bring some hope to those that needed it. Can't knock it.

But there've been court challenges to adhere to a more Christian-style of teaching towards all kids, most notably in Texas and in LA. Granted I'm veering away from a singular God, here, and more towards the Christian God, but just work w/me.

But doesn't that mean those same decisions can be questioned?

Again, I've no problems w/a belief in God, but I DO have had some w/those who believe in God. I have famo that's Gay, and not only can they get married but they cannot even adopt children through the Christian-run adopting agencies.

The only way for them, and their supporters to sway public opinion is to attack, and deligitimize the Christian belief.

Their(Christians/Muslims) claim is b/c of God's word, and so if you work to prove God's word isn't very real, then public's perception on their rights to marry and be parents sways to a positive note, no?

I'd say it's foul attacking another beliefs if you already had the right that belief was opposed to, but for folks, like my cuzzo, it's not there, so they're gonna have to do what they need to do. That's really why I said the burden of proof relies on those making a positive claim, b/c I feel the govt should step in on this issues.

[pic][pic][pic]

Not sure what that's actually from, but there is NO mention of dinosaurs ANYWHERE in the actual bible.

Please, tell me what verse in the Bible, this accompanies [pic]

I'll wait.


This is a list of all of the animals mentioned in the bible




You mean to tell me that of all the Animals that existed, they somehow forgot dinosaurs .

Really?

[pic]

They forgot all of these guys. [pic]

Are you serious? You really want to get into a pissing match about your degree?


[pic]


From a top 5 engineering program. Don't even try it with me son. I think I would know


[pic]

And yes, decay is a measurable rate. All measurable rates depend on a constant. That constant is[..]umed to be constant throughout the entire process. You're gonna tell me we have observed U-238 for over 4 billion years to determine it's half-life when we only known about radioactivity for a little over 100? Clearly, it is relying on a HUGE[..]umption.

And yes, gravity is scientific fact but it is not a fact. It's a theory. At one point, the Earth being flat was considered a scientific fact. At one point, the Earth being the center of the universe was considered scientific fact. Scientific facts are not absolute truths and are subject to change. So wouldn't it be illogical to say science, in it's ever changing state, disproves or discredits something?

What animal is Job 40: 15-24 describing?

“Look at Behemoth,
which I made along with you
and which feeds on grass like an ox.
16 What strength it has in its loins,
what power in the muscles of its belly!
17 Its tail sways like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are close-knit.
18 Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like rods of iron.
19 It ranks first among the works of God,
yet its Maker can approach it with his sword.
20 The hills bring it their produce,
and all the wild animals play nearby.
21 Under the lotus plants it lies,
hidden among the reeds in the marsh.
22 The lotuses conceal it in their shadow;
the poplars by the stream surround it.
23 A raging river does not alarm it;
it is secure, though the Jordan should surge against its mouth.
24 Can anyone capture it by the eyes,
or trap it and pierce its nose?

Even your own evidence says it's a possible reference to dinosaurs. [pic]

[pic]

Good man.

Those challenges need to be appealed, as well as the challenges stopping children (on their own) from practicing their religious beliefs on school grounds.

Parents should also take their children out of those schools, if they disagree with the procedures.

But with "public" (government) schools being a Communist ideology, it's no surprise children/parents have something FORCED on them no matter what.

Personal, private, non-violent, everyday decisions?

No, they shouldn't be questioned.

Not unless you want to intrude into someone else's personal affairs.


You, me, Bill Nye, or anyone else questioning those decisions (beliefs, in this case) is not knowledgeable enough of the afterlife to definitively know the answers.

"Christian-run" adopting agencies are the only local/State options?

Fully knowing they (like anyone else) don't know the makeup of the afterlife, to question anyone religiously (and peacefully) believing what they choose.

No, it just pisses people off, causes more inst@bility/anger amongst fellow Americans, and continues tearing down our Constitutional Rights.

Reading/researching the religious doctrine(s) and refuting claims of "believers" with quoted passages is the most effective way.

Being ideologues of the same fascistic nature doesn't solve anything; it makes things worse, and makes hypocrites of the detractors.

Anyone impressing a definitive answer onto someone else is who has the burden of proof.

Religious/spiritual or Atheist.

There is no Right to marry in the Constitution for anyone, homosecksual or straight. That is why the States & State Citizens have authority to decide these matters.

Homosecksuals can start their own churches/religious centers, or their own adoptive agencies.....that would be taking charge of the situation.

If you want something done right, do it yourself.


Or at the very least, sue the State to allow for equal treatment of adoptive procedures.


Being proactive not only gets things done, but preserves the Rule of Law.

watch the new katt williams special he /thread on this topic

[pic][pic][pic]

Not sure what that's actually from, but there is NO mention of dinosaurs ANYWHERE in the actual bible.

Please, tell me what verse in the Bible, this accompanies [pic]

I'll wait.


This is a list of all of the animals mentioned in the bible




You mean to tell me that of all the Animals that existed, they somehow forgot dinosaurs .



Really?

[pic]

They forgot all of these guys. [pic]

Where in the Bible does it say the Earth's exact age? It doesn't. It's an[..]umption. How do you think scientist determined the age of the Earth? It's determined by radioactive dating which is also, based on an[..]umptions. Radioactivity was discovered a little over a 100 years ago, but yet we[..]ume we know how it decayed billions of years prior? How can you say something based on[..]umptions discredits something else based on[..]umptions?

Do you not realize most of all scientific methods relie on a simple[..]umption?
[pic]

Perfect my[..].

70% of this planet is uninhabitable by humans.

Meteor strikes wiped out entire species.

Natural disasters decimate entire countries yearly.

And that's from geological/meteorological perspective.

When looking from a biology perspective, diseases, birth defects, disabilities and other run rampant in all families of the biota kingdom.

And from an astronomical perspective, what the !! are the other planets in our solar system then? Was god just !!ing around with making them and said "ehhhh i guess Ill make this ONE PLANET habitable by living organisms and the other ones will just be there so humans can have !! to look at in space" ?

People can't live with the (probable) fact that life is a happy accident. We just have to be "special".

Wait you're arguing for Creationism, and then in the same breath claiming that Radioactive decay is an[..]umption because we haven't observed it? The irony of that statement! [pic]

Rate of decay is observable(even without witnessing firsthand it's entire timeline being played out), we don't need to see something with our eyes to know it exists. We don't need to see dinosaurs to know they were real, we don't need to touch the sun to know it's hot, we don't need to take a deep breath in space to know we can breathe there. We are able to observe the constant rate of decay, therefore we can map out it's effect. By your logic, nothing that came before us or nothing that lasts forever(or seemingly forever), can be a fact because it cannot be observed....think about that for a second.

If you REALLY are a nuclear engineering major....really....but if you really are...you have got to be a freshman or sophomore, if you honestly think that the observable constant rate is a HUGE[..]umption. How can you observe something which goes on forever?

The world being flat was NEVER and I repeat NEVER a scientific fact. You're talking about a time before science, the scientific method, and the concept of scientific fact. [pic]




To be clear, I'm not a religion bashing Atheist. I was raised Catholic most of my life, and am open minded enough to believe that we may have been "created" somehow, as part of some intelligent design. But Creationism is an ancient fairy tale for little kids and rednecks who are afraid to think about "scary" concepts outside of their religion. And I understand that, because I was once one of those kids, and it was a very scary and confusing time for me when I began to question my faith. As of now, I would say I'm not religious, don't believe in any one single religious est@blishment, and might classify myself as Agnostic. Questioning what you're told to believe is OK, and if the answers they give you don't add up, well...that's up to you. [pic]

Behemoth (and then the sea-monster Leviathan who is also described) are used in a parable told to demonstrate the power of God. They are admittedly mythical characters who nobody had actually seen and are only used and described in this one story.

In this scripture, these are one-off animals. Doesn't make sense because it's been proven that dinosaurs were all over in their time. Not just mysterious mythical creatures who only God cold tame or had access to.

There is no mention of people casually living with dinosaurs in the Bible. Which would have had to have been the case.

Now I don't know about you, but if people of that time were casually sharing the earth with these creatures

[pic]

Im no genius, but I think there would be a little more than a vague mythical reference to such.. [pic]

[pic]

Show me where I'm wrong.