Oh Lord, where Ark thou?

Taichiliberal said:
Ahh, but Nigh is pointing to basic logic based on PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. Using the Bible as "proof" that everything contained is true is a matter of faith, NOT logic, and certainly not fact based logic.

Creationist and fundamentalists MUST REJECT facts and logic after a certain point in order to maintain faith.
Click to expand...

What's your problem with Creation?
 
Defender of Honor said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Ahh, but Nye is pointing to basic logic based on PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. Using the Bible as "proof" that everything contained is true is a matter of faith, NOT logic, and certainly not fact based logic.

Creationist and fundamentalists MUST REJECT facts and logic after a certain point in order to maintain faith.
Click to expand...


What's your problem with Creation?
Click to expand...

Not creation in an of itself, because let's face it .... one either subscribes to a specific religious dogma or the religion of the scientific method on that. And to date, NEITHER HAS THE DEFINITIVE ANSWER.

I have a problem with sheer BS posing as religious tome. Creationists are folk who will concoct all sorts of tales to fit their particular interpretation of the Bible (or Bibles, if you include the 2nd Testament). Case in point:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...97bd14-2920-11e7-be51-b3fc6ff7faee_story.html

So far, no one on this thread can disprove what Nye is saying.
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
No, he did not. Go over the video again.....Creationists contend that the Earth is only 6 to 10 thousand years old. Nye does not.
Click to expand...

my mistake.....he actually said 4000 years......listen starting at 1:20......I guess Nye is a creationist, then......

he also claimed the fossil record would be altered because of "swimming animals"..........pure idiocy.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
No, he did not. Go over the video again.....Creationists contend that the Earth is only 6 to 10 thousand years old. Nye does not.
Click to expand...

my mistake.....he actually said 4000 years......listen starting at 1:20......I guess Nye is a creationist, then......

he also claimed the fossil record would be altered because of "swimming animals"..........pure idiocy.......
Click to expand...

Actually, he refers to the numbers that his opponent in the debate, Mr. Hamm, uses. Go back and listen carefully, starting at .55 and ending at 1.22.

His point of the fossil record is that there is no physical fossil record showing animals of different species are clamoring and residing at one particular elevation. Remember, the Bible points to 40 days and nights of world wide rain...as lower lands started to flood, animals would instinctively high tail it for the hills. No evidence of this.

So next time listen to something at least twice and PAY ATTENTION, because you come off as an idiot when you don't.
 
Last edited:
Code1211 said:
I'm always amused by people who demand that we accept literally the words of the Bible either in support of or in opposition to anything.

If we assume that the folks who felt the inspired word of God were actually in communication with an Entity or Entities that understood the mysteries of the cosmos, we are also presented with other understandings.

First and foremost, the Humans with whom the Entities were communicating to relay Biblical stories of creation were stone age shepherds on the threshold between Hunter Gatherers and Shepherds.

They understood NOTHING about anything beyond not starving today.

ANYTHING they heard would be interpreted within their own understandings. Then that understanding was passed down as an oral tradition for centuries until written down in their native language.

Then those writings would need to be translated from one language to the next and, very likely, "improved" as the thoughts were passed from one language to the next and one generation to the next.

Finally, we see a guy like "Bill Nye, the Science Guy", noted charlatan and moron, asserting that this parable is a scientific recounting of an actual event.

We know with absolute certainty that the fossil record contains evidence of "choke points" in evolution revealing mass extinction events.

If told of mass extinction events by an Entity with great knowledge, what might a stone age shepherd build in to his understanding? Perhaps a flood? Seems reasonable.

There is also the probable reality of sea level rise after the last Ice Age that caused entire currently existing seas to fill abruptly as the ocean waters crested over natural dams like the Straights of Gibraltar.

Floods wiping out entire civilizations would have been likely given that sort of sea level rise. The legends of great floods and great cities simply disappearing are pretty common. Real events to inspire them seem likely.
Click to expand...

Even if what you say is true, then you must admit that the Bible is not worthy of belief.
 
Taichiliberal said:
His point of the fossil record is that there is no physical fossil record showing animals of different species are clamoring and residing at one particular elevation. Remember, the Bible points to 40 days and nights of world wide rain...as lower lands started to flood, animals would instinctively high tail it for the hills. No evidence of this.
Click to expand...
first, how far did you expect them to swim.......second, do you think 40 days under water is enough to fossilize bone?.........Nye apparently does?......
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed about science based monitoring of sea level changes.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0012821X98001988



https://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/sea-level-rise-2/sea-level-rise/
Post-Glacial_Sea_Level_rise2.png
Click to expand...

Why did you amputate a shred of my thought and post it as it it was the whole thought?
 
Taichiliberal said:
Okay, let's take this sentence for sentence:

1. But you DID doubt (with extreme prejudice) Nye's credentials when you called him a "noted charlatan and moron".

2. Let me put this side bar to rest: to say that over 230 years of increasing global deforestation, industrialization and its air/ground/sea pollution, urbanization on grand scales has no (or negligible) effect on the planet's eco-system is just illogical (or to put plainly, stupid). Too many bonafide scientists from various fields with more extensive credentials than Nye's concur. Industrial lobbies work long and hard on their propaganda to deny reality...and they are losing.

3. My good man, since you are taking a somewhat condescending attitude towards the common man, it should be noted that YOU incorrectly put Moses in the stone age, NOT the bronze age. Get an anthropologist to explain to you the extreme differences, especially when it comes to tool making and such. Once corrected, your original assertions change to a degree.

4. As you previously pointed out, the whole concept of divinely influenced scribes of the Bible is a dubious claim. Couple that with language, social and political changes in translations over the centuries and one can easily cast doubt beyond faith.

5. I suggest you do some research as to the accuracy of many of Egypt's endeavors...whether in science or medicine or mechanics or astronomy. Religion may have been the basis but constructing those pyramids sure as hell required some serious engineering genius by the human brain. There's nothing wrong with spirituality guiding scientific discovery and practices. Case in point, Chinese acupuncture. To date, Western and European medical science don't understand it, and condescendingly say it "tricks" the body into healing itself. Chinese doctors laugh their asses off at this desperate ploy to keep European based medicine as wholly superior.

6 - 10. An analogy that is off topic. At this point, I'm discussing how Nigh deconstructs some major points regarding the "Great Flood" in the Bible. To date, no one on this thread .... including you ... can disprove or debunk what he says. My point of contention with you is that you dismissed Nigh as some blathering phony, which is not the case. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't make them a fraud...you have to prove that they are. You can't, in this instance.

11 - 14. Essentially a rehash of what was covered in #1-5, video non-withstanding.
Click to expand...

My various digressions were what they were. Your observations regarding them are interesting and thank you for taking the time and effort to make your extensive reply.

In your point 2 you addressed environmental impacts of man on the Earth. They are real. While fleas can make a dog itch, they can't control which direction he runs. In this sense, we humans on the planet are like fleas on a dog.

Anthropogenic Global Warming Science asserts that mankind is causing climate change and that mankind can unify and then, acting in concert to achieve a particular goal, can control and direct the climate of the planet.

The two flaws in the theory driving AGW Science are that

1. Mankind cannot and will not ever unify as one
and
2. Mankind cannot control and direct the climate of the planet.

The Sahara Desert formed long before any SUV was ever driven.

The Glaciers in Glacier National Park are melting today. They were melted completely 7000 years ago.

Climate change happens. Always has. Always will.
 
American Man said:
Even if what you say is true, then you must admit that the Bible is not worthy of belief.
Click to expand...

That's an odd conclusion.

You seem to be trapped in a prison of two ideas. On or off. White or black. Hot or cold. Up or down.

The truth of the world is that almost nothing is either this one thing or this other thing. Almost everything is a valuation of many and varied degrees.

My view of religion is the result of this sort of consideration.

My feeling is that there is a supreme Being and that this supreme Being tries to communicate with Individuals.

Individuals, then, try to relay what they have experienced and the messages are colored and changed based on the cultural and geographic influences the folks are saddled with.

We see this sort of thing all the time. One person says something and 10 people take away 10 different understandings of what was said.

It seems reasonable to think that people say to themselves, "He couldn't have meant what he seems to have said. He MUST have meant to say this other thing".

People do this with EVERYTHING. Why not with the word of God or with the word of many gods?

If a Divine Master of the Universe contacts Moses, Moses might think he's talking to a singular, Pharaoh style entity. He was raised in that sort of a culture.

American Indians might understand the message(s) as plural manifestations connected with particular critically important elements of their survival system as hunter gatherers.

Greeks might understand that message as congregation of contributing and competing entities vying for superiority.

Appreciating the values of a thing does not necessarily demand that we embrace those things that don't seem to hold value.

The Bible, TO ME, can have and hold a whole bunch of value even if it was written by folks who were not in command of all of the wisdom of all time for all things.

Does that make any sense?
 
Code1211 said:
That's an odd conclusion.

You seem to be trapped in a prison of two ideas. On or off. White or black. Hot or cold. Up or down.

The truth of the world is that almost nothing is either this one thing or this other thing. Almost everything is a valuation of many and varied degrees.

My view of religion is the result of this sort of consideration.

My feeling is that there is a supreme Being and that this supreme Being tries to communicate with Individuals.

Individuals, then, try to relay what they have experienced and the messages are colored and changed based on the cultural and geographic influences the folks are saddled with.

We see this sort of thing all the time. One person says something and 10 people take away 10 different understandings of what was said.

It seems reasonable to think that people say to themselves, "He couldn't have meant what he seems to have said. He MUST have meant to sya this other thing".

People do this with EVERYTHING. Why not with the word of God or with the word of gods?

If a Divine Master of the Universe contacts Moses, Moses might think he's talking to a singular, Pharaoh style entity. He was raised in that sort of a culture.

American Indians might understand the message(s) as plural manifestations connected with particular critically important elements of their survival system as hunter gatherers.

Greeks might understand that message as congregation of contributing and competing entities vying for superiority.

Appreciating the values of a thing do not necessarily demand that we embrace those things that don't seem to hold value.

Does that make any sense?
Click to expand...
A shy Supreme Being communicating with only certain humans has never made sense to me.
 
It was Bible stories like Noah's Ark for example, that had me start having agnostic thoughts rolling around in my head, even as a young child!

I mean, along with learning that Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and the Stork bringing babies into the world- all turned out to be lies, I was already getting used to the fact that people were starting to lie to me.

I was already starting to ask questions like- WTF?
 
Code1211 said:
Why did you amputate a shred of my thought and post it as it it was the whole thought?
Click to expand...
Why do you give a shit? Do you think your words are golden? Are you special? The link takes anyone who wants to read your dribble back to your post.
 
Code1211 said:
…My view of religion is the result of this sort of consideration.

My feeling is that there is a supreme Being and that this supreme Being tries to communicate with Individuals…
Click to expand...
Does God talk to you, Code? Do you think you are a prophet of God and that’s why you shit your Depends every time someone truncates your diatribes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top