Ham on Nye

Right said:
Yet Darwin did theorize that there are five different races of humans, with his own, the Caucasians, being the highest form.

This is an undeniable fact.

Perhaps this is why liberals like Darwin's theories so much, having these type of beliefs in common.
Click to expand...

Many conservatives accept the theory of evolution. You probably voted for one of them in November, 2012. Science is not a political issue except in the perverse minds of those incapable of an iota of rational thought.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
I already created a thread once before to give you a beat down. Quit trying to hijack my threads.
Click to expand...

Again you fucking dipshit... if you don't bring me into your nonsense, then I won't. YOU brought me into it by trying to equate me to Ham in the OP. So shut the fuck up about me and then I won't have to embarrass you again in your thread.

Also... if you don't wish to talk about it, quit pretending you gave me a beat down. You did nothing of the sort. You were 100% wrong then, just as you are now.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Please, you appear every time someone criticizes a right winger to try to change the subject and toss salad.
Click to expand...

Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Nye definitely won. It was not a fair fight as Ham's views are extremely absurd. Crackpots like Mitt Romney, Tom Cruise and superfreak have nothing on Ken Ham when it comes to ridiculous beliefs.


One thing I have to say about Ham, he is not as stupid as Nova, i.e., does not hold archaic ideas on race, and he is far more honest than PiMPle, i.e., does not lie about the biblical importance of the WORLDWIDE flood to Christian doctrine and its intimate connection to the story of Christ.


But Ham's arguments are still all circular crap and semantics. He starts with his nonsense term "historical science" and then brought out "kind." The definitions are not compelling or controlling though he insists repeatedly that they are (SF style). His proof that the Bible's "historical science" is true is the Bible.


His claim that because we don't know what existed before the Big Bang or that how consciousness comes from matter, that nothing else makes sense so we must believe in the unseen is nothing but a punt. Why not just accept that we don't know? He is claiming that knowledge of God can be supported by our ignorance alone.


Through much of it his argument turned to how do we find support for our morals or purpose without God. This is completely useless and largely an appeal to emotion.


Then at the end he rejected the second law of thermodynamics claiming that entropy was really due to God slacking. Nye did not make a point of it.


One thing I wish Nye would have pounded him with, with his repeated allusions to CSI, is how we are to solve crimes that we have not observed? Is the science that tells us that a defendant's blood is present at the scene of a crime unusable unless we OBSERVE him bleeding at the scene.
Click to expand...

Again you fucking halfwit... YOU brought me into this. So quit whining when I come in here and defend myself from your bullshit.
 
Superfreak said:
Again you fucking halfwit... YOU brought me into this. So quit whining when I come in here and defend myself from your bullshit.
Click to expand...

What does any of that have to with your attempted hijack? I can't say anything critical of you or you get to try to steer the thread off topic?
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
What does any of that have to with your attempted hijack? I can't say anything critical of you or you get to try to steer the thread off topic?
Click to expand...

Read this slowly so you can comprehend...

If you try to equate me to some nutjob, I am going to come in here and defend myself. We both know what topic you were referring to when you tried to lump me in with Ham. So quit whining little boy... YOU attacked me. Don't start crying when I come back at you.

You fucking retard.
 
Superfreak said:
Read this slowly so you can comprehend...

If you try to equate me to some nutjob, I am going to come in here and defend myself. We both know what topic you were referring to when you tried to lump me in with Ham. So quit whining little boy... YOU attacked me. Don't start crying when I come back at you.

You fucking retard.
Click to expand...


Waaaaaaaa! Sorry, crybaby. You lump yourself in with them because you feel the need to defend them.

Did I mention you in the thread on Kirk Cameron? No, you just show up to try to change the subject from anything that would be critical of your butt buddies.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Waaaaaaaa! Sorry, crybaby. You lump yourself in with them because you feel the need to defend them.

Did I mention you in the thread on Kirk Cameron? No, you just show up to try to change the subject from anything that would be critical of your butt buddies.
Click to expand...

NO moron... I am not defending them. I did not lump myself in with them. YOU DID. So don't whine and bitch and moan when I come in here and correct you. Funny how you cry about thread diversion, yet this is the third time you have diverted the thread into your cry session.
 
Superfreak said:
NO moron... I am not defending them. I did not lump myself in with them. YOU DID. So don't whine and bitch and moan when I come in here and correct you. Funny how you cry about thread diversion, yet this is the third time you have diverted the thread into your cry session.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely full of shit. I made no mention of you in the Cameron thread. You lumped yourself in with Cameron. Any time someone criticizes conservatives you attempt to divert attention and change the subject. It's your signature move. If someone says "Republicans suck on the WoD," a line would form of those willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that you will respond with "Obama! Wahhh!!!" You'd rather do that than deal with the fact that the right is filled with science deniers, busybodies and crackpots.
 
Rationalist said:
Many conservatives accept the theory of evolution. You probably voted for one of them in November, 2012. Science is not a political issue except in the perverse minds of those incapable of an iota of rational thought.
Click to expand...

Everything can become a political issue- science is definitely one of them.

Creationism (a posited theory derived from molecular biology) has given cause to discuss its legitimacy within the political arena, as to whether it should be taught in public schools. The anti creationists claim it is not a legitimate theory, and therefore should not be taught- at least not in a science class. Is this not true?

Our understanding of when life begins in the abortion debate has likewise become entangled politically. Science definitely plays a role in that discussion, doesn't it?

Global warming anyone?
 
Last edited:
XLVIII DOMINATORS said:
Creationism (a posited theory derived from molecular biology)
Click to expand...

Creationism isn't a theory; it's a doctrine. All evidence points to descent with modification as being the means by which all species arose. Abiogenesis is a separate question in biology, one that remains very much up in the air, but I personally don't find magic to be a satisfactory answer, let alone a scientific one.

has given cause to discuss its legitimacy within the political arena, as to whether it should be taught in public schools. The anti creationists claim it is not a legitimate theory, and therefore should not be taught- at least not in a science class. Is this not true?
Click to expand...

Teaching doctrine in public schools would constitute a violation of the 1st Amendment establishment clause, which is why it should be forbidden. Crazy fundamentalist parents are free to program their children in the privacy of their homes; they don't need taxpayer money to do it.

Our understanding of when life begins in the abortion debate has likewise become entangled politically. Science definitely plays a role in that discussion, doesn't it?

Global warming anyone?
Click to expand...

I accept that human life begins at conception. However, I also believe the rights of a fetus are trumped by the rights of its host, at least until viability. The bottom line is that it isn't a decision I'd ever feel comfortable making for anyone, which is why I'm pro-choice.
 
Rationalist said:
Creationism isn't a theory; it's a doctrine. All evidence points to descent with modification as being the means by which all species arose. Abiogenesis is a separate question in biology, one that remains very much up in the air, but I personally don't find magic to be a satisfactory answer, let alone a scientific one.




Teaching doctrine in public schools would constitute a violation of the 1st Amendment establishment clause, which is why it should be forbidden. Crazy fundamentalist parents are free to program their children in the privacy of their homes; they don't need taxpayer money to do it.



I accept that human life begins at conception. However, I also believe the rights of a fetus are trumped by the rights of its host, at least until viability. The bottom line is that it isn't a decision I'd ever feel comfortable making for anyone, which is why I'm pro-choice.
Click to expand...

Good to see you.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
You are absolutely full of shit. I made no mention of you in the Cameron thread. You lumped yourself in with Cameron. Any time someone criticizes conservatives you attempt to divert attention and change the subject. It's your signature move. If someone says "Republicans suck on the WoD," a line would form of those willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that you will respond with "Obama! Wahhh!!!" You'd rather do that than deal with the fact that the right is filled with science deniers, busybodies and crackpots.
Click to expand...


I did not defend Cameron in that thread you idiot. I addressed YOU lumping Christians in with Cameron. I addressed your OP of christian bashing directly. But you cant help but think your hate filled rants are full of 'reason'. They are not. You bash christians out of hate. That was my point. You are intolerant of those that believe differently than you and thus you try to use an extremist's position as the groups position as a whole. You are a lying twit who is full of himself... and a pretend libertarian.

Also, I did not say you brought me into that thread... I said you did so in THIS THREAD you dishonest piece of shit.

Then you whine IN THIS THREAD that I came in and defended myself from your petty bullshit.
 
Superfreak said:
I did not defend Cameron in that thread you idiot. I addressed YOU lumping Christians in with Cameron. I addressed your OP of christian bashing directly. But you cant help but think your hate filled rants are full of 'reason'. They are not. You bash christians out of hate. That was my point. You are intolerant of those that believe differently than you and thus you try to use an extremist's position as the groups position as a whole. You are a lying twit who is full of himself... and a pretend libertarian.

Also, I did not say you brought me into that thread... I said you did so in THIS THREAD you dishonest piece of shit.

Then you whine IN THIS THREAD that I came in and defended myself from your petty bullshit.
Click to expand...


You completely evade the point. It does not matter if I mention you or not. You do you your little whiny diversion tactics in every thread I post, little baby. I did not mention you in the Cameron thread or many of the others. But you always find a way to defend the extremist that dominate the right by trying to change the subject.

I have plenty of friends and family who are religious. I don't hate Christians, I hate stupid people who spread lies, like you do.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
You completely evade the point. It does not matter if I mention you or not. You do you your little whiny diversion tactics in every thread I post, little baby. I did not mention you in the Cameron thread or many of the others. But you always find a way to defend the extremist that dominate the right by trying to change the subject.

I have plenty of friends and family who are religious. I don't hate Christians, I hate stupid people who spread lies, like you do.
Click to expand...

Again moron... commenting on YOUR OP is not diverting the topic. It is commenting on the topic. You put me in THIS OP... making me a part of your OP topic discussion. I addressed your stupidity.

In the Cameron thread, you tried to link Christians as a whole to Camerons postion. You did this in the OP, to which I responded to your stupidity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top