Bill Nye The Science Guy Is A 'Shill' For The NWO!

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by rainfall

 

I've seen him try to debunk the UFO

Weird, I never seen him try to debunk UFOs, I have however seen him try to debunk peoples assumptions of what UFOs must be.

got a link of him debunking ufos in general?

I posted where I seen him take the anti-UFO question, on Larry King.

If you wish to watch it, I'm sure there is a archive of LK shows.

You can start there for your search.

reply to post by sparrowstail


Honestly, I think he is dead wrong on Roswell frankly, but I know I also cannot come up with a better story than the (current) offical story since there is no proof.

So...I think his concept of Roswell is wrong, but thats all...I (some unknown) think (through mushy feelings, speculation, and desire) his views are wrong..and if thats all I have to back up my claim, its best he keep speaking of what happens until I have alot more factual evidence to back up my (non)theory of what happened there.

His methodology is cold and frankly, uninspiring...but that is the function of science...to have the most likely and mundane answers until that no longer fits, then find the next most likely senario.

A skeptic can always change his mind, and do so when new evidence is put into the equasion...but things like personal testimony is not actual evidence...science is not a courtroom, its not open to opinion, it relies strictly on hardcore tangable evidence...and its not up to him to debunk UFOs whenever someone claims it, nor witches, fairies, etc...its up for the claims to produce evidence before it should even be considered...else everytime they investigate something, they would be bogged down with trying to find ufo radiation, pixie dust, witches warts, etc etc etc...

reply to post by rainfall

The guy is defiantly queer ( traditional usage, meaning odd, Not the LGBT distorted meaning).
en.wikipedia.org...
He needs to get a job flipping burgers.
He was on Fox And Friends, and was totally discredited and embarrassed.
They might as well have tarred and feathered him.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by sparrowstail

 

...but things like personal testimony is not actual evidence...science is not a courtroom, its not open to opinion, it relies strictly on hardcore tangable evidence...and its not up to him to debunk UFOs whenever someone claims it, nor witches, fairies, etc...its up for the claims to produce evidence before it should even be considered..

Well I humbly disagree with some of this. Science does not always demand tangible proof. For instance conceptual and theoretical physics and mathematics sometimes work strictly on hypothesis or theories that can not be proven (string theory, dark matter).

Einstein's testimonials regarding his famous thought experiments on time travel and relativity were vital to his final conclusions yet he had no tangible way of proving them just his thoughts. Think how much science is built off these thought experiments.

In some ufo cases there is enough anecdotal evidence that allows patterns of truth to be revealed. This can not simply be thrown out

And By the way Bill Nye did try to debunk ufos and other conspiracies on an episode named pseudo science. I tried to find a link but the terms are violated and videos are no longer available at youtube.

Originally posted by sparrowstail

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by sparrowstail

 

...but things like personal testimony is not actual evidence...science is not a courtroom, its not open to opinion, it relies strictly on hardcore tangable evidence...and its not up to him to debunk UFOs whenever someone claims it, nor witches, fairies, etc...its up for the claims to produce evidence before it should even be considered..

Well I humbly disagree with some of this. Science does not always demand tangible proof. For instance conceptual and theoretical physics and mathematics sometimes work strictly on hypothesis or theories that can not be proven (string theory, dark matter).

Einstein's testimonials regarding his famous thought experiments on time travel and relativity were vital to his final conclusions yet he had no tangible way of proving them just his thoughts. Think how much science is built off these thought experiments.

In some ufo cases there is enough anecdotal evidence that allows patterns of truth to be revealed. This can not simply be thrown out

And By the way Bill Nye did try to debunk ufos and other conspiracies on an episode named pseudo science. I tried to find a link but the terms are violated and videos are no longer available at youtube.

String theory, Dark Matter, and even up until reciently, black holes, were just that...theories and speculation. It didnt mean that since there was no proof meant they werent true, it simply meant that it was just a theory (and still is)...

If you said matter of factly that String Theory was a fact, you would be laughed out of any science classroom...its not. If you said, I like to speculate about string theory...then you would get loads of interest...but put it in context.

until there is solid grounded proof, then its all just theory. hell, most of quantum physics in general is still theoretical.

and here is something that should open up your eyes...Gravity is still theoretical...I mean, its a self evident fact because we know the effects of it, but there are still blank spots filled with just theory (gravitons, etc) that have yet to complete the picture perfectly.

So, knowing that, do you honestly fault Bill for saying there is no reason we need to talk about ET as a reality...when his professional position must be that we are still debating gravity to begin with?

representing science is not being a disinfo whatnot...its simply representing our collective knowledge to date...not our collective speculation, but our factual hardcore knowledge...aka, science.

Originally posted by sparrowstail
Einstein's testimonials regarding his famous thought experiments on time travel and relativity were vital to his final conclusions yet he had no tangible way of proving them just his thoughts.

Wanted to respond to this individually.
Einstein was a quack for his day...and at the same time, a freaking brilliant man of science. He loved to put theories out there based on his speculations and a bit of number crunching.

Theories based on scientific data is still just a theory...and Einstein had all sorts of well grounded yet unproven (even today) theories that may one day turn out to be true...but until they are proven, they remain just that...outside of science.

best answer is...we dont know. We think we know, but if we did the experiment of putting someone in a ship and launching it at the speed of light...he might come back not young or old...he might turn into a bloody cat. we simply wont know until it is tried...but we can speculate like mad about it...some grounded, some not.

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to [url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread543139/

 

String theory, Dark Matter, and even up until reciently, black holes, were just that...theories and speculation. It didnt mean that since there was no proof meant they werent true, it simply meant that it was just a theory (and still is)...

If you said matter of factly that String Theory was a fact, you would be laughed out of any science classroom...its not. If you said, I like to speculate about string theory...then you would get loads of interest...but put it in context.

until there is solid grounded proof, then its all just theory. hell, most of quantum physics in general is still theoretical.

and here is something that should open up your eyes...Gravity is still theoretical...I mean, its a self evident fact because we know the effects of it, but there are still blank spots filled with just theory (gravitons, etc) that have yet to complete the picture perfectly.

So, knowing that, do you honestly fault Bill for saying there is no reason we need to talk about ET as a reality...when his professional position must be that we are still debating gravity to begin with?

representing science is not being a disinfo whatnot...its simply representing our collective knowledge to date...not our collective speculation, but our factual hardcore knowledge...aka, science.

Well this is my point. You say that to speculate about string theory gains interest, fine.

The Drake equation speculates ET's. Why won't skeptics even speculate about ET's and their possible visitation? Why won't Bill Nye even consider the data to speculate? This is my point. They won't. Even though there are lots of good theories and speculation about ufo's and ET's. It should at least be given consideration. Instead of being given the "slide" ie. giggles and kook jokes and stupid balloon myth explanations that are just as unscientific and baseless.

[edit on 12-2-2010 by sparrowstail]