Hilarious explanations of the Bill Nye Debate notepad creationist photos.

page: 4
31
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 02:41 AM
link   
The only hilarious thing about the debate is that a guy with a BS in Mechanical Engineing is being touted as a "science guy."

No offense to any ME folk




posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 


What he said. ^

Second line... but I do agree with the above posters comments.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 06:00 AM
link   
The catholic church is not christianity. The pope is not gods emissary on earth and mary is the mother of jesus, nothing more. Mary is NOT to be worshipped. Do not bow down to idols no matter who they represent.

The whole of the vatican city could be nuked and christianity is not fazed one bit.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 06:05 AM
link   
Bill Nye has quite a bad temper when he's annoyed. He throws hissy fits like some teenage girl when things don't go his way.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ThaddeusTStevens
 


Yes I personally would have found it funny if the questions had been answered with facts instead of puttin words into people's mouths.
This site is about separate opinions and denying ignorance. It would have been funnier TO ME PERSONALLY if ignorance wasn't used to fight ignorance.
Because it would shut them up & stop the retarded questioning.
Secondly, we don't know each other from Adham, so don't assume a single thing about me you melon.


"When we catch you in a lie"???
I haven't lied once. Again you make the assumption that I adhere to the ideology that Earth is thousands of years old and there is a man in the clouds.
Like I said don't assume a single thing about me.
Gravity has been proven.
Hence it WAS a theory. If you judge it to still be a theory/hypothesis/conjecture/guess then you are obviously awaiting further proof.
The difference between Earth Gravity & Moon Gravity was proof enough for most.
Grab a dictionary pal.

What ignorance??? You are suggesting that my opinion that it was a petty way to deal with this, when I'd personally prefer to educate people rather than ridicule them is "ignorance"...??? Is that so???
As for me being "uneducated " you're quite mistaken.
RE: Grab a dictionary and learn about the meaning of words before you talk nonsense to people.
This site will eat you alive if you continue your rude & obnoxious, know-it-all, belittlement!!!


Peace



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ThaddeusTStevens
 


I'm not a Fanatic towards anything.
My mind is open to all suggestions & Theories, leaning towards whatever pieces fit perfectly.

Secondly "Stephen Jay" as accomplished as he is does not determine the meaning of words.

Evolution is a theory because it has yet to be proven. It's still just a theory.
If proven it goes from Scientific Theory to Scientific fact.

Unless you take an Evolutionist like Stepen Jay and expect him to be unbiased about what is fact and what is considered a link.

However there are other ways to determine the DNA links among species...
and seeing as we do not share DNA with just the Apes my personal opinion is that most likely Earths biological nature can only create a certain amount of DNA & Genetic structure. Therefore that's the link IMO. But if you want to convince me we used to walk on all fours and swing from tree vines I'll need to completely forget we are an entirely different species called Homo-Sapien.

However that's just my theory... with links... not facts. So it remains unproven.

Peace.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by ThaddeusTStevens
 


No doubt pal, Ockham's Razor fits evolution better,
But we were discussing Creation... being either divine intelligence or a biological accident...
I tend to think this was intended to happen considering the universal magnitude if everything having it's purpose.

As for evolution my personal(that word again as this site is about sharing our opinions) is that evolution is much more complicated than Darwinism.
But do I believe in it(evolution not Darwinism)... you bet I do.
I am not the type to side with religion or science... I've found in my experience that things make much more sense when the two are blended together.

As for faith... that's easy to throw at the religious or spiritual...
But it would be ignorant to think that Stephen Hawking doesn't have faith in his Multi-Verse theory, or Black Hole theory... For which we haven't got a lick of proof.
Faith doesn't just occur with Deity belief.

But aside from the faith part... I agree with your post overall.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


"A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. livescience.com
Explore: Scientific method"

From Google pal!!!

Peace.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


Impossible in the sense that we need chemicals to cause a reaction such as "Big Bang".
Scientific experiment has yet to cause an wxplosion(especially of such magnitude) without already having the components to do it.
My main question with te Big Bang is where did the chemicals come from.
Chemicals that wouldn't exist if it was the beginning of creation.
That kind of impossible as within the laws of science & nature.

Peace.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Science can not and will not, go beyond the physical.
Jesus Christ does.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 


Also, It is not our place to force beliefs onto others.

We can present them with the facts, make a good argument, but in the end then it is their freedom and prerogative to choose what they believe in.

Namaste.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   

cascade
The whole of the vatican city could be nuked and christianity is not fazed one bit.


You realize that the Holy See commands the largest congregation of Christians in the world, right? I'm an atheist, so to me its all bunk. But more people believe in Roman Catholic bunk than evangelical bunk, protestant bunk, and so on.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by cascade
 


Kind of like the one you just threw?



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by CharlieSpeirs
 


"Gravity has been proven.
Hence it WAS a theory. If you judge it to still be a theory/hypothesis/conjecture/guess then you are obviously awaiting further proof. "


Demonstrate to me a scientist using the phrase "the fact of gravity" in the context you mean it to mean, and I will believe you. Cite your scientist (or creationist).

My proof
en.wikipedia.org...

In this article you will find "theory of" several times. Theory, in scientific acumen, is a model to explain observable facts. You will notice that Newton's theory of Gravity has been supplanted by the Theory of Relativity, only for Einstein's thoery to be supplanted by quantum mechanics.



It all comes down to the one question asked in the Bill Nye debate.

Moderator: [asking an audience question] "What, if anything, would change your mind?"
Scientist: "Evidence."
Creationist: "Nothing."



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 01:59 PM
link   

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by ThaddeusTStevens
 

Secondly "Stephen Jay" as accomplished as he is does not determine the meaning of words.

Evolution is a theory because it has yet to be proven. It's still just a theory.
If proven it goes from Scientific Theory to Scientific fact.
Peace.


If this is a troll, bravo.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
"No doubt pal, Ockham's Razor fits evolution better,
But we were discussing Creation... being either divine intelligence or a biological accident... "


Translation

"Of course evolution is more logical, but magic might have been responsible for evolution. Perhaps the result of some sky wizard's incantation/spell."



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by aorAki
 


"A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. livescience.com
Explore: Scientific method"


You are confusing an aspect of a Theory that is "just like" a hypothesis to mean "all of a theory is all of a hypothesis". In the ven diagram of this concept, a theory initially contains a hypothesis. We discard and adopt theories as new observations add the the model, or theory, that best explains said phenomena.


Anyone can quote mine, even a creationist.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by aorAki
 

Scientific experiment has yet to cause an wxplosion(especially of such magnitude) without already having the components to do it.
Peace.


Translation

"The big bang can't be proven because scientists have yet to BLOW UP THE UNIVERSE in order to prove it." -Troll



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

randyvs
Science can not and will not, go beyond the physical.
Jesus Christ does.


Until you realize there is nothing beyond the physical, and then Jesus becomes more like Thor and Wotan.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   

WiseThinker
reply to post by benrl
 

We can present them with the facts, make a good argument, but in the end then it is their freedom and prerogative to choose what they believe in.



Until they act on those backwards bronze age beliefs. Then we end up with places like Al-Abama, a state controlled by the American Taliban that teaches bible class in public schools. That teach that HUMANS RODE DINOSAURS.






top topics



 
31
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join