Hilarious explanations of the Bill Nye Debate notepad creationist photos.

imgur.com...


It doesn't get much better than this haha

reply to post by Tylerknight


What is funny about lying about people and misrepresenting opinions that they hold?

Whether you agree with them or not, their opinions and beliefs mean as much to them as yours does to you.

reply to post by adjensen


Because it is meant to be funny? Someone took the pictures and made a parody of it... to create humor.

I am obviously a non-believer in creationism and religion as a whole, but even as a religious person you must be able to find the humor in this!

adjensen
reply to post by Tylerknight

 

What is funny about lying about people and misrepresenting opinions that they hold?

Whether you agree with them or not, their opinions and beliefs mean as much to them as yours does to you.

Wait a second here, doesn't the lying and misrepresenting happen every day with politicians and bankers and lawyers and accountants doing all the lying and misrepresentation? If it's good for them, it's good for the rest of us ;-) Or are you indicating that we are all not "equal" and that some are more "equal" than others? Shouldn't we all just be as bad as them or should we pull a mandela and overthrow our corrupt lying scumbag politicians and the present ponzi banking scam? One rule fits all or that one rule fits none :-)

Cheers - Dave

I feel noetics was treated rather unfairly in that long list of hilarious rebuttals. Quite frankly, that's my only objection.

I'm all for a good laugh and think people need to lighten up, but I didn't see what was supposed to be funny. This was just an attempt to make fun of people and their beliefs.

sheepslayer247
I'm all for a good laugh and think people need to lighten up, but I didn't see what was supposed to be funny. This was just an attempt to make fun of people and their beliefs.

No actually, because most of the (rhetorical) questions are fundamentally flawed. Meaning the people asking them did not even attempt to learn the science behind what they immediately dismiss to be false, simple because they've been indoctrinated with something.

I have seen enlightening interviews with people in the catholic church. The ones teaching the bottom rungs in the church racket. And they admit in light of scientific evidence, the bible can not be interpreted literally.

In one case… So far as to say:

Pope Benedict XVI's astronomer: the Catholic Church welcomes aliens
Highly evolved extra terrestrial lifeforms may be living in space and would be welcomed into the church - "no matter how many tentacles", one of the Pope's astronomers has said.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

"Beliefs" in religious context, are fine. If you are participating in a debate, you must debate the facts. This was a debate, the comments were in light of the debate.

Trotting on peoples beliefs would be outlawing or banning them. Making fun of them, they aren't doing this because they in fact are making fun of their ignorance.

Now if the notes said, "in light of all the evidence we believe god XYZ…" that would be a statement. A belief.

Not ignorance.

"How do you explain a sunset if there is no God?" What the hell kind of question is that?
S&F - while I am a Theist, my views on creation are much different than those of traditional evangelists and religious persons - at that, I do not look toward the Bible (or the countless other creation myths) as an accurate, or literal examination of that event.

It is unfortunate that a persons beliefs dissallow any introspection into the findings of science or philosophy. Both fields allow much room for Theism and even creationism - however, many uneducated religious persons refuse to even consider the various arguments and propositions given forth within these disciplines, as they believe they are inherently antagonistic toward Theism and religion, which is not the case. The converse is also true - many students approach science and philosophy with the misunderstanding that these studies are inherently atheistic, and (if their professor is worth her salt), find very quickly that there is little certainty regarding the matter. With that said, if there is a Cosmic intelligence that set up the universe and everything, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that repeated critical examinations of the laws of nature would be in the best interest of the Theist so as to garner a better understanding of the mechanisms of this intelligence? Wouldn't it be valuable to disregard outmoded theories in the light of new findings? Of course, yet we see here the lack of a great number of people to relinquish their beliefs on the basis of a literal interpretation of scripture. I know it hurts, but it is ridiculous and emotionally immature.

This was funny as hell - thanks for shariing! I remember the comedian, Bill Hicks (another 'BIll') talking about the young-earth creationists: "I buh-leev that Gawd created me in ONE day." Bill responds, "Well, looks like he rushed it!" LOL

xox
-kissy

reply to post by kissy princess


EXACTLY!

This isn't a stab at all religious believers by any means. This is poking fun at these select few people who "thought" they knew what they were talking about and posted photos of themselves.

Religion and science should be working hand in hand to find out the origins of life. Neither of them can PROVE it at this point in time, but science is at least TRYING to prove it and if they are found to be wrong, they accept that and try to look elsewhere.

Forgive me believers, but this to me, seems like a very mature and open-minded way about it.

reply to post by boncho


Fair enough Boncho.

What really stood out to me was the guy that asked "where do you derive objective meaning in life?". I think that's a decent question. The next picture says "I think we should take advice on modern living from a bronze age mythology".

In my uneducated agnostic opinion, thats just a low blow.

And whats the real purpose behind this, to debate and show facts or to belittle them?

Sometimes I think of two scenarios.

The world full of religion - people would still fight and bicker and kill over whose God is right or real.

The world full of atheists - people would still fight and bicker and kill over whose Theory is right or real.

These were all pretty funny yeah I'll star and flag it - lot's of ignorance in religion - but this boils down to little difference from "red" versus "blue" politics and "us" versus "them" - ridicule solves nothing.

The more I try to be quiet and listen to the world the more it sounds like listening to white noise while the toilet is flushing.

reply to post by Tylerknight


Thanks for the laugh.

Some of the comments are pretty funny as well.

These aren't kids. They're adults in a 1st world country in the 21st century. This level of ignorance is a choice


if we came from British people, then why are there still British people/Are you saying you don't believe in revolution?


These are awesome, it's like dog shaming but for dumb people.

reply to post by Tylerknight


I for one am not afraid to laugh at myself or my beliefs
if something funny is thrown in the ring. But this is better
described as an attempt to, boast and gloat as if OP himself,
has achieved some great hurdle. Very weak.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

What really stood out to me was the guy that asked "where do you derive objective meaning in life?". I think that's a decent question. The next picture says "I think we should take advice on modern living from a bronze age mythology".

In my uneducated agnostic opinion, thats just a low blow.

And whats the real purpose behind this, to debate and show facts or to belittle them?

Yeah actually, not a bad question…

Context is important. If the question is rhetorical, and implies that we can derive objective meaning from the bible, then take all the facts surrounding the bible and historical period it was created. If the comment implies we can find objective meaning in the bible, it's actually kind of ironic.


Here is an example of the questions being taken seriously and answered seriously.



---
In any case, if anyone thinks these all are "low blows"…

OKAY…



This girl after sitting through the debate decides to post this picture. OH WOW, EVOLUTION TOTALLY DISPROVED.

Nice one!

Simply acknowledging the fossil record however, goes against the belief that the world only existed 6000 years. This and many other points were failed to be addressed by Ham in the debate.

...and when you run into a roadblock, "Oh, well that's god that did that."

Just like Ham, smug comments …

The mocking of the comments are more appropriate than a serious answer. Since as we see nothing can be "official proof" besides a book you read, translated into english, from a couple millennia ago... based on other myths, promoted under political and personal power grabs in ancient times.

No low blows, just mocking people mocking facts.

Watch the debate first, and ask yourself why someone would decide to jump up and post these online…

reply to post by adjensen


FFS - all the " questioners " appear to be adults - and this is 2014 - they DESERVE ridicule

adjensen
reply to post by Tylerknight

 

What is funny about lying about people and misrepresenting opinions that they hold?

Whether you agree with them or not, their opinions and beliefs mean as much to them as yours does to you.

My problem is their beliefs are not even consistent with their own theology,

The whole debate was pointless.

A none professional Scientist, arguing with a Uneducated Theologian.

The man representing "creationism" Hell pretty much anyone who argue for it, couldn't give you the basis and origin of their own view point from a theological perspective.

Even the "god did it" arguments they try show a gross lack of understanding and ability to reason and debate their very own faith.

Hi all

Here about the books we read:
booksthatmakeyoudumb.virgil.gr...

and the music we listen:
musicthatmakesyoudumb.virgil.gr...

They are B-) too !!!

Blue skies.

reply to post by benrl

The whole debate was pointless.

I agree -- I'm not a Creationist, and I turned off the debate about halfway through because it was pointless. I have no idea why Nye even agreed to do it.

But I do not agree that people should be belittled for their beliefs -- if someone wants to think that Jesus rode a dinosaur, that's just stupid, but whatever, people believe all sorts of stupid things, and you fix that through education, not ridicule.

adjensen
reply to post by benrl

 

The whole debate was pointless.

I agree -- I'm not a Creationist, and I turned off the debate about halfway through because it was pointless. I have no idea why Nye even agreed to do it.

But I do not agree that people should be belittled for their beliefs -- if someone wants to think that Jesus rode a dinosaur, that's just stupid, but whatever, people believe all sorts of stupid things, and you fix that through education, not ridicule.

LOL

I agree with this but how do you educate someone who refuses to listen to logic?

If you have any ideas, please let me know...

After that debate was over the people around me just shook their heads as if Bill had nothing relevant to say

Akragon

adjensen
reply to post by benrl

 

The whole debate was pointless.

I agree -- I'm not a Creationist, and I turned off the debate about halfway through because it was pointless. I have no idea why Nye even agreed to do it.

But I do not agree that people should be belittled for their beliefs -- if someone wants to think that Jesus rode a dinosaur, that's just stupid, but whatever, people believe all sorts of stupid things, and you fix that through education, not ridicule.

LOL

I agree with this but how do you educate someone who refuses to listen to logic?

If you have any ideas, please let me know...

After that debate was over the people around me just shook their heads as if Bill had nothing relevant to say

You don't

They can't even comprehend their own viewpoint, let alone someone elses, it was why this debate was a farce and waste of time.