'Bill Nye the Science Guy' to Take On Creationist in Evolution Debate (global warming, vs)

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ

What do you base that on? Is the only evidence for a black hole a mathematical metaphor?

No metaphor was offered. I guess you're not much better with figures of speech than you are with math.

What was offered was direct observation followed by the calculations of basic space mechanics. Evidence and reason.

Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ

Where is the science?

Click back through the post to the video. It's there.

[sickofnyc]

Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ

Yet you accept every "fact" laid forth to you by said greedy pigs, psychopaths, sociopaths, religious freaks etc etc

Excuse me? You know me personally? When did we meet? And WTH are you talking about?

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by suzy_q2010

Are you serious or do you really have no concept how big a pile you have stepped in by using Isaac Newton, who was a Biblical creationist, as an example to support "intelligent design"?

Newton doesn't invoke God in his 3 Laws of Motion. Ask yourself why that is...

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Hmmm... No mention of God creating any of those...

So?

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Newton doesn't invoke God in his 3 Laws of Motion. Ask yourself why that is...

Read the Principia. He most certainly did.

Here is his dedication from the very book where he published those laws of motion:

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being....This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God "pantokrator," or Universal Ruler....

Don't believe us? Then ask your fellow creationists:

http://www.icr.org/article/3859/

[ChestRockwell]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

No metaphor was offered. I guess you're not much better with figures of speech than you are with math.

What was offered was direct observation followed by the calculations of basic space mechanics. Evidence and reason.


Click back through the post to the video. It's there.

Oh, I watched the video. I'm still waiting for you to bring direct evidence.

"Best possible proof" is not going to fly here. Care to explain how it's in any way empirical?

Or...maybe you're just some wordy tool having a pull-off session on a forum, perhaps?

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

He most certainly did.

No mention of God in his 3 Laws of Motion. Why?

[InformedConsent]

Still waiting for someone to prove that GMO crops evolved in a natural unguided process.

Have at it!

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ

Oh, I watched the video. I'm still waiting for you to bring direct evidence.

You move those goal posts.

Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ

"Best possible proof" is not going to fly here.

Then I can be of no help to you.

Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ

Care to explain how it's in any way empirical?

It is empirical by definition.

em·pir·i·cal (emˈpirikəl/) adjective

1. based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ

Or...maybe you're just some wordy tool having a pull-off session on a forum, perhaps?

Let no irony go unsmelted.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

No mention of God in his 3 Laws of Motion. Why?

Go read the Principia, and you will find that you are quite mistaken.

Of course you won't admit it, but you will find it.