Ken Ham's Opening Day at the Ark. #FAIL only 4000 show up. (atheist, Baptist)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again...guys like Bill Nye....pretending to be a "Science Guy" and debating against a guy with an actual degree in Environmental Biology....
Or a huge number of internet experts that love to comment on religion, but don't have a clue what they're talking about, and have no education on the topic of any kind.
Last edited by BaptistFundie; 08-02-2017 at 03:20 PM..
Reason: Fixed a typo
Believe it or not, we actually like science. But the fact is, sometimes scientists themselves have disagreements and are not in unison on some things.
Science is all about disagreement. When scientists debate on if the Earth is 4.3 or 4.4 billion years old creationists claim that even scientists cannot agree and therefore 6000 years old can be acceptable. In evolution there is disagree on if natural selection dominates or is just one if the main driving forces and then creationists claim that even scientists no longer believe in evolution. AIG is not conce red the least bit wit science ir tRuth abut science. They work on people wit ltitle understanding about fossils, sedimentation or radio methic dating. They can fool some by hating oeople wit adanced degrees, mainly in un related fields bUT they hAve yet to publish a peer review article about creationism in a science journal, they were unable to present in a court of law that there was any science behind their claims and every one of their claims requires a belief in the literal truth of the Bible.
How can I believe that the religious right loves science when they dismiss climate change, evolution and much of geology or physics and work hard at discrediting scientists whose work does not line up with their religious beliefs? And in dismissing these they expose to the world that they do not even understand the topic.
If you love science have you read A Universe From Nothing by Lawrence Kraus, Greatest Show on Earth by Dawkins, The Rocks Don't Lie by Mongomery ? Those are science books, written for the layperson by working scientist? If you do not have a decent grasp of the sciences behind geology and paleontology, how can you possibly judge if AIC is possible or a load of crap? I do have formal education in geology and paleontology, have read many books and papers on the subject and have over the decades read many of the books and websites by creationists. Personally I think I know enough about the creationists to make my own judgement on the lack of science in their works. When supporters of creationist believe it to be true but will not read the science, that is not making an informed judgement.
Science is all about disagreement. When scientists debate on if the Earth is 4.3 or 4.4 billion years old creationists claim that even scientists cannot agree and therefore 6000 years old can be acceptable. In evolution there is disagree on if natural selection dominates or is just one if the main driving forces and then creationists claim that even scientists no longer believe in evolution. AIG is not conce red the least bit wit science ir tRuth abut science. They work on people wit ltitle understanding about fossils, sedimentation or radio methic dating. They can fool some by hating oeople wit adanced degrees, mainly in un related fields bUT they hAve yet to publish a peer review article about creationism in a science journal, they were unable to present in a court of law that there was any science behind their claims and every one of their claims requires a belief in the literal truth of the Bible.
How can I believe that the religious right loves science when they dismiss climate change, evolution and much of geology or physics and work hard at discrediting scientists whose work does not line up with their religious beliefs? And in dismissing these they expose to the world that they do not even understand the topic.
If you love science have you read A Universe From Nothing by Lawrence Kraus, Greatest Show on Earth by Dawkins, The Rocks Don't Lie by Mongomery ? Those are science books, written for the layperson by working scientist? If you do not have a decent grasp of the sciences behind geology and paleontology, how can you possibly judge if AIC is possible or a load of crap? I do have formal education in geology and paleontology, have read many books and papers on the subject and have over the decades read many of the books and websites by creationists. Personally I think I know enough about the creationists to make my own judgement on the lack of science in their works. When supporters of creationist believe it to be true but will not read the science, that is not making an informed judgement.
It's weird. You start out by saying that "science is all about disagreement".
Then you say that you can't believe we believe in science if we don't agree with you and the things you believe in. I kind of have a hard time believing a word you say.
Again...guys like Bill Nye....pretending to be a "Science Guy" and debating against a guy with an actual degree in Environmental Biology....
Or a huge number of internet experts that love to comment on religion, but don't have a clue what they're talking about, and have no education on the topic of any kind.
Do you have the educational background to debate science with me? I most likely, judging from Ham's degree I would have more courses in geology, paleontology, atmospheric science and maybe even biogeography than does he. Bill Nye is fully qualified to debate Ham, he is educated, well read and of course is using the works of thousands of scientists to support his claim.
And Bill Nye is a science guy, no pretending at all involved. He does not claim to be a scientist. Ham only has a BSC so he would not even be qualified to teach a college level course at a real university so what makes him an expert in a field he was nit educated in? I thought you already apologized for lying about Nye, now you are getting close to misreprenting him again. I do have a degree in Physical Geography with a minor in Geology. Ham is wrong, misled his followers and has no expertise in geology or with fossils therefore, how is he even qualified to be the great expert that you seem to think he is. He only has an undergraduate degree. How is he qualified to argue about design with an engineer? How does an engineer not know anything about design? Sorry but you are giving Ham qualifications he does not pocess and dismissing Nye s access to some of the world's top scientists in order to give your side some sort of advantage.
Do you have the educational background to debate science with me? I most likely, judging from Ham's degree I would have more courses in geology, paleontology, atmospheric science and maybe even biogeography than does he. Bill Nye is fully qualified to debate Ham, he is educated, well read and of course is using the works of thousands of scientists to support his claim.
Why does one have to have a degree to do that? No other topic requires a degree for discussion on this board.
Quote:
And Bill Nye is a science guy, no pretending at all involved. He does not claim to be a scientist. Ham only has a BSC so he would not even be qualified to teach a college level course at a real university so what makes him an expert in a field he was nit educated in? I thought you already apologized for lying about Nye, now you are getting close to misreprenting him again. I do have a degree in Physical Geography with a minor in Geology. Ham is wrong, misled his followers and has no expertise in geology or with fossils therefore, how is he even qualified to be the great expert that you seem to think he is. He only has an undergraduate degree. How is he qualified to argue about design with an engineer? How does an engineer not know anything about design? Sorry but you are giving Ham qualifications he does not pocess and dismissing Nye s access to some of the world's top scientists in order to give your side some sort of advantage.
Bill doesn't have a degree....so how is he qualified?
It's weird. You start out by saying that "science is all about disagreement".
Then you say that you can't believe we believe in science if we don't agree with you and the things you believe in. I kind of have a hard time believing a word you say.
So.....
Wow.
I mean....
I guess you will have to wait for someone who is more articulate than myself because I think you missed the entire point of my post.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
