Page 12 of 75 FirstFirst ... 210111213142262 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 749

Thread: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164, 712]

  1. #111
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Why, oh why do I allow myself to get dragged in to these mind-numbing debates. Why why why. Sigh. OK fine, here's your proof (ie text from "my actual link", now go take a cold shower.

    Biochemist Robert Shapiro has summarized the "primordial soup" theory of Oparin and Haldane in its "mature form" as follows:

    - The early Earth had a chemically reducing atmosphere.

    - This atmosphere, exposed to energy in various forms, produced simple organic compounds ("monomers").

    - These compounds accumulated in a "soup", which may have been concentrated at various locations (shorelines, oceanic vents etc.).

    - By further transformation, more complex organic polymers – and ultimately life – developed in the soup.
    Do you understand why it's put in quotation marks?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotati..._unusual_usage

    Quotation marks are also used to indicate that the writer realizes that a word is not being used in its current commonly accepted sense:

    Crystals somehow "know" which shape to grow into.

    In addition to conveying a neutral attitude and to call attention to a neologism, or slang, or special terminology (also known as jargon), quoting can also indicate words or phrases that are descriptive but unusual, colloquial, folksy, startling, humorous, metaphoric, or contain a pun: Dawkins's concept of a meme could be described as an "evolving idea".

    People also use quotation marks in this way to distance the writer from the terminology in question so as not to be associated with it, for example to indicate that a quoted word is not official terminology, or that a quoted phrase presupposes things that the author does not necessarily agree with; or to indicate special terminology that should be identified for accuracy's sake as someone else's terminology, as when a term (particularly a controversial term) pre-dates the writer or represents the views of someone else, perhaps without judgement (contrast this neutrally-distancing quoting to the negative use of scare quotes).

    The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition,[9] acknowledges this type of use but, in section 7.58, cautions against its overuse: "Quotation marks are often used to alert readers that a term is used in a nonstandard, ironic, or other special sense … [T]hey imply 'This is not my term,' or 'This is not how the term is usually applied.' Like any such device, scare quotes lose their force and irritate readers if overused."
    I can't believe I'm actually explaining this concept. Is there someone near your computer with a basic grasp of science & use of punctuation? This is pretty basic stuff here Grimm and you're looking uninformed again. It's called "a soup" by the author of the wiki article, but he's not literally speaking about a soup in understood sense of the word. It's not even a literal "slime" of any sort. The fact that it's a summarized account of what the theory is about should give you a clue.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 01-04-14 at 07:23 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  2. #112
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    You mean people with no religious preconceived ideas about evolution reviewed the scientific data and found them to be correct. No religiously biased pseudo scientists have been able to prove that evolution is incorrect or blown any holes into evolutionary evidence.
    Yawn.

    No, I mean precisely what I said: a bunch of atheists peer-review each others papers.

    According to Pew 2009, only 33% of scientists believe in God. Scientists and Belief | Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project

    According to a 2005 study done by Elaine Ecklund of Rice University, the percentage is lower for biologists than it is for other scientists.

    So yes, indeed, the people who are peer-reviewing papers on evolution are, as I've colloquially coined them, a "bunch of atheists" whose beliefs don't track those of the general population.

    And before you say "well they're so much better educated than everyone else, that's why they don't believe in a silly thing like God," I'd remind you that the same Pew survey found that 76% of medical doctors in the United States believe in God.... and, as we all know, it takes quite a bit of education to become a doctor.

    Dare I say, it takes one or two courses in evolution to get that medical degree as well. Lol.

  3. #113
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Do you understand why it's put in quotation marks?

    Quotation mark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    I can't believe I'm actually explaining this concept. Is there someone near your computer with a basic grasp of science & use of punctuation? This is pretty basic stuff here Grimm and you're looking uninformed again. It's called "a soup" by the author of the wiki article, but he's not literally speaking about a soup in understood sense of the word. It's not even a literal "slime" of any sort. The fact that it's a summarized account of what the theory is about should give you a clue.
    It's put in quotation marks because it's a colloquialism. Just like I said it was about two pages ago. I'm amused by this.... what kind of soup did you think I meant, Campbell's Chicken Noodle?

  4. #114
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    It's put in quotation marks because it's a colloquialism. Just like I said it was about two pages ago. I'm amused by this.... what kind of soup did you think I meant, Campbell's Chicken Noodle?
    Actually, you called it slime to begin with. Then refined it to mean "a soup". Then you even implied it was a literal soup. Which it isn't. Actually, you've even been wrong about what the initial claim:

    The theory of evolution, in simplistic terms, states that you and I evolved from slime on a rock.
    Abiogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Now, I count about 23 different possible explanations for the appearance of life. None of which speak of an actual soup of any sort. None of which have been conclusively established as how life originated but certainly have more evidence to support them than a god of the gaps. The primordial "soup" thing? They're simplifying a state in a way you can understand it. It seems they're going to have to simplify it even further in your case.

    I think the best part about this entire thing is that you're so caught up in trying to disprove 1 of the currently studied explanation as to how life came to exist that you ignore the other 22. I guess that's the problem with science. It's gotten so complex that the material you're discussing even by your admission has been dumbed down for your understanding. In other words, it's actually so complex that you can't discuss it as anything other than as a layman and in anything other than layman terms. You've even gone so far as to show that the reason you dismiss evolution is because of 1 of the explanations. The one you understand in very basic terms anyways.

    I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing but I definitely understand where you're coming from. I mean, if we check your posts, you've been stating that humans literally came from rat looking mammals. In your head, the explanation seems to work as an overnight sort of thing. One day we're rat looking things, the next we're wearing suits. Only that's not really how scientists have mapped out evolution and I think you know it but refuse to acknowledge it. Acknowledging it would mean actually taking the time to explore the mountains of evidence that range from geological finds to genetics to microbiology and there is no time for that in this discussion. You'd much rather play the outraged Mr. Jennings and scream "I ain't come from no monkey!" because anything more complex than that would probably require moving away from your established religious assumptions.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 01-04-14 at 07:54 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  5. #115
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Actually, you called it slime to begin with. Then refined it to mean "a soup". Then you even implied it was a literal soup. Which it isn't. Actually, you've even been wrong about what the initial claim:



    Abiogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Now, I count about 23 different possible explanations for the appearance of life. None of which speak of an actual soup of any sort. None of which have been conclusively established as how life originated but certainly have more evidence to support them than a god of the gaps. The primordial "soup" thing? They're simplifying a state in a way you can understand it. It seems they're going to have to simplify it even further in your case.
    Wow.

    When I say we evolved from "slime on a rock" it's pretty obvious that I'm sacrificing a bit of taxonomic exactness for the sake of punchiness.

    I know some people are just missing the gene that allows them to key in to that stuff.

  6. #116
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,618

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth.....


    No...wait...thats silly.

    In the beginning there was...nothing...a vast expanse of nothing which can only be described as a nothingness...a vacuum...a complete lack of existence of all matter of any nature. Nothing...less than the size of a pinpoint...less because in fact even the pinpoint didnt exist. There was in every way, shape and form...nothing. Less than nothing. Then...there was this mysterious explosion...or rather implosion...caused by...nothing...which suddenly and in an instant created matter of all nature, planets, elements, and an ever expanding cosmos........

  7. #117
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Wow.

    When I say we evolved from "slime on a rock" it's pretty obvious that I'm sacrificing a bit of taxonomic exactness for the sake of punchiness.

    I know some people are just missing the gene that allows them to key in to that stuff.
    Now you're starting to cooperate. However, you're not quite there yet. You still think we evolved from "a soup". Can you tell us what Homo Sapien's most recent ancestor is? While you're researching, can you tell us what it is that frightens you so much about the concept of there being a natural explanation to the existence of life?
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  8. #118
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth.....


    No...wait...thats silly.

    In the beginning there was...nothing...a vast expanse of nothing which can only be described as a nothingness...a vacuum...a complete lack of existence of all matter of any nature. Nothing...less than the size of a pinpoint...less because in fact even the pinpoint didnt exist. There was in every way, shape and form...nothing. Less than nothing.
    HowStuffWorks "What existed before the big bang?"

    According to the big bang theory, one of the main contenders vying to explain how the universe came to be, all the matter in the cosmos -- all of space itself -- existed in a form smaller than a subatomic particle.
    Then...there was this mysterious explosion...or rather implosion...caused by...nothing...which suddenly and in an instant created matter of all nature, planets, elements, and an ever expanding cosmos........
    Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The Big Bang is not an explosion of matter moving outward to fill an empty universe. Instead, space itself expands with time everywhere and increases the physical distance between two comoving points. Because the FLRW metric assumes a uniform distribution of mass and energy, it applies to our Universe only on large scales—local concentrations of matter such as our galaxy are gravitationally bound and as such do not experience the large-scale expansion of space.
    I wish you'd seriously just did some 4 minutes of research on the stuff you're trying to mock. It would save you a lot of embarrassment. Look, if we're going to get into asking questions: Where did a creator come from? Obviously, a creator, whether he is god, allah, whatever - can't come out of thin air, yes? So what created the creator? Who created the creator? What created the creator's creator? If you open that can of worms....
    Last edited by Hatuey; 01-04-14 at 08:09 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  9. #119
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,618

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    HowStuffWorks "What existed before the big bang?"





    Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    I wish you'd seriously just did some 4 minutes of research on the stuff you're trying to mock. It would save you a lot of embarrassment.
    Where did all the matter come from? Dont give me 'theory'...give me facts. Science baby. Where did it all come from?

    From your cited articles...I'd just point out that they have listed several contradictory theories to the 'big bang...all of course theories that go with the supposition that all of that stuff just existed so lets create a theory from a threory...and it ends with this gem...

    What existed before the big bang? It's still an open question. Perhaps nothing. Perhaps another universe or a different version of our own. Perhaps a sea of universes, each with a different set of laws dictating its physical reality.
    Last edited by VanceMack; 01-04-14 at 08:12 AM.

  10. #120
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    re: Bill Nye the Science Guy to debate Creation museum founder Ken Ham[W:164]

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Where did all the matter come from? Dont give me 'theory'...give me facts. Science baby. Where did it all come from?
    Curious About Astronomy: Where did the matter in the universe come from?

    Quote Originally Posted by Where did that matter come from? I mean, where did the stuff to create everything in the universe come from?

    When photons have enough energy, they can spontaneously decay into a particle and an antiparticle. (An antiparticle is the exact opposite of the corresponding particle--for example, a proton has charge +e, so an antiproton has charge -e.) This is easily observed today, as gamma rays have enough energy to create measurable electron-antielectron pairs (the antielectron is usually called a positron). It turns out that the photon is just one of a class of particles, called the bosons, that decay in this manner. Many of the bosons around just after the big bang were so energetic that they could decay into much more massive particles such as protons (remember, E=mc^2, so to make a particle with a large mass m, you need a boson with a high energy E). The mass in the universe came from such decays.
    Last edited by Hatuey; 01-04-14 at 08:22 AM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 12 of 75 FirstFirst ... 210111213142262 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •