Anybody watch the Bill Nye, Ken Ham creationist debate?

[Lyman Zerga]

Originally Posted by Yetra Flam

Many people have faith in God and are independent of any major church or organization.

im that way, i also believe the bible and god/jesus are mostly two seperate things like i wont believe they are being homophobes!

it hurts when some mormon family members keep saying homosexuality got planted into us by satan but even if i wasnt bi and my dad wouldnt be gay then i would still heavily disagree with them

[Laver1969]

Anyone every check on Penn and Teller's show called Bullshit!? They have a episode about the bible. You can find it on youtube. Interesting stuff!!!

[rirv]

I can't believe this is even a thing.

[Waus]

I watched maybe a third of it, skipping around. Bill Nye was really classy, Ken Ham is still crazy.

The general feeling at the seminary is people shrugging and going "who cares?" because we pretty much all considered Ham a weirdo. I imagine there's a few conservatives who might get defensive, but I haven't heard anything from any of them. Mostly we're all just too busy with things that actually concern us to discuss in detail a debate between a crackpot and a friendly science enthusiast.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by rirv

I can't believe this is even a thing.

it bugs me that we're expected to give equal weight between A) a scientific theory of evolution backed by evidence and B) a single religion's creation myth

such balls on that single religion! if you're going to "teach the controversy" then surely every creation myth should be involved? if i had any means to do so, i'd like to get invited to an "evolution vs. creation" debate on the side of creation and just advocate for the hindu creation myth while not every acknowledging that christianity or any other religion has a story of their own.

richard dawkins is kind of a douche, but he does have that one quote that's pretty spot on here: “We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.”

[Waus]

Originally Posted by Bob

it bugs me that we're expected to give equal weight between A) a scientific theory of evolution backed by evidence and B) a single religion's creation myth

such balls on that single religion! if you're going to "teach the controversy" then surely every creation myth should be involved? if i had any means to do so, i'd like to get invited to an "evolution vs. creation" debate on the side of creation and just advocate for the hindu creation myth while not every acknowledging that christianity or any other religion has a story of their own.

richard dawkins is kind of a douche, but he does have that one quote that's pretty spot on here: “We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.”

I agree with your points. I think the lack of other perspectives is probably just because this was specifically an invitation from Ham to Nye to discuss whether his version of the creation myth was scientifically tenable. Nye ably showed that it was not.

[TurdBerglar]

I wonder if when religion and "god" starts to become even less and less impactful to people that the separate overt religions and religious beliefs will start to ally and band together against scientific thinking.

there seems to be less and less people that identify with religion and god. there's going to be a point when there's hardly anybody left.

[Waus]

Originally Posted by TurdBerglar

I wonder if when religion and "god" starts to become even less and less impactful to people that the separate overt religions and religious beliefs will start to ally and band together against scientific thinking.

there seems to be less and less people that identify with religion and god. there's going to be a point when there's hardly anybody left.

I guess it's possible. I don't really think the "science vs. religion" paradigm is accurate. I don't personally know any Christians who think science and religion are at odds, and even the fringe people I know several degrees removed generally come up with some shitty pseudo-science to justify their beliefs.

This guy has an unbearably slow cadence and english accent, but he kind of expresses what I think a lot of religious folks subscribe to now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSVPZykCRyQ Really - science and religion are not concerned with the same things. Some people hear this sort of defense and argue that the entire basis of religious belief is inimical to empirical science, I remain unconvinced.

Whether or not religion will continue to be a thing I can't say. I think it might, it'll just start coming from different portions of the world.