|
Gyges posted:I don't know, they both came back from the dead and are far more well known than most confirmed non-fictional people. Who are we to say either never existed? Jesus of Nazareth, the historical figure, very much existed.
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 09:16 |
|
|
Darth Windu posted:Jesus of Nazareth, the historical figure, very much existed. The city of Nazareth existing at that time however, is not so certain.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Nah, everyone will be doing crossfit in forty years. It won't be obesity, it'll be anal-organ expulsion related stuff. And back injuries. Darth Windu posted:Jesus of Nazareth, the historical figure, very much existed. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Negative Entropy posted:Worst Dystopia Ever It's not a debate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
Darth Windu posted:It's not a debate. Did Jesus really exist provided contemporary historical documents? Is the universe sitting on an invisible turtle? Who knows. Who cares. What does it have to do with Cosmos? Go to the Christian thread in gbs if you want to argue over religion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
What you guys got there, science? That's alright. Have you tried religion?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
My wife is christian and she has been LOVING this show. We talk about how it's basically like Magic School Bus for adults. The point of this show is not to teach. The point of this show is to inspire. After every episode, she has been wanting to learn more information about various topics covered. Having this as a heavy science documentary would be boring. This is an inspirational program meant to awaken curiosity in people. At least, that's how we see it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Darth Windu posted:It's not a debate. Please don't. We actually got this thread back on track after Brunogate and we should attempt to keep it there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
Artificial selection at work! Dogs that would surely die out in the wild without us to wipe their butts and brush their hair. http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2014/03/18/shocking-dog-transformation-severely-matted-rescued-canada?hpt=hp_c3 I mean, I look at my brainless chihuahua/pug puppy and wonder how the hell she would survive more than 5 minutes in the wild...
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:I mean, I look at my brainless chihuahua/pug puppy and wonder how the hell she would survive more than 5 minutes in the wild... Meanwhile my cat is unlocking and opening my front door and smugging about all the free food she gets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 08:35
|
|
|
Negative Entropy posted:You're not getting it. Not every science discussion needs to derail on religion. It's a noxious topic and nobody changes their minds. It contributes nothing to scientific discourse and yet it gets brought up constantly whenever science is. The reason that religion does get brought into science discussion without fail is because religion has a way of influencing the way people think about scientific fact, one way or another. Example: Close friend #1 believes in God, believes facts about evolution and the big bang, but also believes the flood happened. He believes the scientific fact because he understands that they are non-disputable. On the other hand, he believes the flood happened because the Bible says so. Close friend #2 believes in God, is unwilling to accept scientific fact about evolution or the big bang, and of course takes the Bible as gospel. As for scientific discussion with these two friends, it is impossible to discuss science without religion becoming involved because their religious views are dictated by the Bible. Now, these are personal examples. However there are millions of people in the world like this, many even hold powerful positions to make changes. I agree with you that discussion about science and religion should be clearly separate, but until scientific fact is widely accepted and religion stops people from changing their minds based on the scientific facts presented, it will always be intertwined. Science does not seek to answer "why", only "how". That is the difference between philosophy and science. I have no problem not talking about religion. Just don't tell me that insert scientific fact here can't be true because it conflicts with insert religious text here. edit: forget this part, didn't have my coffee yet... crossing it out for future quotes... Fiendish Dr. Wu fucked around with this message at 13:02 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 12:00
|
|
|
Fiendish Dr. Wu posted:Also, I would say it is incredibly important whether or not the universe is sitting on an invisible turtle. We do know that's not true. It has everything to do with the cosmos, and we should care about that if we are to understand the universe and the world that we live in The turtle would be outside the observable universe, so there's no way that we would be able to observe it. The the vibrations from the trumpeting of the four elephants it sits on however is what creates dark mater.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 12:40
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The turtle would be outside the observable universe, so there's no way that we would be able to observe it. The the vibrations from the trumpeting of the four elephants it sits on however is what creates dark mater. Brain processed universe as something smaller than universe... Like a galaxy or something... I rescind that part but stand by the rest of the post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
Negative Entropy posted:You're not getting it. Not every science discussion needs to derail on religion. It's a noxious topic and nobody changes their minds. It contributes nothing to scientific discourse and yet it gets brought up constantly whenever science is. Cosmos probably should cover archaeology since it's a major component of our understanding of humanity (which by definition is a major part of our world).
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
I guess Neil really likes dogs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_3s4V9FLVA
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Negative Entropy posted:You're not getting it. Not every science discussion needs to derail on religion. It's a noxious topic and nobody changes their minds. It contributes nothing to scientific discourse and yet it gets brought up constantly whenever science is. It's always going to happen because the idea of faith is directly opposed to the concept of science.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
Chairman Capone posted:What if Stephen King is God, and we're all doomed to chase the Man in Black through the desert on an endless cycle? Why would we be chasing Johnny Cash?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 15:05
|
|
wins.
|
Creationist Group Demands Airtime on "Cosmos" for Sake of "Scientific Balancequote:When Mefferd asked if Cosmos will “ever give a Creationist any time,” Faulkner responded by lamenting that “Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them, they wouldn’t even consider us plausible at all.” I, personally, would like to see this but also know it would do more harm than good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
jisforjosh posted:Creationist Group Demands Airtime on "Cosmos" for Sake of "Scientific Balance It would be a horrible idea. Same reason it was a bad idea for Bill Nye to debate Ken Ham - it legitimizes complete nonsense by pretending it's equivalent to science.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
jisforjosh posted:Creationist Group Demands Airtime on "Cosmos" for Sake of "Scientific Balance It's a slippery slope. Creationism isn't science, so I'm not entirely sure why it would need to be showcased in a "balanced" way, or any way at all, on a show about science. It's literally as scientifically valid as the geocentric model of the universe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
smg77 posted:It would be a horrible idea. Same reason it was a bad idea for Bill Nye to debate Ken Ham - it legitimizes complete nonsense by pretending it's equivalent to science. Exactly, doing more harm than good. Just if I could view it and relish in the pure hilarity of their "arguments". Basically I need more comedy in my life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Well, if you crack open any modern biology book they pretty much have to put a page on "Creationism by Magic Space God" in it now. The fundies are everywhere. Oh and thanks Space Jesus for http://www.cosmosontv.com since when I switched my DVR to the NatGeo version instead of the Fox version it didn't record last week for some reason. Keyser_Soze fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Mar 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
It would be hilarious if it was aired with a disclosure saying "this program is based on fiction and is in no way representative of any actual scientific fact"
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:Well, if you crack open any modern biology book they pretty much have to put a page on "Creationism by Magic Space God" in it now. The fundies are everywhere. You want to hear less of them, try to be more diplomatic than outright mocking them. I'm not Hindu, but you don't see me going "lol pray to your blue elephant, goober."
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Sash! posted:You want to hear less of them, try to be more diplomatic than outright mocking them. But anyone believes that religious ideas deserve the same stature of scientific fact deserves to be mocked?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:But anyone believes that religious ideas deserve the same stature of scientific fact deserves to be mocked? Exactly. People with ridiculous ideas deserve to have their ideas ridiculed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 01:10
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Mordiceius posted:But anyone believes that religious ideas deserve the same stature of scientific fact deserves to be mocked? I'm on board with that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Who wants 500 pages of creationism? You may notice that creation "science" has not advanced one bit since this book was smashed together. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...e-his-students/ https://www.dropbox.com/s/70ymjapspmwdiz3/Creation%20Battles%20Evolution%20%28Larry%20Booher%29.pdf
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
jisforjosh posted:Creationist Group Demands Airtime on "Cosmos" for Sake of "Scientific Balance This really isn't the place for that at all. If NDT wants he can debate them in any other setting, Cosmos is about inspiring interest in science by giving a brief resume of the history of science and where we are today. Creationists just have nothing to add to this, this is a celebration of knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Sash! posted:You want to hear less of them, try to be more diplomatic than outright mocking them. Hindus aren't actively trying to poo poo up American science education though. And scientists aren't trying to rewrite religious texts either, for that matter. Pockets of internet smugness aside, it's the religious fanatics that are making GBS threads up the real world we actually live in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:But anyone believes that religious ideas deserve the same stature of scientific fact deserves to be mocked? That's not what I'm saying and you know it. I'm saying if you want people to come around to your side, stop being kind of a jerk when you're trying to be change things. Ultimately, you're going to win in the end anyhow, given how virtually every trend is going, so it's more useful to be like "there's no scientific validity to the concept you are presenting, so it would be unreasonable to present it alongside a presentation of verifiable and repeatable information" over "you're a dummy." It's outright childish. sean10mm posted:Hindus aren't actively trying to poo poo up American science education though. And scientists aren't trying to rewrite religious texts either, for that matter. Pockets of internet smugness aside, it's the religious fanatics that are making GBS threads up the real world we actually live in. I'd argue that it's almost irrelevant. There's not a whole lot of them, numerically, and they're in locations that education sucks anyhow. I mean, I grew up not only in the state that produced Rick Santorum, not just the county, but the township (even the school district) he was from. Half our school board was born again Christians of that somewhat dirty almost a hippie variety. You know what word never came up in school? Creation. Sash! fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Mar 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
Sash! posted:I'm saying if you want people to come around to your side, stop being kind of a jerk when you're trying to be change things. Ultimately, you're going to win in the end anyhow, given how virtually every trend is going, so it's more useful to be like "there's no scientific validity to the concept you are presenting, so it would be unreasonable to present it alongside a presentation of verifiable and repeatable information" over "you're a dummy." It's outright childish. It's not like the people we're talking about would make a distinction between the two phrases.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
I think it's perfectly fair to have a This Is How Creationism Says Things Happened program. Though I do think that it's only a valid program if everyone is given a fair platform. Do it in ascending proponent numbers and it'll be nice and orderly. I assume we'll start with the Raelians and move on from there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
jisforjosh posted:Creationist Group Demands Airtime on "Cosmos" for Sake of "Scientific Balance Tell them they can have it when the scientific method gets equal time on the pulpit every Sunday, for the sake of balance. If they're not willing to give it, why should they expect it in return after all?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
Sash! posted:I'd argue that it's almost irrelevant. There's not a whole lot of them, numerically, and they're in locations that education sucks anyhow. I don't know, this feels like kind of a sheltered view of what huge swathes of the country are actually like. If Pennsylvania is a right-wing hellscape, what do you call the states that didn't go Democratic in the presidential elections of 2012, 2008, 2004, 2000 and 1996? Probably a lot worse than what you experienced in terms of hostility to science education, I'm guessing. Also, Santorum's a Catholic, and the Catholic Church lost interest in fighting evolution in like 1950. He's a huge rear end in a top hat, but he's been waffling on intelligent design for like the last decade and is kind of a poor example to bring to this particular discussion. Plus, have you heard of Kansas? http://www.kansascity.com/2013/09/27/4511191/kansas-evolves-into-national-laughingstock.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:Well, if you crack open any modern biology book they pretty much have to put a page on "Creationism by Magic Space God" in it now. The fundies are everywhere. Sure thing, man. Probably the 2 most standard biology books I know are Lehninger's Principles of Biochemisty, and Campbell's Biology. Neither of those really have dick to say about creationism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:Well, if you crack open any modern biology book they pretty much have to put a page on "Creationism by Magic Space God" in it now. The fundies are everywhere. Nope, not even in high school level literature.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:I don't know, this feels like kind of a sheltered view of what huge swathes of the country are actually like. If Pennsylvania is a right-wing hellscape, what do you call the states that didn't go Democratic in the presidential elections of 2012, 2008, 2004, 2000 and 1996? Probably a lot worse than what you experienced in terms of hostility to science education, I'm guessing. Its definitely an odd complaint to make. Pennsylvania has what is known as the Red T, a t-shaped distribution of conservative Republicans in the middle of the state. However, Santorum is from Pittsburgh, which falls outside the Red T and, along with Philly, typically accounts for Democratic wins in state-wide elections. Furthermore, saying that 50% Christian representation on a school board is disproportionately high is weird because, if anything, its too low given the demographics of the area.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
WeAreTheRomans posted:Sure thing, man. Probably the 2 most standard biology books I know are Lehninger's Principles of Biochemisty, and Campbell's Biology. Neither of those really have dick to say about creationism. 2005 College Biology book by (Raven/Johnson/Losos/Singer) for example:  I can only guess what the newer Texas High School textbooks have.  I'm really just saying that none of the biology books we had back in the 1980's even bothered with these types of sections, for better or worse. Keyser_Soze fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Mar 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 09:16 |
|
|
Keyser S0ze posted:2005 College Biology book by (Raven/Johnson/Losos/Singer) for example: In Texas there was literally just a sticker on the inside cover which said "The State of Texas is legally required to say that Evolution is just a theory".
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 16:47
|
|