# Creationist vs Scientist Live Debate



## OzPaleAle (5/2/14)

Interesting Live debate on Youtube at the moment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkI&feature=player_embedded


----------



## sp0rk (5/2/14)

Oh man I hope Nye goes postal and tears this bloke apart


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

Creationism. Up there with Pink Unicorns and Flying Spaghetti Monsters.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (5/2/14)

I can't believe this is even a thing. Should be renamed bloodsport.


----------



## technobabble66 (5/2/14)

How can this possibly be a proper debate??
Creationists ultimately come down to a point of "I choose not to follow a philosophy of rationale, logic and evidence."
A debate is fundamentally argued on rational points using logic & evidence.
... And furthermore, "Instead, I choose to simply believe some stuff other people have said/written about 2000 years ago"

2c

Edit: spelling


----------



## OzPaleAle (5/2/14)

It was interesting, some of the debate was not just because this book says this here, they actually have"scientists" on staff "researching" these things and he is using their research to dispute Nyals arguments, as usual always deflecting when it came to Ham to prove any of their positions using their science.


----------



## OzPaleAle (5/2/14)

technobabble66 said:


> ... And furthermore, "Instead, I choose to simply believe some stuff other people have said/written about 2000 years ago"


As Nyal kept saying something written 2000 years ago and translated x amount of times to eventually be American English. Surely no chinese whisper style lost in translation, ala and instruction manual translated from chinese, style.


----------



## Dave70 (5/2/14)

Science dose itself no favor's taking part these clusterfucks of ignorance, delusion and dogmatisim. 
Its basically lending weight the creationist supposition that there's an argument to even be had in the first place.

Take a look at the laundry list of redundant parts on our own bodies and design flaws, are the trying to prove god _was_ actually a bumbling twat? 
Intelligent design? 
Oh, the ******* irony.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (5/2/14)

My guess is Nye is taking the soft diplomatic approach. People don't like being told that they are wrong, it just gets their back up. The 'debate' was at the so called Creation Museum, so he was on their turf, so to speak. He could have ridiculed the lot of them but it wouldn't have helped, they would have gone home saying "that stoopid science man is a jerk, he says god isn't real, what a moron! Everyone knows god is real! I didn't evolve from no damn monkey!" ..and them voted in the next election for whoever wants to introduce creationism into school curriculum.


----------



## sp0rk (5/2/14)

Ham's 12,000 animals on the ark doesn't add up if as he claimed there were 2 pairs of every animal listed in the bible (which there weren't according to their stories)
The number would be closer to 300


----------



## Liam_snorkel (5/2/14)

You can't argue with fiction.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

Liam_snorkel said:


> You can't argue with fiction.


Thats a fact


----------



## Mardoo (5/2/14)

Dave70 said:


> Its basically lending weight the creationist supposition that there's an argument to even be had in the first place.


That's a good point.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

The bible is basically a book of short stories passed down & translated over the centuries. No two bibles are the same, each publisher has their own version. The story about Noahs Ark , as I have read, was that he was to take a pair of each "religous" clean animal with him, which according to old texts was only 7 pairs of animals.


----------



## pcmfisher (5/2/14)

So you mean to tell me that humans were not running around with dinosaurs?

What makes it worse is he is Australian :unsure: :unsure:


----------



## Liam_snorkel (5/2/14)

Not quite a big enough market for his brand of crazy over here.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

pcmfisher said:


> So you mean to tell me that humans were not running around with dinosaurs?


Nope....some creationists beleive the earth is only 9,000yrs old


----------



## OzPaleAle (5/2/14)

Liam_snorkel said:


> Not quite a big enough market for his brand of crazy over here.


If there is a big enough market there the least he could do was spring a few extra bucks for a suit that at least closely fitted him.......


----------



## tavas (5/2/14)

pcmfisher said:


> So you mean to tell me that humans were not running around with dinosaurs?


Were they???


----------



## sp0rk (5/2/14)

Well I just finished it
Certainly didn't sway my view from being 100% believing in evolution...


----------



## Parks (5/2/14)

I actually found it quite interesting to listen to. Ham probably did about the best job of anyone I have heard trying to explain his point of view.

Unfortunately it's all underpinned by a mystical being who created everything in 6 days.

It seems like the creationism science is all to do with coming up with semi plausible reasons the evolution science isn't right.

Either way, it was 100% better to listen to than some of the anti-gay bible debates I have heard.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

You god damn non-believer Spork.


----------



## OzPaleAle (5/2/14)

Parks said:


> I actually found it quite interesting to listen to. Ham probably did about the best job of anyone I have heard trying to explain his point of view.
> 
> Unfortunately it's all underpinned by a mystical being who created everything in 6 days.
> 
> ...


Yes I found at the start it was a fairly well put argument with the odd sprinkle of crazy slipping through.
Still not convincing as a whole but he had some reasonable questions.

He is correct, none of us were there when these events were happening, its all based on current understanding, we thought the speed of light was constant, pluto was a planet when I was at school.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

Parks said:


> Either way, it was 100% better to listen to than some of the anti-gay bible debates I have heard.


Thats only because there where no gay people back then. .....


----------



## Parks (5/2/14)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> Thats only because there where no gay people back then. .....


Is that because they only started choosing to be gay recently?

h34r:


----------



## Dave70 (5/2/14)

2.05:20 pretty much crystallizes christian piety and arrogance in full gallop. No one will ever convince _him. _

Fair enough. How could the work of dickheads like Stephen Hawkings, Prof Laurence Krauss, Prof Richard Dawkins, Charles Darwin and their numerous esteemed ilk ever hope to compete with the first century wisdom of a burning bush..


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

Bloody scientist....spending all those years working out how the universe worked and how old fossils are...all they had to do was read a 2000 yr old book of tales then spend the rest of the time brewing beer


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

Parks said:


> Is that because they only started choosing to be gay recently?
> 
> h34r:


 Yes.....Since 10:35am on the 14th August 1963


----------



## angus_grant (5/2/14)

I remember quite a few years ago I shattered some girl's world. I was having a conversation with her and it turned out she was a god-botherer. Normally I can't be arsed having a discussion with them but I had nothing better to do.

So the conversation went along these lines:

Me - So you agree that God made us in his image.
Her - Yes, it says so in the bible
Me - So God is capable of lying, murder, coveting his neighbours wife, worshipping false idols, taking his own name in vain, etc, etc.
Her - Well no I don't think that is right.
Me - So the bible is lying then?
Her - No, that's not right. Umm, God put those parts in us to test our faith and commitment.
Me - So God is a raging asshole then to build us with these temptations and vices (which he doesn't have) and then makes up rules which say "oh by the way, don't do those things"
.
.
.
.
Me - "boom, see ya"

I particularly liked the "taking his own name in vain" part. Tickled my funny bone.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

A had a chic who repeatedly called me her god one night......


----------



## lukiferj (5/2/14)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> A had a chic who repeatedly called me her god one night......


 I doubt it stu


----------



## lukiferj (5/2/14)

Wait. So the bible isn't real? But it makes so much sense.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (5/2/14)

Its real if you believe it


----------



## Bribie G (6/2/14)

The bible was written by members of a society that would make modern Third World shitheaps like Somalia look like paradise in comparison. About the only thing they can teach us is 101 uses for dried donkey dung.


----------



## SmallFry (6/2/14)

Bribie G said:


> ... About the only thing they can teach us is 101 uses for dried donkey dung.


I got a list of 6. Eagerly awaiting the other 95...


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

I much preffer the Monty Python version.


----------



## wbosher (6/2/14)

What??!! So we weren't created by the FSM???


----------



## sp0rk (6/2/14)

Bribie G said:


> The bible was written by members of a society that would make modern Third World shitheaps like Somalia look like paradise in comparison. About the only thing they can teach us is 101 uses for dried donkey dung.


Quoted for truth
If you'd been walking in the desert for 40 days, you'd hallucinate about a burning bush too!


----------



## Cube (6/2/14)

Luckily for me, I only have a hand full of these nut jobs in my family tree. I take joy in letting them handle my stony, stony-iron, chondrite and tektite collection.


----------



## Dave70 (6/2/14)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> I much preffer the Monty Python version.


Now_ thats _the version that should be taught in schools.


----------



## manticle (6/2/14)

It is

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBqe5xvYnNc


----------



## mckenry (6/2/14)

The real debate should be 'why does Religion exist at all?' More people have been abused, tortured and murdered in the name of God than all wars summed. Not just the Christian God. Here is a snapshot of some atrocities. I couldnt find the article I wanted to, but this is similar. Most of it is old, but I doubt it will ever end. There is (IMO) more hate in the world based on religious belief than anything else.
Being an athiest, I dont hate anyone for following a religion, because we are not in conflict. (They may hate me, but meh) I dont have the need to prove my god exists and theirs doesnt. Its a nothing debate that gets people all worked up.

Another point that shits me, is why do I have to wear the label 'Athiest'? Whats the label for someone who doesnt believe in the Tooth Fairy? Both God & the Tooth Fairy have shown themselves to me equally.

Having said all that - every active church goer I know, is nice and I'm glad I live in a country where the laws/morals are based on the Christian bible.


----------



## tavas (6/2/14)

Faeriest!!!


----------



## tavas (6/2/14)

mckenry said:


> Having said all that - every active church goer I know, is nice and I'm glad I live in a country where the laws/morals are based on the Christian bible.


I've found the opposite is mostly true. Most churchgoers I know are the most racist, small minded bigots I've ever met. They think that by going to church on Sunday all is forgiven.


----------



## OzPaleAle (6/2/14)

mckenry said:


> The real debate should be 'why does Religion exist at all?'


I am far from religious, I do think that if the belief in Heaven\God makes the death of a loved one easier for someone then that can't be a bad thing.
I don't like the exclusion\derision that comes across when you do mention your not flavour x of religion\atheist, the if your not with us your against us that is evident in some religions.

I remember speaking to my neighbour who was a Karma Yogi(I think thats what it was called) and what that meant, the gist sounded like it was just about being a good bloke in general, helping someone out with no expectation of the favour being returned, just made him happy to help someone out. Seemed like a reasonable enough thing, hard to say that religion is evil, except he wasn't meant to drink beer, body is a temple yada yada.


----------



## mckenry (6/2/14)

mckenry said:


> Having said all that - every active church goer I know, is nice and I'm glad I live in a country where the laws/morals are based on the Christian bible.





tavas said:


> I've found the opposite is mostly true. Most churchgoers I know are the most racist, small minded bigots I've ever met. They think that by going to church on Sunday all is forgiven.


I'll admit I dont know that many, but the ones I do, have never given me that impression. They seem to never lose their temper, or criticise others (apart from religious belief, which is my problem with religion anyway) and handle pressure quite well. It would be nice to believe that a greater being is in control and therefore you can relax, dont worry, have a homebrew. read the bible. Not my go though.
As I said in the opener, small sample pool and it might just be how those few are and not indicative of the religious population.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

wbosher said:


> What??!! So we weren't created by the FSM???


Nope. He was to busy watching the strippers and drinking from the beer volcano


----------



## OzPaleAle (6/2/14)

And in summary....


----------



## Truman42 (6/2/14)

I read a book years ago called "Chariots of the Gods (was God an Astronaut)" by Erik Von Daniken.
Quite a good read and it basically says that a lot of information in the bible can be put down to an alien visit. An example I remember is Marys immaculate conception, In short she was knocked out by a stun gun and alien semen inseminated into her. Thats why jesus could do so many party tricks. He was half human half advanced alien intelligent life form.

Even the star that the 3 wise men followed was the alien mother ship in orbit around the earth. 

Recently I watched the mini series called The Bible and every miracle performed could be explained by advanced technology. Red sea being parted....force field from an orbiting mothership.

Sodom and gomorah hit by fire and brimstone..... laser beams from a space craft.
Anyway its a great read if your into that sort of thing.

Heres the link from amazon.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Chariots-Gods-Was-God-Astronaut/dp/0285629115




All over the world there are fantastic ruins and improbable objects which cannot be explained by conventional theories of history, archaeology, and religion. Why, for instance, do the world's sacred books describe Gods who came down from the sky in fiery chariots and always promised to return? How could an ancient Sanskrit text contain an account which could only be of a journey in an alien craft? Compare photographs of American space centre launch sites to the constructions on the plains of Nazca in Peru. In order to understand the mysteries which Erich Von Daniken has cataloqued we must go back to these ancient relics with an open mind. We must call in the resources and experience of sciences other than archaeology. Read Von Daniken's classic work and make up your own mind.


----------



## Truman42 (6/2/14)

BTW, How do creationists explain the dinosaurs? Whats their answer on who put them there and why? Just god playing around when he was a little boy before making us????


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

I think your tinfoil hat just slipped a little.


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

The whole alien thing is essentially the same as religion anyway. It provides no answers.

Just replace the word god with the word alien. Still just as devoid of any real explanation for anything. It just changes all answers from "because god" to "because aliens". Which is a little cooler I admit.. because.. you know... aliens! Aliens are cool.

You might as well replace God with Flying Spaghetti Monster. Or Flying zombie veloceraptors. Or Jedi squirrels. 

Why? Because Jedi Squirrels.

I'll stick with plain old boring science which provides actual answers to stuff.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (6/2/14)

http://www.skepdic.com/vondanik.html


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

Well that explains Scientology......but will never explain Tom Cruise


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

Nothing can explain Tom Cruise.

Edit: Not even Jedi Squirrels.


----------



## pcmfisher (6/2/14)

mckenry said:


> I'm glad I live in a country where the laws/morals are based on the Christian bible.


That's the selective good bits you are talking about, right?

Not the slavery, genocide, killing children etc..


----------



## sp0rk (6/2/14)

Not bagging people who believe this theory, I don't personally believe it but I do find it quite interesting


----------



## Camo6 (6/2/14)

Lol. I read Chariot of the Gods years ago and from memory the author was a bigger zealot than most of the religious nuts I know.
I think Icke(sp?) is closer to the truth and we're ruled by a horde of lizard people.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

mckenry said:


> I'm glad I live in a country where the laws/morals are based on the Christian bible.


Um....yeah....hundreds of stolen , forced adoptees, physicaly & sexually abused children cant be wrong....


----------



## pcmfisher (6/2/14)

Airgead said:


> The whole alien thing is essentially the same as religion anyway. It provides no answers.
> 
> Just replace the word god with the word alien. Still just as devoid of any real explanation for anything. It just changes all answers from "because god" to "because aliens". Which is a little cooler I admit.. because.. you know... aliens! Aliens are cool.
> 
> ...


Yes, that's right.
Don't have an explanation for something? Well, God did it, or aliens. It doesn't matter.

The up side is, the more we learn, the less can be attributed to a God.


----------



## Dave70 (6/2/14)

Truman said:


> BTW, How do creationists explain the dinosaurs? Whats their answer on who put them there and why? Just god playing around when he was a little boy before making us????


The creationist explanation is the bones were placed there by god as a test of faith. They will tell you this with a straight face.


----------



## manticle (6/2/14)

Plus dinosaurs are in the bible. Leviathan and something or other.

Big whale that ate Jonas maybe. Tryanosauarus Rex that gave birth to Solomon.

OK I made that last one up.


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

pcmfisher said:


> The up side is, the more we learn, the less can be attributed to a God.


They call this one the "god of the gaps" argument.

Oh... yeah.. so evolution is true.. but who started it huh? Oh... it started in a puddle through come fairly common chemical reactions... well who put the chemicals there huh?... and so on until you get to the "well who caused the big bang then?" discussion.


----------



## manticle (6/2/14)

The answer is 'some magical guy who can do everything'. The question is then 'How do you know about that guy?'.

Answer: 'I just know. You'd know too if you knew'.

Makes sense.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

The answer is 42


----------



## OzPaleAle (6/2/14)

Airgead said:


> "well who caused the big bang then?" discussion.


Probably our universe is just a grain of malt in a sack full of many universes, big bang was just John Palmer putting us through the Mill.


----------



## Dave70 (6/2/14)

mckenry said:


> Having said all that - every active church goer I know, is nice and I'm glad I live in a country where the laws/morals are based on the Christian bible.


On balance, its predominantly atheist countries who enjoy a better standard of living. This contrasts sharply with the backward brutal, cultural quagmires still under the theocratic jackboot.

This tends to nullify the persistent bleating of religious types that society would collapse into a murderous orgy without the fickle hand of god and his impossible to follow prohibitions.


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

Dave70 said:


> On balance, its predominantly atheist countries who enjoy a better standard of living. This contrasts sharply with the backward brutal, cultural quagmires still under the theocratic jackboot.


Yep.. that pretty much describes the US.


----------



## wide eyed and legless (6/2/14)

Hey Truman Erich Von Daniken was debunked when he wrote a book about time travel, some one asked him why couldn't it have been someone coming from the future and mucking around.
And Bill Bailey reckons they were Scots who invented time travel.


----------



## manticle (6/2/14)

That'll be me...................up the road.


----------



## zappa (6/2/14)

God did exist. Here's proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3ilRFkvgbM&feature=youtube_gdata_player '>


----------



## Bridges (6/2/14)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> The answer is 42


And the question is?
Hope you know where your towel is.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

Its in my satchel with some salted peanuts and a spare babel fish


----------



## Goose (6/2/14)

The answer lies in the "Anthropic Principle".

Quite simple really. We're exist in a universe that has an infinitesimally small chance of existence. Yet here we are to observe it because we are also part of that existence, despite the extreme improbability of such.

It's sheer luck that we should celebrate with beer....

Cheers.


----------



## sponge (6/2/14)

Goose said:


> Quite simple really. We're exist in a universe that has an infinitesimally small chance of existence. Yet here we are to observe it because we are also part of that existence, despite the extreme improbability of such.


Observe, and destroy... one planet at a time.


----------



## Goose (6/2/14)

sponge said:


> Observe, and destroy... one planet at a time.


Indeed. Life becomes untenable on earth in 2-3 billion years, when the Sun runs out of fuel and goes Nova. We better get some brews in before then I reckon....

Seems to be getting a bit warmer here lately...


----------



## tavas (6/2/14)

Truman said:


> How do creationists explain the dinosaurs?


How do people claim to know how to speak Klingon? And get PhD's on it? It's an idea in someone's mind, yet others have taken it and created a whole world.

Not unlike religion actually.

Goebbels: "It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise."


----------



## tavas (6/2/14)

Goose said:


> Indeed. Life becomes untenable on earth in 2-3 billion years, when the Sun runs out of fuel and goes Nova. We better get some brews in before then I reckon....
> 
> Seems to be getting a bit warmer here lately...


Better switch to ale making


----------



## Goose (6/2/14)

Clarke's Third Law:

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

Goose said:


> when the Sun runs out of fuel and goes Nova.


Nahhh... no nova. The sun is G type main sequence. You don't get novas until you up up in the blue giant range.

In 3-4 billion years or so the sun will stop burning hydrogen at its core. The core will shrink to a point where it begins burning helium. At that point the sun will drop off the main sequence and become a red giant. Later it will shed its outer layers as a spectacular planetary nebula before the helium runs out and the core is not big enough to start burning carbon. It ends up as a white (then black) dwarf.

You don't go nova unless the core is heavy enough to start burning carbon to silicone then silicone into iron. Around 20 solar masses is the limit if I remember correctly.

Science is wonderful.

Cheers
Dave


----------



## Mardoo (6/2/14)

Cube said:


> Luckily for me, I only have a hand full of these nut jobs in my family tree. I take joy in letting them handle my stony, stony-iron, chondrite and tektite collection.


Ooooo, can I see!


----------



## Goose (6/2/14)

Airgead said:


> Nahhh... no nova. The sun is G type main sequence. You don't get novas until you up up in the blue giant range.
> 
> In 3-4 billion years or so the sun will stop burning hydrogen at its core. The core will shrink to a point where it begins burning helium. At that point the sun will drop off the main sequence and become a red giant. Later it will shed its outer layers as a spectacular planetary nebula before the helium runs out and the core is not big enough to start burning carbon. It ends up as a white (then black) dwarf.
> 
> ...


 :lol: ah yes, I should have known it was G type main sequence.

What's a super nova vs nova then.

Then can you tell me about black holes please. And I don't mean where the sun don't shine


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

Actually I was slightly wrong...the nucleosynthesis is hydrogen->helium->carbon->neon->oxygen->silicone->iron. I left out a few steps.

A supernova is where the core of a massive star undergoes collapse (or other wierd processes like pair instability) and goes foom.

A nova is usually where a compact object (like a neutron star or white dwarf) collects material on its surface which undergoes fusion and explodes.

The key difference is that in a nova the object survives. In a supernova it doesn't.

Supanova on the other hand is a comic book convention in Sydney.

And black holes are cool.

Cheers
Dave


----------



## Goose (6/2/14)

> And black holes are cool.


How do you measure the temperature of a black hole ?


----------



## Airgead (6/2/14)

Strangely enough you can.... a black hole is a perfect black body radiator. You can measure its temperature very accurately indeed from its spectrum.

A black body in thermal equilibrium (that is, at a constant temperature) emits electromagnetic radiation called black-body radiation. The radiation is emitted according to Planck's law, meaning that it has a spectrum that is determined by the temperature alone (see figure at right), not by the body's shape or composition.

Cheers
Dave

Science - FTW!


----------



## wide eyed and legless (6/2/14)

Two of my brothers, myself and my father have to sleep in bed with a slated head board, and we all have to sleep holding the slats,
I hadn't thought much about it, and put it down to something quirky that had passed down from father to son.
My wife has mentioned it a few times that I look like I am scared of falling out of bed, then I read a piece by the late Carl Sagan about the "Falling Dream" which we all have, his theory was that when we were tree dwellers and built our nests high in the trees that is where the falling dream originated and made us hold on to a secure branch.
I would like to know how many of you have to, or are more comfortable, holding on to a slatted bed head, or as I have told my Dad
his side of the family are lagging behind on the evolutionary ladder.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

The only reason I grabbed the head board was so I didnt get dragged out of bed to go to school in.


----------



## Bridges (6/2/14)

I thought they were called head boards as you generally bang your head on them whilst on the job...
Or maybe I have a big head...


----------



## wide eyed and legless (6/2/14)

If you can bang your head more than six times your a legend


----------



## Truman42 (6/2/14)

While reading buzzfeed tonight I came across this post on what creationists views are on dinosaurs. They have an actual dinosaur museum, and believe dinosaurs were on Noah's ark. OMG. Or should I say Oh there god

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/this-is-what-creationists-believe-about-dinosaurs


----------



## Truman42 (6/2/14)

A good doco on evolution is the BBC series Walking with Caveman. Explains how we evolved from apes due to climate factors etc. 

They say one of the evolutionary leaps we took was due to us eating bone marrow from dead animals after lions had eaten a kill and left the remains. The bone marrow contained protien which helped our brains to grow.

You can download it from the torrent sites.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

The stupidity is breathtaking.....whats worse is some of these fools go on to become world leaders.

Then again, Pharoh's beleived cats where higher beings.....and anyone who has a cat would sometimes think that the cat actually believes it is a higher being


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (6/2/14)

Truman said:


> They say one of the evolutionary leaps we took was due to us eating bone marrow from dead animals after lions had eaten a kill and left the remains. The bone marrow contained protien which helped our brains to grow.
> .


Carefull...you will upset the raw food vego mob


----------



## angus_grant (6/2/14)

Which brings me to another story where I offended another group. I was talking to some girl at the drive-in movies during the intermission. Somehow she mentioned that she was a vegetarian and I said "oh, I don't think I could be a vegetarian" she replied "why not?" I replied "I love eating dead cows too much". Needless to say it was the end of the conversation. Not even my parting "what, was it something I said?" could charm her back. 

Angus Grant: offending demographics way before comedians made it cool.


----------



## manticle (6/2/14)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCwYnJYgtxU


----------



## stone4x4 (6/2/14)




----------



## jyo (6/2/14)

Dave70 said:


> On balance, its predominantly atheist countries who enjoy a better standard of living. This contrasts sharply with the backward brutal, cultural quagmires still under the theocratic jackboot.
> 
> This tends to nullify the persistent bleating of religious types that society would collapse into a murderous orgy without the fickle hand of god and his impossible to follow prohibitions.


Expressed beautifully.


Years ago I worked with a guy who believed Earth was only 6000 years old. When I asked him about carbon dating he told me that it was made up by scientists.

Watch some of this from about 10 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AS6rQtiEh8&list=PLPoYQOiKKRWCEcGDRR4AOSvZOqK40f_-I


----------



## manticle (7/2/14)

Show me the evidence.

I want a batmonkeyfish fossil


----------



## manticle (7/2/14)

Not isolated


----------



## angus_grant (7/2/14)

@manticle: come on man, I don't wear glasses. Besides that, the video brings a back a few memories. He he

I only offend demographics that choose to be a demographic. Oh wait.....

I only offend demographics that choose to be a stupid demographic. Oh wait....

I only offend demo Oh wait....

<out>


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (7/2/14)

Bloidy scientists. Going around spending all their time making sense of things.


----------



## angus_grant (7/2/14)

jyo said:


> Expressed beautifully.
> 
> 
> Years ago I worked with a guy who believed Earth was only 6000 years old. When I asked him about carbon dating he told me that it was made up by scientists.
> ...


Darwin was a racist. Oh my dog, argument is destroyed.


----------



## idzy (7/2/14)

I am a Christian.


----------



## angus_grant (7/2/14)

I am an Angus


----------



## krausenhaus (7/2/14)

jyo said:


> Expressed beautifully.
> 
> 
> Years ago I worked with a guy who believed Earth was only 6000 years old. When I asked him about carbon dating he told me that it was made up by scientists.


I met this creationist guy at a bar once and he said that he believed radioactive dating was flawed, but then he admitted he didn't really know much about it and asked me to explain it to him.

So I took the time to explain in some detail how it works, and that scientists don't only use carbon but a range of different radioisotopes with half-lifes ranging from thousands to billions of years and that the different methods all converge with one another, but the whole time I was talking he just sat there with a stupid grin shaking his head like I was explaining some outrageous conspiracy theory.

So I went to the bar and got another beer and then sat somewhere else when I came back.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (7/2/14)

Haha oh boy. This is a pisser. JB can be a bit hit and miss, but this piece is gold.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/blogs/blunt-instrument/for-gods-sake-how-did-he-get-out-20140205-321yi.html

"If it helps we cringed a lot as the cheerful creationist debated your popular scientist Mr Bill Nye, wherein by debate I meant faithfully repeat things that couldn’t possibly be true over and over until the audience – which topped a million viewers online – began to imagine that maybe Russell Crowe did build a big boat and squeeze 14,000 pairs of animals on board just to avoid the big flood that gave Kevin Costner gills in Waterworld because that would also explain why the polar caps are melting because God is keeping his options open. Or something."


----------



## Dave70 (7/2/14)

manticle said:


> Show me the evidence.
> 
> I want a batmonkeyfish fossil


Her you go mister, meet the family. introducing _Pikaia _of the Burgess Shale. Estimitated to be around five hundred million years old.
Apparently, its the notocord, primitive limbs and muscle attachments that make all the difference in terms of vertebrate evolution. 








So according to the sharpest minds around, we basically evolved from 2" long worms. 

I think it was Darwin who quipped, 'We'll never escape the stamp of our lowly origins'. - likely as he grabbed someone on the arse and felt the bony lump where our tails use to be.


More poignant in a way, was a quote from the famous paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, scientific historian - and so on - Stephen J Gould: 

*"if we could somehow "rewind the tape" of evolution and let it play again, chance would favor a different selection of that original multitude, and the world would be a very different place from the one we see around us. There is nothing "preordained" about the appearance of humanity or the human level of awareness."*

Butterfly effect? Spooky.


Now isn't that kind of stuff infinitely more thought provoking than simply passing us off as being crafted by some capricious insecure dictator from dust and clay, or clots of blood, or bits of rib?


----------



## Dave70 (7/2/14)

idzy said:


> I am a Christian.


No ones judging you. 

At least in this thread.


----------



## jlm (7/2/14)

I'd like to hear from Jim Jefferies on what he thinks of the subject:



NSFW, what with all the swears and stuff..........


----------



## sp0rk (7/2/14)

Liam_snorkel said:


> Haha oh boy. This is a pisser. JB can be a bit hit and miss, but this piece is gold.
> 
> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/blogs/blunt-instrument/for-gods-sake-how-did-he-get-out-20140205-321yi.html
> 
> "If it helps we cringed a lot as the cheerful creationist debated your popular scientist Mr Bill Nye, wherein by debate I meant faithfully repeat things that couldn’t possibly be true over and over until the audience – which topped a million viewers online – began to imagine that maybe Russell Crowe did build a big boat and squeeze 14,000 pairs of animals on board just to avoid the big flood that gave Kevin Costner gills in Waterworld because that would also explain why the polar caps are melting because God is keeping his options open. Or something."


In the Comments
"Here's a tip on the apparent ark issue .... you're assuming that the animals had to be full size. You might want to re-think that one."
Oh man, that's the best theory yet!


----------



## Parks (7/2/14)

I have come to this thought on religion:

If you are religious and use stories in the bible to demonstrate some moral story and share hope with like minded people - great. If it provides a means of counsel to help you get through tough times - great.

If you use the bible to judge others, pick and choose what's literal and what's figurative to suit whatever point you are trying to prove, or to vilify someone else, quite frankly you p*ss right off. I know too many Catholic people who do whatever they want in life then go to church a few times a year and are all forgiven.

I live by the thought of being a good person to others because you want to, not because you're trying to get into heaven or stay out of hell. Don't be a c*nt - it's a pretty simple life philosophy.


----------



## manticle (7/2/14)

Dave70 said:


> Her you go mister, meet the family. introducing _Pikaia _of the Burgess Shale. Estimitated to be around five hundred million years old.Apparently, its the notocord, primitive limbs and muscle attachments that make all the difference in terms of vertebrate evolution.
> 
> 
> 
> So according to the sharpest minds around, we basically evolved from 2" long worms. I think it was Darwin who quipped, 'We'll never escape the stamp of our lowly origins'. - likely as he grabbed someone on the arse and felt the bony lump where our tails use to be. More poignant in a way, was a quote from the famous paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, scientific historian - and so on - Stephen J Gould: *"if we could somehow "rewind the tape" of evolution and let it play again, chance would favor a different selection of that original multitude, and the world would be a very different place from the one we see around us. There is nothing "preordained" about the appearance of humanity or the human level of awareness."* Butterfly effect? Spooky. Now isn't that kind of stuff infinitely more thought provoking than simply passing us off as being crafted by some capricious insecure dictator from dust and clay, or clots of blood, or bits of rib?


Yeah but where's the evidence? You can't show any evidence.


----------



## wide eyed and legless (7/2/14)

I couldn't be stuffed watching the debate, we all know where we came from, why try and debate with those people, the reason Ken Ham went over there was because he would feel at home amongst all the other fruit cakes.

Potential Republican Texas Senate Candidate David Barton Claims Abortion Leads to Climate Change
Ken Ham could have stayed here and got a bigger audience world wide had he chosen Xanthe Mallet as his adversary especially if she wore her trade mark singlet.


----------



## Cube (7/2/14)

jyo said:


> Years ago I worked with a guy who believed Earth was only 6000 years old. When I asked him about carbon dating he told me that it was made up by scientists.


Ask him how he got to work and if it was on a bike, car, train or bus ask him where and how the metal for such an invention came from for him to magically sit on his ass and be propelled through space time to work.


----------



## Liam_snorkel (7/2/14)

Dave70 said:


> *"if we could somehow "rewind the tape" of evolution and let it play again, chance would favor a different selection of that original multitude, and the world would be a very different place from the one we see around us. There is nothing "preordained" about the appearance of humanity or the human level of awareness."*


depends if you're going to go back further than the proterozoic eon or not, and if you're going to assume that geologically, Earth would have followed a similar course. yes, life would look different, but my guess would be that the different forms of life would be fulfilling the same or similar functions to what it has so far. Evolution is driven by changes in the surrounding environment, and species expand & specialise to fill ecological niches. The niches become environmentally separated, & over time become separate. There's a good book I've read which touches on this, _The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World_. Written by a mathematician & a biologist, mostly in layman's terms.


----------



## Mardoo (7/2/14)

wide eyed and legless said:


> I couldn't be stuffed watching the debate, we all know where we came from...


Today my daughter said, "I stayed in Oscar's (our cat) tummy until I got really big and popped out his V V."


----------



## Not For Horses (7/2/14)

I wonder if there are any circumstances for which manticle has no video...


----------



## OzPaleAle (7/2/14)

Bill Bailey did a very interesting doco on Wallace(along the same lines as Darwins natural election) not long ago, can be found online.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0160nxk


----------



## angus_grant (7/2/14)

Mardoo said:


> Today my daughter said, "I stayed in Oscar's (our cat) tummy until I got really big and popped out his V V."


Well obviously if she believes it, then it is fact!

Now write a book about it, throw some miracles in, set up a world-wide pyramid scheme, and profit!!

Careful though, some other organisation might have a trademark on the business setup!


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (7/2/14)

The bible was pretty factual right up to the point of Adam and the talking snake. After that it just got to wierd.


----------



## wide eyed and legless (7/2/14)

I bet manticle has this one in his collection.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGASvVqzOa0


----------



## Dave70 (7/2/14)

^Single malt aged in new oak barrels I'll bet.^


----------



## pcmfisher (7/2/14)

OzPaleAle said:


> Yes I found at the start it was a fairly well put argument with the odd sprinkle of crazy slipping through.
> Still not convincing as a whole but he had some reasonable questions.
> 
> He is correct, none of us were there when these events were happening, its all based on current understanding, *we thought the speed of light was constant*, pluto was a planet when I was at school.



It's not? 
Einstein would turn in his grave.


----------



## sponge (7/2/14)

pcmfisher said:


> It's not?
> Einstein would turn in his grave.


Relative to you or him?


----------



## pcmfisher (7/2/14)

sponge said:


> Relative to you or him?


Relative to God.
Is that neither or both?


----------



## OzPaleAle (7/2/14)

Heard something about that last year.

http://news.discovery.com/space/speed-of-light-einstein-physics-130428.htm


Edit: was more of a statement to point out the based on current knowledge part.


----------



## pcmfisher (7/2/14)

That's the thing. Science is based on current understandings.

Crap like Creation is based on 'that's the truth and that's how it is, so there.'


I have heard that Mr Ham's museum is having a bit of financial trouble.
It seems that these days even some of the hardened whack jobs are scratching their head about it.


----------



## OzPaleAle (7/2/14)

Probably also just more of these "interesting"(Scam, cough cough) religions taking a slice of the pie too.


Edit: Shit I guess by sharing the youtube vid I just got them more youtube hit dollars, guess I was sucked in to their sneaky revenue raising campaign.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (7/2/14)

http://m.csmonitor.com/Science/2014/0205/Bill-Nye-versus-Ken-Ham-Who-won-video


----------



## goomboogo (7/2/14)

Poor Oscar's V.V.


----------



## Dave70 (7/2/14)

Dave70 said:


> *Science dose itself no favor's taking part these clusterfucks of ignorance, delusion and dogmatisim. *
> *Its basically lending weight the creationist supposition that there's an argument to even be had in the first place.*
> 
> Take a look at the laundry list of redundant parts on our own bodies and design flaws, are the trying to prove god _was_ actually a bumbling twat?
> ...


*But Nye's participation in the debate did lend a lot of credibility to the creationists lobby, Coyne says.*

​Professor Coyne and I agree. 
Only he didn't say clusterfuck 'n' stuff.


----------



## Cube (7/2/14)

Mardoo said:


> Ooooo, can I see!


They are in the wardrobe because I have a toddler that loves throwing 'stones'. So three years in a stuffy, maybe musty wardrobe, it was very nice to feel them again. The iron ones are heavy suckers and need a good clean.


----------



## Cube (7/2/14)

I have a piece of the moon and mars in a small display case. Certified genuine and are put away because of said toddler. When I get to them I'll post.

In a display case I got for my 4.6 billion or so year old babies.


----------



## Airgead (7/2/14)

Sweet!


----------



## browndog (7/2/14)

Cube said:


> They are in the wardrobe because I have a toddler that loves throwing 'stones'. So three years in a stuffy, maybe musty wardrobe, it was very nice to feel them again. The iron ones are heavy suckers and need a good clean.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


now where the hell do you get a collection like that?


----------



## jyo (8/2/14)

pcmfisher said:


> I have heard that Mr Ham's museum is having a bit of financial trouble.
> It seems that these days even some of the hardened whack jobs are scratching their head about it.


Really? That's strange, you'd think business would be booming considering that nearly 50% of Americans believe humans were created in their present form less than 10,000 years ago. Sorry Aboriginal Australia. Apparently you didn't exist.

Maybe Mr Ham just needs a better advertising department in order to hit his target audience.


----------



## jyo (8/2/14)

FTFY



Cube said:


> In a display case I got for my 6000 or so year old babies.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Northside Novice (8/2/14)

Deleted for science


----------



## Liam_snorkel (8/2/14)

northside novice said:


> For the record I am nothing , star dust . But without religion I would not be able to exist in my country drinking beer ! And for the sciences , and Darwin , if you have really studies it , you would know the flaws and inconsistencies that are life that we know it ! Um has a duck bill but feeds it young milk . Ok that will do . No **** knows what the fuk is going on ! And sunshine , if you do you would be worth all the gold in the known universe !greed , seek , destroy , chill , have sex , drunk beer . We have bitching else , realise and move on it enjoy


Quoting for posterity


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (8/2/14)

Those comments made about as much sense as a creationalist..


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (8/2/14)

........Right........


----------



## pk.sax (8/2/14)

Man, you love science or what!


----------



## Donske (8/2/14)

Awww, I missed a NN late night post spree, they are always quality.


----------



## Cube (8/2/14)

browndog said:


> now where the hell do you get a collection like that?


Years of collecting


----------



## Sada (9/2/14)

Cube said:


> I have a piece of the moon and mars in a small display case. Certified genuine and are put away because of said toddler. When I get to them I'll post.
> 
> In a display case I got for my 4.6 billion or so year old babies.
> 
> ...



They're not rocks, Maree, they're minerals!


----------



## Cube (9/2/14)

Sada said:


> They're not rocks, Maree, they're minerals!


Hehe. Now get my funions bitch.


----------



## Goose (10/2/14)

> Cube, on 07 Feb 2014 - 4:32 PM, said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Certified genuine moon and mars ?

origin meteorite ?


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (10/2/14)

Well some say the moon is made up from consolidated meteorites...or cheese..


----------



## Goose (11/2/14)

err, Dr Stu, I didn't mean the origin of the moon (or mars for that matter) .. 

However the source of Cube's rocks from the moon could be brought back from one of the lunar landers. This I doubt as they would be the most expensive rocks on the planet. Probably even more expensive than diamonds.

And since no spacecraft sent to mars surface has ever returned, I doubt they were dug up by a robot and returned for Cube's collection either.


----------



## Goose (11/2/14)

http://www.meteorites.tv/371-mars-rocks-for-sale

100 grand for a 100g rock.... man, Martian land is expensive these days.... :blink:


----------



## Cube (12/2/14)

Goose said:


> Certified genuine moon and mars ?
> 
> origin meteorite ?


Purchased both off one member from the international meteorite collectors association. 

Mars meteorite NWA 4766. Authenticated and guaranteed by two members from the international meteorite collectors association. I won't post their membership numbers publically 


The moon one ill post when I find it. It's somewhere safe..... So safe it's a little to hard to locate ha!

Edit. Moon is not a returned rock. I'd have to be working for NASA and have sticky fingers to have one of them..... Dream job working for NASA. One day....


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (12/2/14)

Just curious as to how they know its a martian meteorite. Not doubting, just curious.


----------



## Cube (12/2/14)

Because they know their shit. MMMKAAYYYYYYYYYY.


----------



## Airgead (13/2/14)

Simple version - They study the various isotopes of elements present. Usually carbon and oxygen. Each planet has a particular isotopic signature. The moon and earth are quite similar (obviously). Mars is different.

Cheers
Dave


----------



## Cube (13/2/14)

Airgead said:


> Simple version - They study the various isotopes of elements present. Usually carbon and oxygen. Each planet has a particular isotopic signature. The moon and earth are quite similar (obviously). Mars is different.
> 
> Cheers
> Dave


Simpler version:
They know their shit. 

Ha!


----------



## Liam_snorkel (13/2/14)

Back onto the original topic - Sir David says it all.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/11/sir-david-attenborough-enough-with-the-creationists-and-climate-change-deniers.html


----------

