"1,000 Scientists Sign Up to Dissent from Darwin"

[ImmortalFlame]

You mean "Bill Nye The-Not-So-Science-Guy"?

He is not a scientist.

He is a mechanical engineer and invented a hydraulic resonance suppressor.

He is not an authority in the scientific community as he often acts like.

I don't believe Nye positions himself as an authority within the scientific community. He's a communicator; he sees his role as a kind of entertainer who presents science and scientific ideas to people in a form designed to entertain and educate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mean "Bill Nye The-Not-So-Science-Guy"?

He is not a scientist. He is not an authority in the scientific community as he often acts like.

But I literally "laughed out loud" at your claim that I was somehow denigrating creationists by pointing out that Bill Nye is not a scientist.

It was funny.

How has he acted as an authority? Okay, compared to people that believe the creation myths he has, but then in that regard anyone with at least a high school level of scientific authority. He is often a spokesman for the sciences and if he got anything significantly wrong he would be corrected. I think

And a person that could reason logically would understand how you denigrate creationists denigrating Nye. Ask nicely and I will explain it to you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope.

An elementary school kid and a baking soda volcano are not scientists.

Neither is Bill Nye.

Your example tells us that you do not understand the scientific method either. You need to try again. I will gladly go over the scientific method wit you.

I wouldn't know anything about that.

Wait...was that an "attack" just now?

BY attacking creationists you are denigrating all scientists.

L-O-L

I hope this post is not indicative of your ability to reason logically. And no, my claim about creationist sources is easily proven. But then again one must understand the scientific method. Most creationists do not. The poor fools at AiG and other such sources are not even ashamed enough to try to hide the fact that they require their workers to swear to not follow the scientific method.

 

[tas8831]

An elementary school kid and a baking soda volcano are not scientists.

Neither is Bill Nye.

Is Ken Ham a scientist?

 

[tas8831]

I'd say that it does not, in and of itself, make one a scientist, but the Discovery Institute seems to think that engineers and psychologists, and dentists are.

And forestry people, and the guy that thinks water has memory, and nutritionists, and lawyers, and....

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is Ken Ham a scientist?

I truly laughed out loud at this question. There should be a rating that is a combination of "Winner" and " Funny".

 

[BilliardsBall]

How did Jehovah overcome thermodynamics and chirality?

Evidence please.

I will tell you, as soon as you explain how mechanistic abiogenesis did the same!

 

[Subduction Zone]

I will tell you, as soon as you explain how mechanistic abiogenesis did the same!

Why do you think that thermodynamics goes against abiogenesis?

 

[tas8831]

I will tell you, as soon as you explain how mechanistic abiogenesis did the same!

Hazen's team has several publictions on the chirality issue, in which they have found that certain minerals favor the adhesion of organic molecules of specific chirality.
The thermodynamics thing was dismissed decades ago, I can't understand why creationists still bring it up.

It was most informative to see what you dodged or failed to reply to. Here is one of my original posts - what you ignored/dodged is in red:

Amazing stuff - I was unaware that bacteria are now considered fluids and that their movements require neurological and multiple systems also moving/catalyzing - even at a level devoid of life! Amazing insights!

But I note that did not explain why none of the papers (at least one of them from which you must have gleaned your appendix information) even contained the word "enzyme" even as they described the function of the appendix.

I would also like to learn more about this movement and catalysis - what is moving and what needs to be catalyzed for fluid bacteria to re-colonize the gut after a bout of diarrhea. I am especially intrigued about this prior-to-life level that you speak of - is that the spirit realm? Can't wait to see the evidence!


Having taught college genetics for about 6 years, yes, yes I am. Not sure what that has to do with enzymes or bacteria being fluid or the Spirit realm.​

 

[tas8831]

Urey proved that mud can have a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of what is required for abiogenesis, ignoring issues of thermodynamics, chirality, complexity...

Urey used mud? Interesting - can you show that he used mud?

And why do you bring up thermodynamics and chirality all the time? Did you read about those 'problems' on a YEC website recently?

In real life, the Miller-Urey experiments were set up to test Oparin's hypothesis about the reducing atmosphere. Pity that creationists decided a long time ago that their best bet was to misrepresent the goal of the experiments.

 

[tas8831]

My God set laws in place that macroevolution seems to defy, including chirality, thermodynamics and entropy, etc.

None of those have any impact on macroevolution.

Of course, if macroevolution cannot occur, you just made the ark an impossibility (well, more of one).

 

[tas8831]

No, I'm sure you accused 1,000 scientists of dishonesty, if so, that means we can't trust science, and need to trust the Bible still more. Good luck!

Non sequitur.

I see that many Priests have been covering up child sexual abuse for decades.

If your logic had merit, we should be burning bibles.

 

[Tiberius]

My God set laws in place that macroevolution seems to defy, including chirality, thermodynamics and entropy, etc.

Can you explain how evolution defies chirality, thermodynamics and entropy?

Can you also explain why "macro"-evolution violates these but "micro"-evolution does not?

 

[Prestor John]

He is a mechanical engineer and invented a hydraulic resonance suppressor.

That's awesome. What even is a "hydraulic resonance suppressor"?

There are lots of inventors out there who are not scientists.

Bill Nye is not a scientist.

I don't believe Nye positions himself as an authority within the scientific community.

He sure does.

Last year when he claimed to be attending the State of the Union address, he tweeted that his attendance should not be "seen as an acceptance of the recent attacks on science and the scientific community."

He definitely considers himself a representative of the scientific community.

He's a communicator; he sees his role as a kind of entertainer who presents science and scientific ideas to people in a form designed to entertain and educate.

Yet he also advocates that those who deny mankind's influence on climate change are suffering from psychological delusions and should be imprisoned as war criminals.

That's not very entertaining.

 

[Prestor John]

How has he acted as an authority? Okay, compared to people that believe the creation myths he has, but then in that regard anyone with at least a high school level of scientific authority. He is often a spokesman for the sciences and if he got anything significantly wrong he would be corrected. I think

No. A high school level of education does not make anyone an authority in the scientific community.

Bill Nye is often criticized by members of the scientific community.

And a person that could reason logically would understand how you denigrate creationists denigrating Nye.

But, I never denigrated Bill Nye.

He has worth as an entertainer, but not as a scientist.

Being clear and fair about him is not denigrating him.

Ask nicely and I will explain it to you.

No thanks.

That would risk me having to talk with you longer than I'd like to.

 

[Prestor John]

Your example tells us that you do not understand the scientific method either. You need to try again. I will gladly go over the scientific method wit you.

My example exhibits how little credence I give to Bill Nye.

I hope this post is not indicative of your ability to reason logically. And no, my claim about creationist sources is easily proven. But then again one must understand the scientific method. Most creationists do not. The poor fools at AiG and other such sources are not even ashamed enough to try to hide the fact that they require their workers to swear to not follow the scientific method.

Aw, so it's not an attack if it's easily proven to be true?

Then why did you claim that I personally attacked you when I claimed that you were being condescending and rude in another post?

You're being inconsistent.

 

[Prestor John]

Is Ken Ham a scientist?

I don't know anything about Ken Ham.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. A high school level of education does not make anyone an authority in the scientific community.

Bill Nye is often criticized by members of the scientific community.

Please pay attention. I said comparatively in regards to someone with a high school level of scientific literacy. In fact being an authority is often a matter of comparison. Can you provide examples that support your claims?

But, I never denigrated Bill Nye.

Sure you did. I can quote you again.

He has worth as an entertainer, but not as a scientist.

Being clear and fair about him is not denigrating him.

You were not fair and clear about him. You only tried to denigrate him. No one claimed that he was a scientist. Now you are trying to change the claims as well.

No thanks.

That would risk me having to talk with you longer than I'd like to.

That is fine with me. I thought that you might want to correct your errors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My example exhibits how little credence I give to Bill Nye.

But that is only based upon prejudice. You can't seem to base it on facts and evidence.

Aw, so it's not an attack if it's easily proven to be true?

No, even something that is true can be an attack. But you can't even seem to do that.

Then why did you claim that I personally attacked you when I claimed that you were being condescending and rude in another post?

You're being inconsistent.

No, what you call being "condescending" is bristling at that fact that your beliefs are easily shown to be wrong. And rude, perhaps, but that is debatable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know anything about Ken Ham.

Then you are very lucky.