RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,692
Posts: 5,431,024
Members: 24,829
Currently online: 468
Newest member: 713brianp27


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science and Technology

Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 5 2014, 03:59 PM   #61
Yminale
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Democratically Liberated America
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

DarthTom wrote: View Post
Yea. The flaw of course is that the New Testament was written not by god but by the Apostles. And Mark et al. were very much men.
All the synaptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were probably not written by the Apostles directly. Mark was probably written 40 years after Jesus's death and resurrection (and he and Luke were not apostles). John was the latest and written probably 100 years after Jesus's death. The only original Apostle to actually write anything down was probably Peter and he only wrote down 2 Peter (1 Peter was probably done by a scribe).
__________________
This Space for Rent
Yminale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5 2014, 04:07 PM   #62
DarthTom
Fleet Admiral
 
DarthTom's Avatar
 
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

Yminale wrote: View Post
All the synaptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were probably not written by the Apostles directly. Mark was probably written 40 years after Jesus's death and resurrection (and he and Luke were not apostles). John was the latest and written probably 100 years after Jesus's death. The only original Apostle to actually write anything down was probably Peter and he only wrote down 2 Peter (1 Peter was probably done by a scribe).
Mark for example recounts Jesus death in the first person. So, it's written as if he witnessed it himself.
DarthTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5 2014, 04:20 PM   #63
Yminale
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Democratically Liberated America
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

DarthTom wrote: View Post
Mark for example recounts Jesus death in the first person. So, it's written as if he witnessed it himself.
That's true but Mark probably started as an oral tradition (aka personal testimony) with the rest added later and then written down by someone else (few Jews could write back then).
__________________
This Space for Rent
Yminale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9 2014, 10:40 PM   #64
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

I might have had Hugh Ross join with Nye as one is an old-Earther, and another a skeptic to take the "Hit him high and I hit him low approach."

The Kitz.Dover deal wasn't even intel design, but a YEC textbook, and NOVA proved the YECers deception.

I think it is harder for skeptics these days.

In the past it was all about Sunday school, go burn your D&D manuals.

Now I see more YEC'ers electric-universe cranks and cryptid hunters all rubbing off on each other. If the Earth was only 6,000 years old, then a plesiosaur might have survived in Loch Ness, Bigfoot are "Nephilim," and so were the Greek Gods--so its ALL real...Nessie, UFOs (not aliens they're all demons of course )

That's how you get on Coast-To-Coast. The Woo try not to contradict each other too much and accommodate each other's tales if they can--so its all very chummy.

But that isn't how science works. We reveal truth with conflict, peer review--not by accommodation. You don't teach the controversy, you teach what is.

It is just that "what is" can be very depressing. You won't meet passed loved ones, there will likely be no field effect starships, humans didn't ride dinos as on the Flintstones, bigfoot is a myth....bummer!

The universe is older and more majestic, yes, but it seems a less fun place to live.

And even I'm guilty. I keep going to Nextbigfuture hoping to see some breakthrough, something that will give humanity at least a taste of what we see on Saturday morning--even though I should know better.

This is why we need programs like Cosmos to give us new things to hold onto, just in case.

I think the one thing that makes people doubt evolution is the old memory of the warm pond model where something just kind of happens, when what you really see are impact theory, extremophiles and smokers, the alembics of the deep--nature as Hermes Trismegistus. Or to oil men, you might call smokers biological cracking stations of a sort. This more dynamic model is far better than the warm pond which is what Ken thinks Evolution can be reduced to. It's a lot richer than that. And that is cool too.

This is why we need men like Bill Nye, to bring the cool factor back to science.
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 12:09 AM   #65
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

I'm an evolution skeptic as well, because I don't buy the idea that it's solely based on random mutation and natural selection, which was what I was taught back then in school. It think that (in addition to random mutation) an organism changes bits of its genetic makeup depending on the environment it lives in/adapts to. And over generations (if the offsprings are living under the same environmental conditions), these changes to the genetic code get more and more refined. That's the only way I can see things happen the way they did.

Only a few days ago I stumbled over this article that makes me think my hunch is correct. An organism that does sport like running recognizes what areas of the body need more support (like the heart, the lungs and the leg muscles). So everything is refined to change this. And the changes are also passed on to the offsprings. And if future generations run as well, these refinements get more and more prominent.
Adapt that principle to primates coming into a region with fruits hanging from tall trees, and over generations, back muscles got stronger and stronger, the shape of the spine changed, etc..., to refine the upright walk they needed. Furry animals relocate to a hot region, and over generations, they change their genetic makeup to produce less fur, or more sweat glands.

And organism absolutely knows what its doing and actively adapts to its environment. And the evolution theory I was taught completely ignored that.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 01:05 AM   #66
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I'm an evolution skeptic as well, because I don't buy the idea that it's solely based on random mutation and natural selection, which was what I was taught back then in school. It think that (in addition to random mutation) an organism changes bits of its genetic makeup depending on the environment it lives in/adapts to. And over generations (if the offsprings are living under the same environmental conditions), these changes to the genetic code get more and more refined. That's the only way I can see things happen the way they did.

Only a few days ago I stumbled over this article that makes me think my hunch is correct. An organism that does sport like running recognizes what areas of the body need more support (like the heart, the lungs and the leg muscles). So everything is refined to change this. And the changes are also passed on to the offsprings. And if future generations run as well, these refinements get more and more prominent.
Adapt that principle to primates coming into a region with fruits hanging from tall trees, and over generations, back muscles got stronger and stronger, the shape of the spine changed, etc..., to refine the upright walk they needed. Furry animals relocate to a hot region, and over generations, they change their genetic makeup to produce less fur, or more sweat glands.

And organism absolutely knows what its doing and actively adapts to its environment. And the evolution theory I was taught completely ignored that.
Your holding of this hypothesis of yours doesn't make you "an evolution skeptic".
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 01:46 AM   #67
Venardhi
Vice Admiral
 
Venardhi's Avatar
 
Location: Constant transit
Send a message via AIM to Venardhi Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Venardhi
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I'm an evolution skeptic as well, because I don't buy the idea that it's solely based on random mutation and natural selection, which was what I was taught back then in school. It think that (in addition to random mutation) an organism changes bits of its genetic makeup depending on the environment it lives in/adapts to. And over generations (if the offsprings are living under the same environmental conditions), these changes to the genetic code get more and more refined. That's the only way I can see things happen the way they did.

Only a few days ago I stumbled over this article that makes me think my hunch is correct. An organism that does sport like running recognizes what areas of the body need more support (like the heart, the lungs and the leg muscles). So everything is refined to change this. And the changes are also passed on to the offsprings. And if future generations run as well, these refinements get more and more prominent.
Adapt that principle to primates coming into a region with fruits hanging from tall trees, and over generations, back muscles got stronger and stronger, the shape of the spine changed, etc..., to refine the upright walk they needed. Furry animals relocate to a hot region, and over generations, they change their genetic makeup to produce less fur, or more sweat glands.

And organism absolutely knows what its doing and actively adapts to its environment. And the evolution theory I was taught completely ignored that.
Epigenetics accounts for at least some of the things you're talking about. Multiple "genes" may be present in an organism but only certain alleles are expressed due to environmental triggers.

Also, regarding human evolution, you're a little off as far as the chain of changes. Our ancestors were able to walk upright before they left the trees. Chimpanzees actually evolved back to knuckle-walking after our branches split. Neither had anything to do with reaching up to high-hanging fruit as far as I have read. We developed brachiation for that.

Body hair is pretty uneven when you compare the temperature of environments and how hirsute the population is, and lots of animals have plenty of fur in very warm climates (it is good protection from the sun). A lion's mane certainly isn't doing it any favors in the hot African savanna, but other pressures apparently discourage any males born without one from breeding successfully enough for the population as a whole to be effected. It may be sexual selection, it might be the added protection from other males wanting to tear out its throat, whatever it is, it works. This is the randomness in action combined with behavioral pressures rather than environmental ones. Some lion running around half a million years ago didn't just think up the idea that it would like to have a mane and want it so hard that it was impressed into its genetic code.

In any case, perhaps you should read up on Lamarckian Evolution which was one of the predecessors of Darwin's theory, and all the evidence that pushed us away from it.
__________________
"There is no reason why good cannot triumph as often as evil. The triumph of anything is a matter of organization. If there are such things as angels, I hope that they are organized along the lines of the Maffia." - Winston Niles Rumfoord.
Venardhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 01:54 AM   #68
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

Not showing up to the debate is to cede control the of conversation. It's clearly not working for the scientists. Scientists need to be represented and make their case because the strategy of avoiding taking on people like Ham has backfired.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 01:56 AM   #69
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

Certainly my examples weren't what happened exactly, those were just general pictures to visualize the principle I was talking about. To turn it around, we lost our ability to climb trees properly (look at our feet), and I'm pretty sure it's because we didn't need it anymore, and not because a random mutation forced us to live on the ground.

And your mane example makes me wonder if you got my entire point. I was never talking about cognitive functions influencing the genetic make up (the “i want a mane so hard“ thing). That is very certainly not the way it works.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 02:09 AM   #70
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

Maurice wrote: View Post
Not showing up to the debate is to cede control the of conversation. It's clearly not working for the scientists. Scientists need to be represented and make their case because the strategy of avoiding taking on people like Ham has backfired.
Agreed.

It would be one thing if ignoring wacko creationists stopped them from getting attention, but that's clearly not the case. Scientists need to speak up if they want their point-of-view to be represented in the conversation.

--

Out of curiosity, does anyone who saw the debate think it is worth watching? I'm interested, but it's also nearly two and a half hours. That's a big chunk of one's day.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 02:29 AM   #71
Venardhi
Vice Admiral
 
Venardhi's Avatar
 
Location: Constant transit
Send a message via AIM to Venardhi Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Venardhi
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Certainly my examples weren't what happened exactly, those were just general pictures to visualize the principle I was talking about. To turn it around, we lost our ability to climb trees properly (look at our feet), and I'm pretty sure it's because we didn't need it anymore, and not because a random mutation forced us to live on the ground.

And your mane example makes me wonder if you got my entire point. I was never talking about cognitive functions influencing the genetic make up (the “i want a mane so hard“ thing). That is very certainly not the way it works.
As we moved away from forested areas (and the forests became less dense and eventually disappeared) being able to run became a better trait for survival than the ability to climb trees. Those with feet that provided for better running ability survived and those with the clumsy tree-friendly feet did not.

You're basically suggesting that somewhere in our subconscious is a genetic encoder box that recognizes what is needed and codes new genes for that purpose. I get it. I get it, I reject it and I mock it.
__________________
"There is no reason why good cannot triumph as often as evil. The triumph of anything is a matter of organization. If there are such things as angels, I hope that they are organized along the lines of the Maffia." - Winston Niles Rumfoord.
Venardhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 02:31 AM   #72
J. Allen
Science Is Magic™
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: Equestria
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

Harvey wrote: View Post
Maurice wrote: View Post
Not showing up to the debate is to cede control the of conversation. It's clearly not working for the scientists. Scientists need to be represented and make their case because the strategy of avoiding taking on people like Ham has backfired.
Agreed.

It would be one thing if ignoring wacko creationists stopped them from getting attention, but that's clearly not the case. Scientists need to speak up if they want their point-of-view to be represented in the conversation.

--

Out of curiosity, does anyone who saw the debate think it is worth watching? I'm interested, but it's also nearly two and a half hours. That's a big chunk of one's day.
You will roll your eyes, a lot, every time Ken Ham speaks. He's so full of shit it practically pours out of his ears.
__________________
"I'm Star Swirl the Bearded! Father of the amniomorphic spell?
Did you even read that book I gave you about obscure unicorn history?" - Twilight Sparkle
-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Brony Kingdom
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 02:47 AM   #73
Venardhi
Vice Admiral
 
Venardhi's Avatar
 
Location: Constant transit
Send a message via AIM to Venardhi Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Venardhi
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

But he hired someone to make a nicer looking powerpoint than the one Nye apparently threw together in a weekend.
__________________
"There is no reason why good cannot triumph as often as evil. The triumph of anything is a matter of organization. If there are such things as angels, I hope that they are organized along the lines of the Maffia." - Winston Niles Rumfoord.
Venardhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 02:52 AM   #74
J. Allen
Science Is Magic™
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: Equestria
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

Venardhi wrote: View Post
But he hired someone to make a nicer looking powerpoint than the one Nye apparently threw together in a weekend.
Well, when you want to pass off bullshit as truth, you want it to be as pretty as possible, to make it go down easier.
__________________
"I'm Star Swirl the Bearded! Father of the amniomorphic spell?
Did you even read that book I gave you about obscure unicorn history?" - Twilight Sparkle
-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Brony Kingdom
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10 2014, 03:51 AM   #75
Alidar Jarok
Everything in moderation but moderation
 
Alidar Jarok's Avatar
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
Re: Bill Nye to debate Creationist tonight at 7 - 2.4 on CNN

Yminale wrote: View Post
Radioactive decay is constant.
Actually, while decay is constant, the amount of atmospheric radiation has fluctuated. Because of this, some radiocarbon dates can be off if we just used decay rates. If I were a creationist, I'd probably bring this up to argue that God changes the rules.

Of course, it could still be easily refuted because science isn't a one-trick pony. Everything in radiocarbon has been calibrated first by tree rings and then glacier layers. It's really quite consistent and makes Young Earth theories highly implausible.
__________________
When on Romulus, Do as the Romulans
Alidar Jarok is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.