Bill Nye: “Creationism is not Appropriate for Children”

[CorporalCaptain]

Carcazoid wrote:

---

What if there are things we don't know? What if there are forces in the universe that we aren't yet able to understand? What if "what we know of the world" changes? What if we learn something new, through science, that disputes what we thought we knew and believed to be fact?

Closed-mindedness can exist on either side of an issue.

You mean what if one day we discovered that the creationists were right all along? No. I'm perfectly comfortable calling that.

Science has a history of overturning previous misconceptions in science and expanding its own horizons. See relativity and quantum mechanics for two examples in the physical sciences.

So, I really don't know what your point is.

[iguana_tonante]

RoJoHen wrote:

---

Sounds terrible.

Luckily, most public schools don't employ nuns.

Actually, I don't really remember if she was really a nun or a layperson who dressed basically like a nun. I hope for her she was a nun.

I also went to a Catholic elementary school, which gives me awesome nun powers.

[RoJoHen]

Like the ability to withstand being whacked on the hand with a stick?

[iguana_tonante]

And elastic ears that don't hurt when pulled.

[RoJoHen]

You're practically a super soldier.

[Rhaven]

RoJoHen wrote:

---

Like the ability to withstand being whacked on the hand with a stick?

Or, the abilty to kneel on a wooden ruler for hours. To this day, I swear my knee caps remain flat, with a 1 inch center depression.

[iguana_tonante]

How do you think they train the Swiss Guard?

[Carcazoid]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

You mean what if one day we discovered that the creationists were right all along? No. I'm perfectly comfortable calling that.

Science has a history of overturning previous misconceptions in science and expanding its own horizons. See relativity and quantum mechanics for two examples in the physical sciences.

So, I really don't know what your point is.

I've read several posts in this thread that state (paraphrased): "If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you're just a hating hater who hates, and you'll burn in whatever science's substitute for hell is!"

Not that you were saying it, but your quote was handy.

[iguana_tonante]

Carcazoid wrote:

---

I've read several posts in this thread that state (paraphrased): "If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you're just a hating hater who hates, and you'll burn in whatever science's substitute for hell is!"

If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you are not able to distinguish reality from fiction. And the ridicule you should be subjected in this life is worse than any imaginary hell.

[Carcazoid]

iguana_tonante wrote:

---

If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you are not able to distinguish reality from fiction. And the ridicule you should be subjected in this life is worse than any imaginary hell.

I'm sorry, I must have missed that paper. Source?

[MacLeod]

Creationism has no place in science classes, if it belongs anywhere it's in religious studies.

[J. Allen]

Carcazoid wrote:

---

What if there are things we don't know? What if there are forces in the universe that we aren't yet able to understand? What if "what we know of the world" changes? What if we learn something new, through science, that disputes what we thought we knew and believed to be fact?

Closed-mindedness can exist on either side of an issue.

Certainly there can be closed minds on just about any issue that a person encounters. That doesn't mean it is so, here. The Scientific method, by it's very nature, relies on falsifiability. When you bring in a creator god, you no longer need science, because your new god can explain everything away.

"Why is the sky blue?" "God made it that way?"
"How did the earth form?" "God did it."
"Where did man come from?" "God made man."

You start answering questions like that, such as Creationism does, and you eschew the Scientific method of falsifiability, in favor of whatever flight of fancy you wish to believe, without needing a single shred of evidence to support it beyond one's own circular logic.

Having an open mind does not mean having a gullible one. Creationism, by it's nature, is a closed mind system. Everything one needs to know every answer in the universe is always going to fall back on some variation of "God made it that way". It is the device of the incurious.

[Robert Maxwell]

Carcazoid wrote:

---

I've read several posts in this thread that state (paraphrased): "If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you're just a hating hater who hates, and you'll burn in whatever science's substitute for hell is!"

Not that you were saying it, but your quote was handy.

I don't have much sympathy (or respect) for people who willfully reject science.

Creationism is simply impossible based on established science.

Sorry.

[JarodRussell]

Carcazoid wrote:

---

I'm sorry, I must have missed that paper. Source?

[iguana_tonante]

Carcazoid wrote:

---

I'm sorry, I must have missed that paper. Source?

Anything since Galileo. Take your pick.