Bill Nye The Science Guy Booed In Texas

[Mal12345]

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

You're taking him too literally.

 

[Mal12345]

Click on "My Profile" on the top of this page, then click on "Find Latest Posts".

LOL. Now I remember why I blocked you...

 

[Mal12345]

No I'm disengaging from someone who starts an online conversation with A Christian by googling: "Atheism proves bible literalists wrong."

I did not Google that. Where did you get that idea? This may come as a surprise to you, but I actually Googled "C.S. Lewis literalism" and "Biblical literalism."

 

[Sniffles]

LOL. Now I remember why I blocked you...

A very wise decision, one I'm going to follow myself.

 

[Mal12345]

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Illness says that a delusion is not a delusion when it is shared by a large number of believers.

No it doesn't.

But still, a delusion is a delusion no matter how many believe it.

So when is a delusion not a delusion?

Perhaps God is a delusion you have when you are not having a delusion.

Who knows? Certainly not the DSM V.

Yer funny.

 

[Beorn]

I'm sorry, but as a religious person myself I find it impossible to deny (and wouldn't want to deny it even if it were possible) that there are some very strict fundamentalists out there without much in the way of actual religious education, who are not at all open to interpreting the Bible in any way but what is actually right there on the page. My own parents believe that the King James Version was ordained by God Himself and every word of it is perfectly true. (Fortunately they also have an understanding of genre and literary device and don't require "literal" and "true" to be synonyms.) Being critical of unthinking religious people is not the same as being critical of all religious people and I think we'd do well not to take the punishment when it's not meant for us.

Yeah, but all we know is that these people were bothered by Nye's irreverence. That's it. So I don't see why anyone would condemn them when what Nye was bringing up was so obviously stupid.

I know there are backwards people with stupid beliefs. But, simply because someone balks at what a scientist says about the bible doesn't make them stupid or backward.

 

[Mal12345]

Yeah, but all we know is that these people were bothered by Nye's irreverence. That's it. So I don't see why anyone would condemn them when what Nye was bringing up was so obviously stupid.

I know there are backwards people with stupid beliefs. But, simply because someone balks at what a scientist says about the bible doesn't make them stupid or backward.

No, of course it doesn't. It's just their beliefs that are stupid and/or backward.

 

[Mole]

No it doesn't.

Pehaps I'm wrong. I thought the DSM IV gave an out to religion by saying that a shared delusion is not a delusion.

And I understood the DSM IV gave an out to religion for political reasons.

 

[Ivy]

Yeah, but all we know is that these people were bothered by Nye's irreverence. That's it. So I don't see why anyone would condemn them when what Nye was bringing up was so obviously stupid.

That's not the impression I got from the clarifications 93JC posted. Apparently the vast majority of the crowd thought what he said was fine and not irreverent, only a few people walked out.

 

[Mal12345]

Pehaps I'm wrong. I thought the DSM IV gave an out to religion by saying that a shared delusion is not a delusion.

And I understood the DSM IV gave an out to religion for political reasons.

If you were directly quoting the DSMs, then no.

 

[Mal12345]

That's not the impression I got from the clarifications 93JC posted. Apparently the vast majority of the crowd thought what he said was fine and not irreverent, only a few people walked out.

A few of them quietly walked out, and the woman who left with 3 children said quietly to her neighbor, "We believe in the Bible."

 

[Beorn]

That's not the impression I got from the clarifications 93JC posted. Apparently the vast majority of the crowd thought what he said was fine and not irreverent, only a few people walked out.

Yeah, but I'm not judging the minority by the majority's reaction. I'm judging their actions by whether I think Bill was being irreverent or not. I wouldn't walk out myself, but if Bill's irreverence caused people to walk out then I first put the blame on him because what he said was so stupid.

Look if Joel Salatin was giving a talk to a bunch of hippie-foodies and went on a rant about how climate change is a hoax causing people to leave I would think they were both being a bit silly, but I wouldn't see it as a reason to view the people who left with scorn even if I generally agreed with Salatin. And if what Salatin said was demonstrably false and not just controversial then I would mostly blame him.

 

[Beorn]

No, of course it doesn't. It's just their beliefs that are stupid and/or backward.

...

You're losing credibility and looking like you just have a vendetta against religious people.

 

[93JC]

Uh, what part of that contradicts any of my claims?

Actually you're doing a pretty fine job of contradicting yourself without my help.

Genre, grammar, and intent matter.

If intent matters then why are you making statements like this:

I don't see why anyone would condemn them when what Nye was bringing up was so obviously stupid.

Were you there, in Waco, seven years ago, listening to Bill Nye? If you were that's... that's pretty fucking miraculous! Otherwise I don't see why anyone would condemn Bill Nye given that, unless they were there seven years ago, they don't have a fucking clue what he said, what context he said it in and the intentions behind whatever it is he may or may not have said. Because that would be so obviously stupid.

So it's a good thing you were there, right?

 

[Kalach]

The bible says, a science meeting?! What were you guys thinking?

 

[Ivy]

Yeah, but I'm not judging the minority by the majority's reaction. I'm judging their actions by whether I think Bill was being irreverent or not. I wouldn't walk out myself, but if Bill's irreverence caused people to walk out then I first put the blame on him because what he said was so stupid.

I'm not talking about them, I'm talking about him. I don't know that what he said was "so obviously stupid" at all. I don't know exactly what he said but from what I can piece together I think I probably agree with him. What you said earlier, that the Bible isn't a science textbook, is exactly what he was saying from what I can tell.

 

[93JC]

I'm not talking about them, I'm talking about him. I don't know that what he said was "so obviously stupid" at all. I don't know exactly what he said but from what I can piece together I think I probably agree with him. What you said earlier, that the Bible isn't a science textbook, is exactly what he was saying from what I can tell.

Thanks Ivy.

 

[Beorn]

Actually you're doing a pretty fine job of contradicting yourself without my help.



If intent matters then why are you making statements like this:



Were you there, in Waco, seven years ago, listening to Bill Nye? If you were that's... that's pretty fucking miraculous! Otherwise I don't see why anyone would condemn Bill Nye given that, unless they were there seven years ago, they don't have a fucking clue what he said, what context he said it in and the intentions behind whatever it is he may or may not have said. Because that would be so obviously stupid.

So it's a good thing you were there, right?

I'm sorry. Am I attacking your childhood hero?
I promise I'll leave He-Man alone.

As far as I can tell the mischaracterization was of what the reaction was not what Bill Nye said. So the report that he made a stupid comment about the bible referring to a light when the moon is actually a reflector of light was true.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

They don't take the bible literally.

Nobody does that. It's a misnomer.

Some do take the Bible literally, although that shouldn't be presented as the norm. Not sure it even was presented that way.

Also, do you know Waco's history? It's not the most rational spot on the map.

 

[Beorn]

I'm not talking about them, I'm talking about him. I don't know that what he said was "so obviously stupid" at all. I don't know exactly what he said but from what I can piece together I think I probably agree with him. What you said earlier, that the Bible isn't a science textbook, is exactly what he was saying from what I can tell.

He's a scientist. He should stick to science.

This was an ill-made statement. I didn't mean they should be kept seperate. I just mean I have no respect for any commentary that Bill would have on religion.