Ken Ham vs Bill Nye (Is creation a viable model of origins?)

[KevanG]

I forget the general number but isn't a minimum of somewhere between 1,000 and 10,000 non related individuals needed to keep a species healthy and genetically diverse for purposes of long term survival?

 

[webhead9707]

When did he outlaw the gays?

Outlaw is a strong word, yes he said it's bad, but he also said divorce and gluttony are bad, but a lot of people in the Christian church don't like talking about that part. It frustrates me.

 

[webhead9707]

I forget the general number but isn't a minimum of somewhere between 1,000 and 10,000 non related individuals needed to keep a species healthy and genetically diverse for purposes of long term survival?

I don't really know, but also, it could be possible that that number was at one point much smaller. I mean viruses are drastically different today. You could go back 200 years and die from drinking the water, but those people were fine drinking it.

 

[KalMart]

I don't really know, but also, it could be possible that that number was at one point much smaller. I mean viruses are drastically different today. You could go back 200 years and die from drinking the water, but those people were fine drinking it.

Seriously...do you really think that the Noah's Ark part is literal?

Outlaw is a strong word, yes he said it's bad, but he also said divorce and gluttony are bad, but a lot of people in the Christian church don't like talking about that part. It frustrates me.

Calling homosexuality a sin or anything like it is a strong word too, especially for an outlook so ignorant. I really think the 'church' has to wise up about that.

 

[webhead9707]

Seriously...do you really think that the Noah's Ark part is literal?

Honestly? I dunno. I don't hold it as required to be literal, nor is it required to be fictional to me. Jonah and the fish? Probably fictional. I think a large part of the Old Testament is basically parables, much like the ones Jesus told during his travels.

 

[KalMart]

Honestly? I dunno. I don't hold it as required to be literal, nor is it required to be fictional to me. Jonah and the fish? Probably fictional. I think a large part of the Old Testament is basically parables, much like the ones Jesus told during his travels.

It also shares common elements with mythologies and folklore throughout human history...predating Christianity as well. I think at some point some sort of major flooding/cataclysm must have happened which influenced cultures everywhere....perhaps even a comet hitting the ocean and causing worldwide tsunamis.

 

[webhead9707]

It also shares common elements with mythologies and folklore throughout world history. I think at some point some sort of major flooding/cataclysm must have happened which influenced cultures everywhere....perhaps even a comet hitting the ocean and causing worldwide tsunamis.

There are certainly lots of ways it could be explained. I love discussions like this, honestly, no sarcasm intended so I don't want it to come off like that. Unfortunately though, I gotta go do some school. See you guys later!

 

[KalMart]

There are certainly lots of ways it could be explained. I love discussions like this, honestly, no sarcasm intended so I don't want it to come off like that. Unfortunately though, I gotta go do some school. See you guys later!

As I mentioned, I may not agree with religion as a plausible concept, but I find the ideas of its origins and development as a human construct fascinating. How and why did we create the concept of Gods?

 

[Breogan]

How and why did we create the concept of Gods?

Watch any kid waving hi or bye to the rising or setting sun. Or to the moon that they think is "following" them, etc.
That's how and why.

As social beings we have a tendency to project ourselves on to nature, from storms to inanimate objects.
When that natural world is good to us ( flood didn't kill me, crop does well etc.), we praised and thanked it. When it's bad or harsh to us we cursed or fear it.
Adults like kids projecting onto the natural world, animating it with a intent, hence we are not alone... Hello god(s).

 

[KalMart]

Watch any kid waving hi or bye a to the rising or setting sun. Or to the moon that is "following" them, etc.
That's how and why.

We have a tendency to project ourselves on to nature.

I think it runs deeper into our psychology and evolution as cognizant beings.

 

[Breogan]

We have a tendency to project ourselves on to nature.

I think it runs deeper into our psychology and evolution as cognizant beings.

That runs way deep into cognizance.
I am aware of me, now I project - hey foreign strange unfamiliar thing that is outside of me, are you going to kill me or be friends?

 

[jmc]

I don't think 'He gave' us anything...with the concept of a God or gods being a condition that we have created within ourselves fro early in our cognizant evolution...perhaps something that ongoing anthropological studies or the like will dive further into as time goes by. I'm fascinated by that prospect.

You're actually on the money here. We have as a species naturally have a creative mind which is prone to exaggeration and fantasy. It's believed to be a form of defence mechanism which came about from when our ancient ancestors had to come down from the tress in order to obtain food and be wary of predators.

 

[KalMart]

That runs way deep into cognizance.
I am aware of me, now I project - hey foreign strange unfamiliar thing that is outside of me, are you going to kill me or be friends?

And into our earlier efforts of grasping concepts of both individual and communal morality, etc.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

You're actually on the money here. We have as a species naturally have a creative mind which is prone to exaggeration and fantasy. It's believed to be a form of defence mechanism which came about from when our ancient ancestors had to come down from the tress in order to obtain food and be wary of predators.

this is probably very correct indeed. Being self-aware beings and as aware of our world as we are we also have the curse of knowing all bad things, we get stress, worry, much more fear, will of survival etc... and because of all that wear/tear and negativity impacting us Story-telling has always been a key-factor to let us briefly forget about our troubles as well as give us hope for getting us through it and keeping us going. It's very much a human survival technique that's clearly been around for as long as we have.

 

[Doctor Evo]

I don't really know, but also, it could be possible that that number was at one point much smaller.

No, it couldn't. And even if it could, how many were on the Ark, exactly? Something like 8?

Even ignoring the fact that this would mean the extinction of the human species, such a massive bottleneck would be easily detectable today. Needless to say, evidence for a bottleneck on this scale has never been found, despite a massive amount of time and effort examining human population genetics.

I mean viruses are drastically different today. You could go back 200 years and die from drinking the water, but those people were fine drinking it.

Apples v. oranges. This argument (^) has nothing to do with inbreeding depression. You're talking about two fundamentally different concepts.

 

[Hotwire]

Scrap this. Going with something else.

 

[KalMart]

Just a thought for those who don't believe in evolution, where did the three main races of humans come from if they didn't evolve? See, the story of Noah says that it was just him and his family. That means that, at some point, some members of his family took on mongoloid traits while others became negroid and caucasoid. Just food for thought.

Someone got lonely during the flood and got a little too 'comfortable' with some of the animals. One thing led to another.....

 

[Hotwire]

Well Noah's family had his sons wives, so that, in theory, would offer enough genetic diversity as far as being affected by illness, right? By the time of Abraham, God had not yet declared this kind of marriage to be contrary to His will (see Genesis 20:12). Laws governing incest apparently did not become enacted until the time of Moses (Lev 18:7-17; 20:11,12,14,17,20,21). Hence, there was no prohibition regarding marrying a sister (or niece or grandniece)

So, let's just say that Noah was white, or caucasoid. Just going from how he's played in film and not really worried about historical accuracy right now. So, if he and his family are all white, and they're the only humans left on Earth, at what point in his lineage did mongoloids and negroids come in? They would have had to evolve from a white Noah wouldn't they? Even if you change Noah's race, it still runs into the same issue. Hell, you can even throw this back to Adam and Eve. The other two races would have had to evolve from one. Doesn't matter how you slice it.

 

[Tanin]

Ken Ham addressed that in part during the debate as they are different types of the same species. Not a separate one. He believes in macro but not micro evolution as it involves observational and not historical science.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I still think that's rather idiotic. Especially when they (creationists) acknowledge that great danes, and chihuahuas are members of the same species. They don't see how, given a bit more time (well, a lot more time, but relatively little in the grand scheme of things), and isolation, those two could evolve into separate species?

 

[Tanin]

I never said I agreed with it. I was just answering the question.

 

[The End]

This is another thing that always bothers me about creationists (and Nye hits on it when he asks what creationism can predict) is, if only creationists could SHOW some sort of barrier, some sort of upper limit to change within a species. If they showed this barrier or limit the whole discussion would be over. But no such thing has been shown to exist.

In fact, the Lenski e-coli experiment has shown (what is it?) 40, 000 generations?? And they still change, there IS no barrier, no upper limit. Granted, the e-coli doesn't become a mammal, or something, in the timespan of the experiment but I don't think anything less than that would satisfy a creationist like Ken Ham.

 

[redhawk23]

You're actually on the money here. We have as a species naturally have a creative mind which is prone to exaggeration and fantasy. It's believed to be a form of defence mechanism which came about from when our ancient ancestors had to come down from the tress in order to obtain food and be wary of predators.

Along with that penchant for fantasy, humans are capable of anthropomorphizing pretty much anything (despite also disregarding the essential humanity of other people). If humans as a species are anything we are social and we adopt that social proclivity to nearly everything else, be it animals or objects, the weather, or even concepts like luck. We are capable of conceptualizing a car that is slow to start as being "stubborn" (not mention naming vehicles) or reading human emotions into animal expressions, even when our interpretations are actually the opposite of the animal's state (like the "laughing" slow lorises youtube that are actually making defensive panicked sounds). We construct all kinds of figures as stand ins for some of the more abstract aspects of life like Mother Nature, Father Time, Lady Luck and Death.

Creating deities, especially the universal, all powerful kind is a way of personifying existence itself. It creates the potential for a personal relationship with reality.

This plays out in a variety of ways in different cultures. In some, everything happens as an intentional act of a higher being, as part of a universal plan.

In parts of Africa there are understandings of voodoo in which nearly all negative happenstances are the result of magic enacted by another person, most often unconsciously and unintentionally, but still by their actions. This applies even in cases where westerners would often see it as complete accidents and freak chance. Termites may naturally weaken the post of a platform, but it is voodoo derived from ill will and frustration from one person towards another that causes the platform to collapse on top of someone. The witch can be anyone and attempts are made to identify them. If the identified person simply admits to their unconscious undoings it is remarked upon but forgiven. In this way the happenings of everyday life, even when they seem to have connection to people are given a social dimension.

 

[KalMart]

This is another thing that always bothers me about creationists (and Nye hits on it when he asks what creationism can predict) is, if only creationists could SHOW some sort of barrier, some sort of upper limit to change within a species. If they showed this barrier or limit the whole discussion would be over. But no such thing has been shown to exist.

In fact, the Lenski e-coli experiment has shown (what is it?) 40, 000 generations?? And they still change, there IS no barrier, no upper limit. Granted, the e-coli doesn't become a mammal, or something, in the timespan of the experiment but I don't think anything less than that would satisfy a creationist like Ken Ham.

Science and rationality aren't exactly a creationist's forte.

 

[BestGirl]

This is another thing that always bothers me about creationists (and Nye hits on it when he asks what creationism can predict) is, if only creationists could SHOW some sort of barrier, some sort of upper limit to change within a species. If they showed this barrier or limit the whole discussion would be over. But no such thing has been shown to exist.

In fact, the Lenski e-coli experiment has shown (what is it?) 40, 000 generations?? And they still change, there IS no barrier, no upper limit. Granted, the e-coli doesn't become a mammal, or something, in the timespan of the experiment but I don't think anything less than that would satisfy a creationist like Ken Ham.

They'd probably just say "Human being have been on Earth for thousands of years, and we haven't changed!" and that would be their proof.