Bill Nye You're Dead To Me

6-eyed shaman · May 9, 2017

MeAgain said:

I think they see an opening to attack science based on this one video. I don't like the video either, but I don't see it as a reason to attack the entire enlightenment or science itself or Bill Nye in toto .

It seems to me that there are some who feel that science is threatening their world view. While they are happy to drive their cars to the mall, take their daily medicine, or engage in discussions over the internet, all made possible by science and technology; when it comes to any portion of science that contradicts or questions their particular value system, they get upset.

So they seek any opportunity to destroy those who express an opinion and use any type of scientific fact to back it up.
Click to expand...

If Nye can use science to justify the existence of a 3rd or 4th gender. And prove it's all a social construct. Why censor a whole episode he filmed in the 90s he made about gender? Why not make a new episode that proves that modern scientific discoveries and studies in the 2010s have improved gender studies since our understanding of gender in the 1990s? Besides, you can't use trannies to justify the existence of Moore than one gender. Since trannies make up 0.03% of the human population, a number way too small to be considered normal, you cannot consider people like them a different gender.

For that matter, doesn't the B in LGBT prove that there's only 2 genders?

MeAgain · May 9, 2017

Bill Nye was on Steven Cobert Monday night, I just watched it.

He's away of the attacks on the internet and just said he has a mechanical engineering degree which is physics and he has 6 semesters of calculus, so what's the big deal.
(Paraphrased)

FritzDaKatx2 · May 9, 2017

Meliai said:

thinking about how all his old fans who grew up to be republicans and right wingers and have bought the propaganda that humans can do whatever they want to the planet in the name of profit
Click to expand...

The hell we did...

Oddly enough though I think I pissed off whoever moderates his FB page by asking a rather elaborate question about using a mix of Aural frequencies and water splitting,,, **they kept deleting it on me** and now they wont even let me re-like the page

The real sad part is He used to have a Day Job at Boeing studying cavitation in hydraulics systems so it wasn't like it was far off from his actual field of expertise

FritzDaKatx2 · May 9, 2017

6-eyed shaman said:

Since trannies make up 0.03% of the human population, a number way too small to be considered normal, you cannot consider people like them a different gender.
Click to expand...

I'd say this stat is sort of Skewed, much in the same way a stat saying X% of the Human population is Right handed given how long we had systemic cultural programming against being left handed whatever the measured % would be is in no way indicative of the *real* % of Left handed people who were born Lefties but trained out of it by Parents Peers and teachers

Meliai · May 10, 2017

puff n stuff said:

A theory is exactly that, a theory until proven. Once proven it is no longer a theory, it becomes a law. Darwin's theory has never been proven.
Gregor Mendels study of the pea plant and how half the genetics came from the female and half from the male was proven with years of research and 10000 + cross pollinating. There is mendels laws. Law of genetics.
When you have an idea but have nothing to back as fact, then in it remains a theory, it is not absolute.
Click to expand...

You don't understand the meaning of a scientific theory then.

Meliai · May 10, 2017

puff n stuff said:

Theories are not absolute. Darwins theory has never been proven, Mendels Law has been proven with regards to genetics and passed on.
But someone will enlighten us all with their great knowledge and understanding, not to mention her psychic abilities, who has a theory which she states as fact. which is that I don't understand and she is enlightened. Lol
Click to expand...

You said a theory is an idea with nothing to back it as fact, but this is simply not true in terms of the scientific meaning of a theory

You are confusing hypothesis with theory.

In order to become a theory in science, a hypothesis must be well supported by research and evidence.

The very nature of science predicates that very few things are regarded as absolute, because there is always room for our knowledge to expand or change based on new evidence -for example the theory of evolution, although well supported by fact, can, er, evolve the more we learn about it.

This website does a pretty good job of explaining it

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

Moonglow181 · May 10, 2017

puff n stuff said:

So happy someone can explain this to as if they are a mind reader.

You saw the video, do you really think this show is directed at grown adults? Or ard you simply going to ignore the fucked up shit and listen to what others tell you? It is why I gave you a link to another so called informative segment on his show and asked you what you think if it. Looks like you would rather others answer for you?
Click to expand...

No, I did not watch the video. I have not been in the mood to watch the video. I really am not interested in watching the video at this time....so I have no idea what you are talking about. I was talking to MeAgain....with what you quoted me saying here, so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Ok, I watched the video. At first i thought the lesson was to be just be who you are....but then it seemed to want to mix everything together......
Yeah, so....that is how Bill feels about it. I may feel differently. I celebrate individualtiy....

Meliai · May 10, 2017

No, I would not consider a pg13 rating a kids show. Teenagers and children are not the same - and Bill Nye said himself in the quote you posted that the show is intended for adults but that he doesn't see it as a bad thing if teenagers watch it.

You are still making it blatantly clear you don't understand what a scientific theory is. The definition of a scientific theory is not the same as the layman's definition of theory.

A scientific theory is a cohesive interpretation of observable facts.

A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that has been substantiated through repeated experiments or testing.
Click to expand...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-a-theory-7-misused-science-words/

Please click on my links or do your own research because this shit actually is important and you're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly saying a scientific theory isnt supported by facts. Sorry but you are.

guerillabedlam · May 11, 2017

Meliai said:

You are still making it blatantly clear you don't understand what a scientific theory is. The definition of a scientific theory is not the same as the layman's definition of theory.

A scientific theory is a cohesive interpretation of observable facts.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-a-theory-7-misused-science-words/

Please click on my links or do your own research because this shit actually is important and you're just embarrassing yourself by repeatedly saying a scientific theory isnt supported by facts. Sorry but you are.
Click to expand...

Quoted for Emphasis

Moonglow181 · May 11, 2017

puff n stuff said:

No I am not embarrassing myself at all. You are close minded though, which in science you should not be. I am right and you are wrong is your attitude. Just because someone comes up with a theory does not make it true when you will do anything and everything possible to push that as true, even lie in order to get funding, money. This is the problem. A theory is not absolute. When science refuses to look at results that oppose a hypothesis, in order to elevate it to a theory, then it is not good science. to disregard scientific evidence that opposes these supposed climate change is not science. To toot something as true and disregard other scientific evidence, makes Me question, but you are simply a closed off to possibilities, you, who will go along with whatever is shoved down your throat.

Well hey, I consider 12 year old and 13 year olds kids who basically have no clue what is instore for them, and my sex junk song will just confuse them more, again , you might want to look further into the man who pushed the gender spectrum and his views on pedophiles, and methods he used to raise a boy as a girl. Bill Nyes shoe is set up to attract kids, Tweens even,

Darwins theory is in fact not a theory at all, but is a hypothesis, yet it is called a theory. Mendals study on the pea plant was applied to darwins theory of evolution. Mendel theory proved that a gene can mask another gene, he came up with the dominant and recessive gene, but really it is random.

The bipedal Lucy was in fact not evidence of evolution yet that is still being presented as evidence to a theory, but when you read

http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0714_Lucy_fails_test.html

See these are facts that are left out in order to push something as facts that is clearly simply falsified evidence to support an unproven theory. All for funding.

Climate change evidence that it is not happening due to green house gas emissions. From 1940 to about 1979 scientist warned that the next ice age was coming. In the 80s that shifted to global warming alarmists. Fact is there has been no rise in temperatures over the last two decades. Please point me to animals that are going exstinct because of greenhouse gas emissions? Please show me great level of sea levels have risen due to climate change cause by greenhouse gases? Where are all these duper hurricanes that we were all warned about! Fact is that sea levels rising has actually slowed, and sea levls have risen between ice ages. There has been at least 5 ice ages the earth has seen and in between that there were periods in time where the earth had no ice, not even in high latitudes.

So yes the climate does change and there are cycles that the earth goes through.

https://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=3
Click to expand...

So there are no holes above in the atmosphere due to our emissions....? OK....whatever you say.....I have read too many scientists that i respect with no political agenda to think otherwise. the proof is in the pudding.
I know that trump tried to erase any EPA articles from the internet the first day in office.....and I am sure he would like all of the articles about climate change to disappear forever and totally. they do not suit HIS agenda......

I have a knee jerk reaction here, as i have always stood for the environment and animal rights.....and I will always speak for them.....
I have heard your argument before about cycles of the earth, blah, blah, blah.,....perhaps the earth does go through natural cycles.....but I am sure we have made things worse.
With a no way mankind is doing anything to cause global warming attitude....I close down to you....I would have been more receptive to a maybe we are causing harm to the environment...let's discuss it...rather than a no way attitude...I will have nothing more to say to you on the subject....as you already adamently made up your mind, and there is nothing I can say, tell you to read, ect....to change your mind.....and you will not change my mind.....on the matter, either....so there is no point....there is a stand still on it. ...and you are entitled to think what you want to, as am I.
I get it people do not want clean energy or change any of their ways. there is no money in that.

As far as Bill Nye goes.....I do not care about the sex issue enough to look further into it....I know who I am...a female...I never wanted to be a boy.....I am not masculine.......so I am not obsessed with the issue....i understand others may be confused and hold no anamosity towards them. i make no judgements on sex change operations...but I do find issue with any major operations happening before a person is fully biologically developed.. i also know there are feminine guys and masculine girls.....

Meliai · May 11, 2017

puff n stuff said:

No I am not embarrassing myself at all. You are close minded though, which in science you should not be. I am right and you are wrong is your attitude. Just because someone comes up with a theory does not make it true when you will do anything and everything possible to push that as true, even lie in order to get funding, money. This is the problem. A theory is not absolute. When science refuses to look at results that oppose a hypothesis, in order to elevate it to a theory, then it is not good science. to disregard scientific evidence that opposes these supposed climate change is not science. To toot something as true and disregard other scientific evidence, makes Me question, but you are simply a closed off to possibilities, you, who will go along with whatever is shoved down your throat.
Well hey, I consider 12 year old and 13 year olds kids who basically have no clue what is instore for them, and my sex junk song will just confuse them more, again , you might want to look further into the man who pushed the gender spectrum and his views on pedophiles, and methods he used to raise a boy as a girl. Bill Nyes shoe is set up to attract kids, Tweens even,
Darwins theory is in fact not a theory at all, but is a hypothesis, yet it is called a theory. Mendals study on the pea plant was applied to darwins theory of evolution. Mendel theory proved that a gene can mask another gene, he came up with the dominant and recessive gene, but really it is random.
The bipedal Lucy was in fact not evidence of evolution yet that is still being presented as evidence to a theory, but when you read
http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0714_Lucy_fails_test.html
See these are facts that are left out in order to push something as facts that is clearly simply falsified evidence to support an unproven theory. All for funding.
Climate change evidence that it is not happening due to green house gas emissions. From 1940 to about 1979 scientist warned that the next ice age was coming. In the 80s that shifted to global warming alarmists. Fact is there has been no rise in temperatures over the last two decades. Please point me to animals that are going exstinct because of greenhouse gas emissions? Please show me great level of sea levels have risen due to climate change cause by greenhouse gases? Where are all these duper hurricanes that we were all warned about! Fact is that sea levels rising has actually slowed, and sea levls have risen between ice ages. There has been at least 5 ice ages the earth has seen and in between that there were periods in time where the earth had no ice, not even in high latitudes.
So yes the climate does change and there are cycles that the earth goes through.
https://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=3
Click to expand...

I'm not close minded. Its just in this case I am actually right and you are actually wrong. You want to completely disregard what theory means within the scientific community just because you cant be bothered to take 5 minutes to Google "scientific theory" and see what it means. I'm not asking you to take my word for it but I was hoping you would not want to remain willfully ignorant and would take the time to look it up and verify what I am saying.

guerillabedlam · May 11, 2017

Meliai said:

I'm not close minded. Its just in this case I am actually right and you are actually wrong. You want to completely disregard what theory means within the scientific community just because you cant be bothered to take 5 minutes to Google "scientific theory" and see what it means. I'm not asking you to take my word for it but I was hoping you would not want to remain willfully ignorant and would take the time to look it up and verify what I am saying.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a more palatable example of a scientific theory for those with such lack of understanding of the Scientific context is the Theory of Special Relatively. This "Theory" has allowed for the development of the GPS system, which tracks devices, our phones even!? to quite precise coordinates from satellites in space.

MeAgain · May 11, 2017

Lets take an example.

You observe an apple falling from a tree.
You ask why the apple falls.

You form a hypothesis.
The apple is attracted to the earth below.

You test your hypothesis through various means and you discover that objects fall, or are attracted to, objects of greater weight (or mass).
You form a theory to explain these observations, let's call it Newton's Theory of Universal Gravitation. And you do some math and experiments which proves this theory.
Newton's theory of gravitation however can be shown to be incomplete or even disproven.

For example:
Along comes Einstein who develops his own hypothesis of why the apple falls. He contends it has nothing to do with attraction, it is a bending of space/time.
Einstein claims, well Newton is right as far as he goes and NASA is free to use his math to launch a space ship, but as that ship nears the speed of light they'll have to recalculate.

And he come up with his own theory. Two in fact, the theories of general and special relativity.
And he does the math and others do the experiments that prove those theories.

Both theories are correct in their own set of circumstances.

So now we have Laws.
A law describes actions that occur under certain circumstances.
Newton's Theory of Universal Gravitation can be applied to a certain type of circumstance, but Einstein's theories are more general.
To view the laws within Einstein's theories we would have to get into things like an understanding of his equivalence principle.

A little reflection will show that the law of the equality of the inertial and gravitational mass is equivalent to the assertion that the acceleration imparted to a body by a gravitational field is independent of the nature of the body. For Newton's equation of motion in a gravitational field, written out in full, it is:
(Inertial mass) x (Acceleration) = (Intensity of the gravitational field) x (Gravitational mass).
It is only when there is numerical equality between the inertial and gravitational mass that the acceleration is independent of the nature of the body.[1][2]
Click to expand...

Hypothesis: testable assumption.
Theory: statement of the proven validity of the test results in certain situations.
Law: a description, related to one or more theories, of an action that always occurs in certain situations.

6-eyed shaman · May 11, 2017

If gender is a social construct and people can decide their genders after birth, despite their genitalia, like the gender studies activists like Bill Nye believe. Then Donald Trump can, at any time, come out and say he's a trans woman and take the title of the first female president.

And the liberals who pander to trans-activist groups will have no choice but to accept it. TBH I'd love for that to happen. As it would piss off republicans just as much as democrats.

Sorry Hillary
Sorry Pocahontas

6-eyed shaman · May 11, 2017

puff n stuff said:

No, you are wrong, I am well aware of what the theory says, but this does not make it true. Is climate change a theory or a hypothesis? Willfully ignorant is not something I am, you on the other hand....
Science is not absolute, but polticians want absolute facts. I have seen it be said that gasses from pigs and cows cause more green houses gases that fossil fuel, or that cutting down forests is a greater contributor to greenhouse gases.
Currently obama is going after the agricultural sector and the amount of green house gases they emit, This was his first speech outside the USA since leaving office. This conference is a gathering of politians who make policies. If also gathers investors in new technology entrepreneurs who are looking to improve or develop the food chain. For a half a million just to speak At the conference, he will be on board with anything.
Our changing climate is making it more difficult to produce food he says, yet the UN disagrees with this and so do scientists.
Nope, no financial incentives there. I wonder who Obama is investing in?
Next fall he will be speaking at a Cantor Fitzgerald health care conference and has been paid 400k for the appearance.https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/dining/obama-climate-food-milan.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosgenerate
Off for a bite to eat then sleep.
Click to expand...

Not enough mainstream environmentalists are willing to give up their 1st world lifestyle or smartphones to reduce the supposed amount of carbon emissions it would take to slow down anthropogenic global warming. Which would be that of pre-industrial revolution standards. Pope Francis and Bill Nye won't even give in their private jets to fly around the world and give speeches about global warming. What does that tell you?

lode · May 11, 2017

puff n stuff said:

So no one will even acknowledge that climate change, global warming is not even a theory?

No one will acknowledge that it s not a fact?

You will not even acknowledge the theory of evolution is not a theory as it has never been proven? Drawings don't make evolution of man a fact or evidence. And bones found miles apart and 200 feet deeper don't belong together is not fact and is a hoax?

Not one of you will even acknowledge that politians, obama, disregards evidence that is opposing global warming and climate change, calls it absolute when it is not? refuse to questions, look at all research, call it fact when it is a hypothesis at best? Great science there.
Click to expand...

So you're conflate two separate thesis in about 100 words, toss in Obama, misspell politicians, provide no evidence to support your claims, and wonder why you're not persuading anyone?

Your misinformed and proud of it. Nobody has much time for you.

MeAgain · May 12, 2017

6-eyed shaman said:

Not enough mainstream environmentalists are willing to give up their 1st world lifestyle or smartphones to reduce the supposed amount of carbon emissions it would take to slow down anthropogenic global warming. Which would be that of pre-industrial revolution standards. Pope Francis and Bill Nye won't even give in their private jets to fly around the world and give speeches about global warming. What does that tell you?
Click to expand...

LOL. I remember this argument against the hippies, way back when.
It went something like, "They preach save the Earth, live off the land , and go back to basics...but they still listen to rock music on their stereos".

MeAgain · May 12, 2017

No personal attacks by anyone please.

Meliai · May 12, 2017

puff n stuff said:

Yeah and there is Meli, quick to give you a thumbs up to anyone and all who are her support system, because she is close minded and stuck in the echo chamber with you. Sad
Click to expand...

Uh huh.

You know what I recommend? Google scholarly articles. Its a great tool! Particularly if you want to explore the two topics you're focusing on here, evolution and climate change.

MeAgain · May 12, 2017

puff n stuff said:

So no one will even acknowledge that climate change, global warming is not even a theory?

No one will acknowledge that it s not a fact?

You will not even acknowledge the theory of evolution is not a theory as it has never been proven? Drawings don't make evolution of man a fact or evidence. And bones found miles apart and 200 feet deeper don't belong together is not fact and is a hoax?

Not one of you will even acknowledge that politians, obama, disregards evidence that is opposing global warming and climate change, calls it absolute when it is not? refuse to questions, look at all research, call it fact when it is a hypothesis at best? Great science there.
Click to expand...

Climate change is a term that can have several meanings.
Same with global warming.

Climate change is a term used to describe a change in global or local climate patterns. Climate is the prevailing, or maybe average, weather pattern in a particular area or globally.
I don't think there is any disagreement that local and global weather patterns are changing and that seen in the long run this is affecting the local and global climate.
The question is why are the patterns changing, or what is causing the changes?

This is where we get into conflicting hypotheses and theories.
If we accept the premise that our climate is changing, then we can advance a hypothesis as to why.
One hypothesis is that human activity is causing the change.

So then we get into theories to test that hypothesis.
One theory is that the greenhouse effect is one factor that affects our climate.
This theory was first proposed in 1824 by Joseph Fourier.

In the 1820s Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth, and at its distance from the Sun, should be considerably colder than the planet actually is if warmed by only the effects of incoming solar radiation. He examined various possible sources of the additional observed heat in articles published in 1824[14] and 1827.[15] While he ultimately suggested that interstellar radiation might be responsible for a large portion of the additional warmth, Fourier's consideration of the possibility that the Earth's atmosphere might act as an insulator of some kind is widely recognized as the first proposal of what is now known as the greenhouse effect,[16] although Fourier never called it that.[17][18]
Click to expand...

He concluded that gases in the atmosphere trapped the Sun's radiation thus raising the temperature of the Earth.
Fourier backed up his claim by citing experiments conducted by Horace-Benedict de Saussure. This is where facts come into play.

Horace-Benedict de Saussure's experiments were later augmented by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838, John Tyndall in 1859, Svante Arrhenius in 1896. Their experiments pointed to C02 as the most active gas affecting the heat of the Earth.
Since that time the theory of the greenhouse effect has been strengthened to the point of confirmation and other gases have been found to contribute.

In addition to the theory of the greenhouse effect there are other theories as to why we have climate change. In other words it is agreed that there are many influences on our climate.

Now, moving on.
Latey measurements of the amount of C02 and other greenhouse gases in our atmosphere have been shown to be higher than allowed by natural causes such as volcanic eruptions.
Also the temperature of the world's oceans has been rising faster than allowed by the other factors that contribute to climate.

These are all incontrovertible facts.
So the question is, where are these greenhouse gases coming from?

One hypothesis is that they are coming from human activity.
The theory explaining this hypothesis is that the Industrial Revolution was the beginning of the human disruption of natural climate change.
Some of the facts supporting this theory come from ice core samples that show that:

According to work published in 2007, the concentrations of CO2 and methane had increased by 36% and 148% respectively since 1750.[65] These levels are much higher than at any time during the last 800,000 years, the period for which reliable data has been extracted from ice cores.[66][67][68][69]
Click to expand...

This is all a very simple explanation of climate change and global warming but it illustrates that there are facts that back up the claim that the Earth is growing warmer, there are hypotheses and theories as to why, and there are facts that back up those hypotheses and theories to a certain degree.

We can debate the value of those hypotheses and theories, but we can't deny that they exist and are based on facts.

Same with evolution.

I, for one, will readily agree that many politicians disregard facts many times, however I would not think Obama is one of them when it comes to climate change.
Further, if we disregard the politicians, I think the majority of climatic and related scientists constantly question, test, and examine the facts related to climate change.

Log in or Sign up

Bill Nye You're Dead To Me

6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

FritzDaKatx2 Vinegar Taster

FritzDaKatx2 Vinegar Taster

Meliai Members

Meliai Members

Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

Meliai Members

guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

Meliai Members

guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

lode Banned

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

Meliai Members

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

Log in or Sign up

Bill Nye You're Dead To Me

6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

FritzDaKatx2 Vinegar Taster

FritzDaKatx2 Vinegar Taster

Meliai Members

Meliai Members

Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

Meliai Members

guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

Meliai Members

guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

6-eyed shaman Sock-eye salmon

lode Banned

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

Meliai Members

MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

Useful Searches