DEVTOME.COM HOSTING COSTS HAVE BEGUN TO EXCEED 115$ MONTHLY. THE ADMINISTRATION IS NO LONGER ABLE TO HANDLE THE COST WITHOUT ASSISTANCE DUE TO THE RISING COST. THIS HAS BEEN OCCURRING FOR ALMOST A YEAR, BUT WE HAVE BEEN HANDLING IT FROM OUR OWN POCKETS. HOWEVER, WITH LITERALLY NO DONATIONS FOR THE PAST 2+ YEARS IT HAS DEPLETED THE BUDGET IN SHORT ORDER WITH THE INCREASE IN ACTIVITY ON THE SITE IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS. OUR CPU USAGE HAS BECOME TOO HIGH TO REMAIN ON A REASONABLE COSTING PLAN THAT WE COULD MAINTAIN. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE DEVTOME PROJECT AND KEEP THE SITE UP/ALIVE PLEASE DONATE (EVEN IF ITS A SATOSHI) TO OUR DEVCOIN 1M4PCuMXvpWX6LHPkBEf3LJ2z1boZv4EQa OR OUR BTC WALLET 16eqEcqfw4zHUh2znvMcmRzGVwCn7CJLxR TO ALLOW US TO AFFORD THE HOSTING.

THE DEVCOIN AND DEVTOME PROJECTS ARE BOTH VERY IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY. PLEASE CONTRIBUTE TO ITS FURTHER SUCCESS FOR ANOTHER 5 OR MORE YEARS!

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

a_flexitarian_opinion_on_the_real_fear_of_atheist_scientists_like_richard_dawkins [2014/02/13 08:33]
weisoq
a_flexitarian_opinion_on_the_real_fear_of_atheist_scientists_like_richard_dawkins [2014/02/27 22:55] (current)
whoisthelorax [Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham About Evolution, And Scientists Cringe In Fear? Why?]
Line 9: Line 9:
 The internet let out a confused, collective shriek when Bill Nye filmed a micro video for Big Think, an organization known for producing 2-3 minute clips of innovative thinkers on broad topics. Bill Nye's three minute conversation was to encourage his listeners to not teach creationism to their kids. The materialist science crowd shrieked in support of the notion. The large percentage of Americans who believe in some sort of creation involving a god shrieked in horror.  The internet let out a confused, collective shriek when Bill Nye filmed a micro video for Big Think, an organization known for producing 2-3 minute clips of innovative thinkers on broad topics. Bill Nye's three minute conversation was to encourage his listeners to not teach creationism to their kids. The materialist science crowd shrieked in support of the notion. The large percentage of Americans who believe in some sort of creation involving a god shrieked in horror. 
  
-A gallup poll in 2012 showed that 46% of Americans believe in Young Earth Creationism, which is a belief that the world was created by God in under 10,000 years (the number of years varies with the theory). Not surprisingly, the people representing the "teach creationism" camp responded. Widely known creationist with a dubious history at best, Ken Ham, lead the way with sparking conversation between Bill Nye and the hard core evolutionist position. Ham runs a Christian based organization called Answers in Genesis, which provides Christians with a number of resources for understanding the Young Earth Creationism position. Their main presence is in Kentucky where Answers in Genesis has a Young Earth Creationists museum, which depicts the evidence for the creationist position. Eventually, the small discussions between the two leaders lead to the idea of a debate, and then only one side of the polarity shrieked again;  the side of the scientists.+A gallup poll in 2012 showed that 46% of Americans believe in Young Earth Creationism, which is a belief that the world was created by God in under 10,000 years ((http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx)) (the number of years varies with the theory). Not surprisingly, the people representing the "teach creationism" camp responded. Widely known creationist with a dubious history at best, Ken Ham, lead the way with sparking conversation between Bill Nye and the hard core evolutionist position. Ham runs a Christian based organization called Answers in Genesis, which provides Christians with a number of resources for understanding the Young Earth Creationism position. Their main presence is in Kentucky where Answers in Genesis has a Young Earth Creationists museum, which depicts the evidence for the creationist position. Eventually, the small discussions between the two leaders lead to the idea of a debate, and then only one side of the polarity shrieked again;  the side of the scientists.
  
 What was the big deal? Richard Dawkins immediately condemned the concept of someone representing evolution and debating creationism. His foundation had other writers to follow up the condemnation along with the reasoning behind its position ((http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/16/why-bill-nye-shouldn-t-debate-ken-ham)). Other science endorsers like Bill Maher rightly condemned Bill Nye for considering a debate of creationism worthy of anyone's time. So what was the concern from the scientific side? What was the big deal? Richard Dawkins immediately condemned the concept of someone representing evolution and debating creationism. His foundation had other writers to follow up the condemnation along with the reasoning behind its position ((http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/16/why-bill-nye-shouldn-t-debate-ken-ham)). Other science endorsers like Bill Maher rightly condemned Bill Nye for considering a debate of creationism worthy of anyone's time. So what was the concern from the scientific side?
  
 The concerns listed in the Dawkins Institute article stem essentially from one point of contention; that even going about a proper debate gives the other side too much credit and lessens the cause ((http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/16/why-bill-nye-shouldn-t-debate-ken-ham)). Creationism is such a nonsensical concept, they assert, that even to go about the business of a formal debate is too risky.  Could this be true? Let us look at another formerly hotly debated scientific vs. religious belief and see if this system of refusing to debate would help the "cause". The concerns listed in the Dawkins Institute article stem essentially from one point of contention; that even going about a proper debate gives the other side too much credit and lessens the cause ((http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2014/1/16/why-bill-nye-shouldn-t-debate-ken-ham)). Creationism is such a nonsensical concept, they assert, that even to go about the business of a formal debate is too risky.  Could this be true? Let us look at another formerly hotly debated scientific vs. religious belief and see if this system of refusing to debate would help the "cause".
- 
 =A Science History As An Example= =A Science History As An Example=
  

QR Code
QR Code a_flexitarian_opinion_on_the_real_fear_of_atheist_scientists_like_richard_dawkins (generated for current page)
 

Advertise with Anonymous Ads