Colbert’s Theological Debate of the Day
Bill O’Reilly doesn’t understand how the sun rises and sets, or how the tides go in and out, and I have a feeling not even Neil deGrasse Tyson’s explanation will change that.
Bill O’Reilly doesn’t understand how the sun rises and sets, or how the tides go in and out, and I have a feeling not even Neil deGrasse Tyson’s explanation will change that.
2 | Kronocide Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:50:20pm |
That’s awesome: scientists being funny about science!
3 | Idle Drifter Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:51:33pm |
Or is Gravity God? Intelligent Falling? Wait what?
Gravity God sounds like an Indy Rock band.
4 | Kragar Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:51:55pm |
The tides, sunrise and sunset are all example of irreducible complexity.
Next up, the banana.
5 | iossarian Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:52:33pm |
Funny, but again, what is the point of even attempting to “debate” with these people?
6 | PhillyPretzel Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:53:26pm |
I like how he got there so fast. “I have a wormhole.” That was cute.
8 | bratwurst Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:53:51pm |
It is amazing to me that a guy with O’Reily’s educational background (more degrees than Rush, Beck and Hannity combined…3 for Bill, zero total for the other guys!) could be this stupid on television. There really is such a thing as willful ignorance.
9 | Obdicut Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:55:45pm |
re: #8 bratwurst
This is the guy who seriously expected to see black people acting like racist caricatures when he went to eat at a black restaurant. There’s something kind of off in his brain area.
10 | SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Jan 7, 2011 1:55:56pm |
re: #4 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
The tides, sunrise and sunset are all example of irreducible complexity.
Next up, the banana.
Oh God. The banana.
11 | Kragar Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:00:09pm |
re: #3 Idle Drifter
Or is Gravity God? Intelligent Falling? Wait what?
Gravity God sounds like an Indy Rock band.
They’re keyboardist used to date the bassist from Black Robed Shadow Cabal.
13 | Ojoe Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:03:18pm |
Gravity is the weakest known force, that is why comedy is so strong.
14 | PhillyPretzel Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:03:43pm |
re: #12 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
[Link: www.thefreedictionary.com…]
15 | Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:03:53pm |
I think the idea behind rejecting science is to leave more room for God in micromanaging the universe.
16 | shutdown Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:05:02pm |
I only have a minute, but here is something I fail to grasp regarding religious fundamentalist and religious right wing argumentation. It would have been much easier for an all-powerful God to make everything run on a system of miracles and wonders. Tides? No moon, no rotation - just magical coming and going. Humans? Made them just the way you see them. Gave them fire, too. No evolution, no biology, no intelligence.
Isn’t the omnipotent hand of God much more evident in the intricate machinations of nature, than in simple miracles without the need for elaborate, incomprehensibly balanced natural science?
17 | Ojoe Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:05:07pm |
18 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:05:24pm |
re: #9 Obdicut
This is the guy who seriously expected to see black people acting like racist caricatures when he went to eat at a black restaurant. There’s something kind of off in his brain area.
FUCK IT WE’LL DO IT LIVE
19 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:06:24pm |
re: #9 Obdicut
This is the guy who seriously expected to see black people acting like racist caricatures when he went to eat at a black restaurant. There’s something kind of off in his brain area.
it’s like, you know how I believe Rush’s act and Beck’s act is mostly cynical schtick? I don’t think that with O’Reilly. That’s authentic :P
20 | SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:06:37pm |
re: #16 imp_62
I only have a minute, but here is something I fail to grasp regarding religious fundamentalist and religious right wing argumentation. It would have been much easier for an all-powerful God to make everything run on a system of miracles and wonders. Tides? No moon, no rotation - just magical coming and going. Humans? Made them just the way you see them. Gave them fire, too. No evolution, no biology, no intelligence.
Isn’t the omnipotent hand of God much more evident in the intricate machinations of nature, than in simple miracles without the need for elaborate, incomprehensibly balanced natural science?
It doesn’t make much sense to me, either.
21 | goddamnedfrank Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:06:55pm |
re: #1 Idle Drifter
So God is gravity?
Hawking says that gravity does make God unnecessary for the Universe to be created.
22 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:06:58pm |
re: #3 Idle Drifter
Or is Gravity God? Intelligent Falling? Wait what?
Gravity God sounds like an Indy Rock band.
there’s a band called Gravity Kills and a band called the Young Gods, you’re very close :D
23 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:08:22pm |
re: #21 goddamnedfrank
Hawking says that gravity does make God unnecessary for the Universe to be created.
I just like the idea of Stephen Hawking (specifically the Hawking from Futurama) saying “God is unnecessary”
And then robot santa shows up and there’s screaming
24 | Ojoe Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:08:48pm |
re: #16 imp_62
I myself think that it is a great unfathomable miracle that the whole periodic table is latent in the simple hydrogen atom, what could be more amazing than that?
The simpler, the more amazing, if you ask me.
25 | valuepack Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:09:29pm |
The “missed communication” is between O’Reilly and reality.
26 | Kragar Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:10:29pm |
re: #24 Ojoe
I myself think that it is a great unfathomable miracle that the whole periodic table is latent in the simple hydrogen atom, what could be more amazing than that?
The simpler, the more amazing, if you ask me.
NO NO NO! You need to sell it more! Get a burning shrubbery and a booming voice! Maybe work some animal tricks into it
27 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:10:47pm |
re: #15 ralphieboy
I think the idea behind rejecting science is to leave more room for God in micromanaging
the universeNFL games
28 | WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:11:07pm |
re: #26 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
NO NO NO! You need to sell it more! Get a burning shrubbery and a booming voice! Maybe work some animal tricks into it
get some PA stacks, a little reverb…
29 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:11:36pm |
so Moon is not God
Blasphemy! He hurt my Moonie religious feelings!
/ signed: The Mooninite
30 | Kragar Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:12:14pm |
re: #28 WindUpBird
get some PA stacks, a little reverb…
And a fog machine. Got to have a fog machine.
31 | Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:13:11pm |
re: #30 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
And a fog machine. Got to have a fog machine.
Turn on the bubble machine!
32 | Kronocide Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:13:28pm |
There’s a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what have yous. Therefore, God.
33 | Ojoe Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:14:19pm |
There are tides in the solid rocks and in the air too, if you have good enough instruments you can see earth and air tides.
34 | Kragar Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:15:00pm |
35 | SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:19:16pm |
re: #31 ralphieboy
Turn on the bubble machine!
“Sharon, I’m Ozzie Osborne. I’m the Prince of fucking Darkness. I can’t have bubbles!”
36 | shutdown Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:19:52pm |
re: #24 Ojoe
I myself think that it is a great unfathomable miracle that the whole periodic table is latent in the simple hydrogen atom, what could be more amazing than that?
The simpler, the more amazing, if you ask me.
I always get back to that when I discuss either with atheists, OR with religious fundis. Neither has an answer for the questions: where did the first hydrogen atom come from (for atheists) and how can you disregard the hand of God in science (for wingnuts)?
37 | Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:21:55pm |
re: #35 SanFranciscoZionist
“Sharon, I’m Ozzie Osborne. I’m the Prince of fucking Darkness. I can’t have bubbles!”
“They’re DARK bubbles!”
38 | shutdown Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:22:28pm |
re: #32 BigPapa
There’s a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what have yous. Therefore, God.
It’s just sad to say that science is ungodly. Sells God short, if you ask me. It’s like the Discworld. Any minor deity can do a miracle. But science??? You have to be a big swinging you-know-what God to come up with that.
39 | freetoken Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:23:39pm |
re: #33 Ojoe
Yup, we all rise and fall every day!
A standard first year physics student experiment is to measure the Gravitational constant with a set up similar to Cavendish.
Difficult to perform with any decent accuracy, still it drives home that everything around us is attracting everything else.
40 | Sionainn Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:24:13pm |
41 | RurouniKenshin Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:24:46pm |
re: #36 imp_62
I always get back to that when I discuss either with atheists, OR with religious fundis. Neither has an answer for the questions: where did the first hydrogen atom come from (for atheists) and how can you disregard the hand of God in science (for wingnuts)?
There are excellent discussions throughout scientific literature that address the “where” question.
The problem with your question to begin with is: ok, so if God made the first hydrogen atom, then where did God come from? If God has always existed, what did he do before he created our universe? How many universes has he created?
The existence of God brings up far more distressing questions about origin than does the existence of matter.
As for the answer: hydrogen atoms came into existence once the ambient temperature of the universe had cooled enough for quarks to form into protons and for electrons to have low enough energy that they could be captured by a proton. Of course then you have to ask “ok, where did quarks come from”
42 | Kronocide Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:27:55pm |
re: #38 imp_62
It’s just sad to say that science is ungodly. Sells God short, if you ask me. It’s like the Discworld. Any minor deity can do a miracle. But science??? You have to be a big swinging you-know-what God to come up with that.
Many scientists of faith count their amazement of the universe discovered in science as validation of their faith. I sense that if I returned to faith it would be through that avenue. It would never be through the rhetorically shallow logic exemplified by Beck and O’Reilly. I honestly expect more from OReilly but that was just jaw droppingly face palm stupid.
43 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:28:00pm |
re: #36 imp_62
I always get back to that when I discuss either with atheists, OR with religious fundis. Neither has an answer for the questions: where did the first hydrogen atom come from (for atheists) and how can you disregard the hand of God in science (for wingnuts)?
‘Tis easy, from quarks.
half-/
44 | Eclectic Infidel Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:28:42pm |
re: #32 BigPapa
There’s a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what have yous. Therefore, God.
And you gotta feed the monkey.
45 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:31:40pm |
re: #36 imp_62
I always get back to that when I discuss either with atheists, OR with religious fundis. Neither has an answer for the questions: where did the first hydrogen atom come from (for atheists) and how can you disregard the hand of God in science (for wingnuts)?
On a more serious note. To be an atheist I don’t have to “know” where the Universe came from. It’s a big, wonderful mystery. I sure as hell don’t know. It doesn’t mean that “Goddidit” is a rational hypothesis.
And of course I can point out rational variants compatible with atheism, which either boil down to the eternal universe (Multiverse, oscillating universe…) or are limited to our Big-bang-universe but which do not require a beginning (cf. Adolf Gruenbaum’s or Quentin Smith’s works on this topic).
46 | Political Atheist Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:32:24pm |
re: #21 goddamnedfrank
And yet Hawking can make no claim as to what or who made these initial conditions for the laws that led to the big bang exist. Where did the initial conditions come from? Still a mystery to all. It’s not proof god is not there. It’s just a mathematical explanation of (maybe) what happened that no longer has the god possibilities as he saw them. Nothing more or less. But lets remember there is much debate about the big bang as a singular event, it might really be the big “bounce”. Cyclical. Which be sheer luck or coincidence is pretty compatible with some Buddhist cosmology. Not Old Testament, only a singular big bang would enjoy that coincidence.
IMHO-Neither can validate or rightly invalidate the other. Science can only validate how things appear by evidence to have happened or invalidate doctrine. Which really should not be confused with god.
God makes no scientific claims at all. Only man made doctrine does that. May as well ask ice to explain fire.
47 | Sol Berdinowitz Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:33:10pm |
If you insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis and the Bible in general, it leaves little room for any science at all, save for Young Earth Creationism.
And is still a disturbingly large number of people who insist on taking it all literally.
48 | Political Atheist Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:36:53pm |
re: #47 ralphieboy
Hence it’s pretty daring to conflate god with mere church or whatever doctrine. Foolish really. Unless the gods are exactly as numerous as the religions. lol.
That’s the error. The bible is not god. It’s printed paper.
49 | Ojoe Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:41:44pm |
re: #39 freetoken
If you go into a fiord with steep mountains on either side, the water will be higher there than in the open sea, because the mountains on either side are attracting the water.
It is all amazing.
If you think science diminishes God, then you have a hard time seeing miracles.
50 | Obdicut Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:52:00pm |
re: #46 Rightwingconspirator
My main problem with the ‘god’ concept is that nobody can define it. The argument is pretty much a non-starter for me. Nobody can give a coherent answer to “What is God”.
51 | Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton Fri, Jan 7, 2011 2:54:08pm |
re: #50 Obdicut
My main problem with the ‘god’ concept is that nobody can define it. The argument is pretty much a non-starter for me. Nobody can give a coherent answer to “What is God”.
And that is only the beginning of the philosophical problems with theism ;)
52 | SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Jan 7, 2011 3:16:53pm |
re: #50 Obdicut
My main problem with the ‘god’ concept is that nobody can define it. The argument is pretty much a non-starter for me. Nobody can give a coherent answer to “What is God”.
God is like jazz.
53 | MinisterO Fri, Jan 7, 2011 3:22:51pm |
re: #50 Obdicut
My main problem with the ‘god’ concept is that nobody can define it. The argument is pretty much a non-starter for me. Nobody can give a coherent answer to “What is God”.
God is like porn.
54 | sillyallah Fri, Jan 7, 2011 3:23:47pm |
Great video, but it’s sad that this is even necessary in the United States in 2011
55 | Ojoe Fri, Jan 7, 2011 4:14:06pm |
57 | FreedomMoon Fri, Jan 7, 2011 4:53:48pm |
“Fucking magnets, how do they work? And I don’t wanna talk to a scientist. Y’all motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed.”
Insane Clown Posy must get a lot of inspiration from ol’ Bill and Glenn.
58 | Lidane Fri, Jan 7, 2011 6:07:43pm |
re: #54 sillyallah
Great video, but it’s sad that this is even necessary
in the United Statesin 2011
FTFY.
59 | Lidane Fri, Jan 7, 2011 6:13:39pm |
Looks like Bill O’Reilly needs to spend some time hanging out with Bill Nye. What an utterly pathetic display.