[Jefferson]

RSF: Bird Brains and Trains

This is the show from Friday August 13th, 2010.

BEST QUOTE OF THE SHOW:

Evolutionists believe the first single cell evolved by random chance out of inanimate matter. It's just bizarre. It's remarkable how complex the cell is. We know that a cell is far more complicated than a Boeing 747. It's like a city. It takes a far greater faith for evolutionists to believe the first cell evolved by random chance than to believe there is a creator God who made us.

SUMMARY:

* Real Science Friday hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams : have a fun time on this episode of Real Science Friday talking about more articles in the Summer 2010 issue of Creation magazine including on:
- Japan's chief bullet train engineer copying God's design and getting more energy efficient, quieter, and faster
- Evolutionists finally admitting that some global distribution of animals occurred via floating vegetation mats
- Small dogs originated... guess where? Where all other land animals and men disseminated from: the Middle East
- Supposedly hominid Little Lucy left footprints but experiments show modern humans make identical prints
- Evolutionists surprised that "stone age" men performed successful surgery with anesthesia
- Evolutionists surprised that "stone age" men worked textiles, wove and dyed fabrics pink, gray, and turquoise
- Creation Magazine describes Jesus' nine months gestation and His human life supernaturally beginning as a single cell in Mary's womb, pointing out that while atheists reject out-of-hand the supernatural Incarnation, they believe the utterly impossibility of a first single cell arising by random occurrences. As a NY Times science writer said, "The chemistry of the first life is a nightmare to explain," because as the co-discoverer of DNA said, "so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going." Francis Crick then denied that life could have evolved on earth and argued till his death that aliens must have planted life on Earth. Right. Not God, but Martians. And if life is too complex to arise naturally on Earth, why could it arise that way on Mars, or on any other planet?

* Other Real Science Friday Programs:
- BEL's PZ Myers Trochlea Challenge (since PZ blogged on Bob Enyart this summer)
- BEL's famous List of Not-So-Old Things
- Bob's debate with Christian Darwinist British author James Hannam
- Waiting for Darwin's Other Shoe: Evolution mag's cover story Darwin Was Wrong on the Tree of Life
- Microbiologist in Studio: Bob talks with the Creation Research Society Quarterly editor about new genetic findings

* Today's Resource: Have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? Check out especially Walt Brown'
In the Beginning and Bob's interviews with this great scientist in Walt Brown Week! You'll also love Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez' Privileged Planet (clip), and Illustra Media's Unlocking the Mystery of Life You can consider our BEL Science Pack; Bob Enyart's Age of the Earth Debate; Bob's debate about Junk DNA with famous evolutionist Dr. Eugenie Scott; And the superb kids' radio programming, Jonathan Park: The Adventure Begins! And Bob strongly recommends that you subscribe to CMI's tremendous Creation magazine!

[DoogieTalons]

[quote blah blah]Evolutionists believe the first single cell evolved by random chance out of inanimate matter. It's just bizarre. It's remarkable how complex the cell is. We know that a cell is far more complicated than a Boeing 747. It's like a city. It takes a far greater faith for evolutionists to believe the first cell evolved by random chance than to believe there is a creator God who made us. [/quote]
Strawman, number one you don't speak for all if any "Evolutionists" abiogenisis has nothing to do with evolution.

AND MORE IMPORTANTLY

The first cells to replicate were not the complex cells we see today. All it took for all the complex life we see to day is for one strand, JUST ONE STRAND of RNA to duplicate, just one that's it.

Nothing like the double helix we have today and the cell structures would not have been evolved as we see today.

Real Science ? what do you fools know from science.

You teach this to children, you teach them falsely and you teach them to be as dumb as you.

How can you go against real science with this nonsense you talk about from the loony fringe of academia and store bought diplomas.

If there is a God you guys are gonna spend a lot of time in heaven going back to school lol at least you have eternity to make up for your idiocy, which should leave you a couple of days to enjoy it. Let's hope you get weekends off.

[Jefferson]

Then call in to the show and debate them. Oh, I can hear the excuses already. "Bob controls the microphone. It's not fair." Whine, whine, whine.

[Tyrathca]

Originally Posted by Jefferson

Then call in to the show and debate them. Oh, I can hear the excuses already. "Bob controls the microphone. It's not fair." Whine, whine, whine.

No a better answer would be that scientific debates are not practical over the phone due to the need to research and then reference specific data. Phone conversations are inherintly a restrictive medium.

Plus who can be bothered to be available to debate a fundie at a specific time for no perceivable gain even if you are factually correct?

[Alate_One]

Originally Posted by Tyrathca

No a better answer would be that scientific debates are not practical over the phone due to the need to research and then reference specific data. Phone conversations are inherintly a restrictive medium.

Yep. A forum based debate where papers could be cited would be far more useful.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Tyrathca

No a better answer would be that scientific debates are not practical over the phone due to the need to research and then reference specific data. Phone conversations are inherintly a restrictive medium.

Plus who can be bothered to be available to debate a fundie at a specific time for no perceivable gain even if you are factually correct?

Originally Posted by Alate_One

Yep. A forum based debate where papers could be cited would be far more useful.

Those are the lamest couple of responses ever.

1) There's no way doogie had the format on his mind when he decided not to call the show and instead chose to let loose his vitriol here.

2) A spoken debate has numerous advantages over a written debate. And we could all use a bit of change every now and then.

[Granite]

Originally Posted by Jefferson

Then call in to the show and debate them. Oh, I can hear the excuses already. "Bob controls the microphone. It's not fair." Whine, whine, whine.

Well that's true, Jeff. I've heard Bob talk over callers, yell at them, tell them what they "really" believe, and generally act like any other radio show host who's on a power trip. Calling into the program's a total waste of time if you disagree with him.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Granite

Well that's true, Jeff. I've heard Bob talk over callers, yell at them, tell them what they "really" believe, and generally act like any other radio show host who's on a power trip. Calling into the program's a total waste of time if you disagree with him.

fool disagrees.

[fool]

Originally Posted by Stripe

fool disagrees.

Well actually what Granite discribed was pretty much how my series with Bob ended.

[DoogieTalons]

Originally Posted by Jefferson

Then call in to the show and debate them. Oh, I can hear the excuses already. "Bob controls the microphone. It's not fair." Whine, whine, whine.

No thanks anyone with 1% scientific credibility would be giving Bob 100% more credibility just by talking to him, well to every single one of his fool listeners that is.

The mere fact he has no clue about science is evident in this "Real Science" friday.

You see what he is doing is saying all other science is not real, he is setting himself up as a scientific authority against all others to his flock.

The title itself is shameful and then he says the word "Evolutionist" then starts talking about many other sciences like they are all the same.

Let's be frank, he's a clown speaking to fools. Only fools listen and believe and they exhalt him.

Nothing on this planet is more proud than a christian with an audience.

I'd no more call bob for sceintific debate as I would a 5 year old pokemon expert... well at least pokemon evolve... perhaps the 5 year old would prove more fruitful a conversation.

[The Barbarian]

Why don't you ask Bob to come here and debate with someone? Actually, he did that once, didn't he? But it didn't last long. Fred Williams, I happen to find personally likable; we had a rip-roaring debate many years ago that ultimately led to a sort of mutual respect for each other. But he doesn't debate me any more.

[Stripe]

Doogie

[MrRadish]

It takes a far greater faith for evolutionists to believe the first cell evolved by random chance than to believe there is a creator God who made us.

For some people, it takes more faith to believe in evolution than in a God. Not everybody is the same.

[Flipper]

Aside from Tom Hartmann (maybe) I have yet to hear a radio host on the left or the right who doesn't control call-in discussion rigorously. It's one of the perks of having your own show.

But if you think you're going to call into someone's show and make them look bad, you're naive. When is that ever going to be in the host's best interest?

If Bob Enyart was seriously interested in fair-minded dialog, he might take some time to reasonably address some of the inconsistencies and holes in the various creation models. But that's not what his show is about - it's about providing a positive front for his adopted YEC model. So you'll hear people make the case for Walt Brown's asteroid model but no one will ever mention the inconvenient physical impossibility of his aerobraking model.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Flipper

Aside from Tom Hartmann (maybe) I have yet to hear a radio host on the left or the right who doesn't control call-in discussion rigorously. It's one of the perks of having your own show. But if you think you're going to call into someone's show and make them look bad, you're naive. When is that ever going to be in the host's best interest?

Sounds like nobody can find an advantage to doing a radio broadcast.

If Bob Enyart was seriously interested in fair-minded dialog, he might take some time to reasonably address some of the inconsistencies and holes in the various creation models. But that's not what his show is about - it's about providing a positive front for his adopted YEC model. So you'll hear people make the case for Walt Brown's asteroid model but no one will ever mention the inconvenient physical impossibility of his aerobraking model.

Maybe you could call him up and ask him to do so.