Bill Nye is an idiot, loses all credibility

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
Bill Nye Wants to 'Penalize' You for Having 'Extra Kids'
You might want to decide which one or two kids are your favorites, because Nye is coming for the "extra ones."


M.J. Randolph

yes, really), came from the new modestly-titled Netflix series Bill Nye Saves the World. But his most recent episode is just about as bad.

In the 13th episode of the season, titled “Earth’s People Problem," Nye tackles a problem no one's been concerned about since the 1970s: overpopulation.

The 26-minute episode explained that educated women usually have fewer children than uneducated ones, that women in power have fewer children, and the fewer children there are, the more resources can be devoted to those children. All true. Then, the show posits that America’s patriarchal society means that new mothers here are really bad off. Bosworth W. Hollingsworth, IV describes the show in the Federalist:

... women in India get 16 weeks of paid maternity leave, which is “unheard of in the United States.” Never mind that here in California (home to roughly 20 percent of Americans), we have 16 weeks of guaranteed maternity leave as well. Also disregard the fact that the absence of a federal requirement for maternity leave does not mean maternity leave is nonexistent in the United States... Instructively, she approvingly lists China when she rattles off some of the countries that do have required paid maternity leave policies.

Yes, Chinese mothers have it so easy, when the government isn't forcing them to abort children that exceed their quotas.

Next, Nye hosted a panel discussion comprised of "Rachel Snow, chief of population development at the United Nations Population Fund, Dr. Travis Rieder, ethicist at the Berman Institute at Johns Hopkins University, and finally Dr. Nerys Benfield, director of Family Planning Montefiore Medical Center."

"What should we be doing?” Nye asks.

Benfield says health care and family planning are both important, and the panel nods approvingly. “We need justice and we need education," Snow said. Wait, what? Justice? For whom? The panel does not clarify what's meant by "justice," though Nye asks, "How do we create and export this justice?" Again, what's he talking about? Justice is not something you whip up in the lab: it's meted out, not concocted.

Snow says we can do this by creating “excellent education systems," and Rieder says children take up way too many of the earth's resources. That's when Nye asks, “Should we have policies that penalize people for having extra kids in the developed world?” This is when the show gets downright creepy. Hollingsworth describes the ensuing conversation:

Extra kids. These d-mn people and their existence, am I right? Nye (who, again, decided we all needed to see that abomination from Bloom) is wise enough to set limits on humanity. This whole concept and the ease with which he discusses it is so frightening and evil that I am genuinely appalled at Netflix’s decision to air it.

Rieder says we should “at least consider” a form of punishment for people who have these Extra Kids (TM). Nye impatiently responds that “consider means do it.” Snow, to her credit, jumps in and takes issue with the idea that “we do anything to incentivize fewer children or more children.” Benfield notes the history of compulsory sterilization in America, a practice that was in place as recently as the 1970s. The issue was not come at from a position of justice in the past, she adds. But this time will be different, I guess?

So, if you’re scoring at home, that leaves China’s maternity laws and their recently ended one-child policy as the key points from this half hour of science televangelism.
 

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
Bill Nye Wants to 'Penalize' You for Having 'Extra Kids'
You might want to decide which one or two kids are your favorites, because Nye is coming for the "extra ones."


M.J. Randolph

yes, really), came from the new modestly-titled Netflix series Bill Nye Saves the World. But his most recent episode is just about as bad.

In the 13th episode of the season, titled “Earth’s People Problem," Nye tackles a problem no one's been concerned about since the 1970s: overpopulation.

The 26-minute episode explained that educated women usually have fewer children than uneducated ones, that women in power have fewer children, and the fewer children there are, the more resources can be devoted to those children. All true. Then, the show posits that America’s patriarchal society means that new mothers here are really bad off. Bosworth W. Hollingsworth, IV describes the show in the Federalist:

... women in India get 16 weeks of paid maternity leave, which is “unheard of in the United States.” Never mind that here in California (home to roughly 20 percent of Americans), we have 16 weeks of guaranteed maternity leave as well. Also disregard the fact that the absence of a federal requirement for maternity leave does not mean maternity leave is nonexistent in the United States... Instructively, she approvingly lists China when she rattles off some of the countries that do have required paid maternity leave policies.

Yes, Chinese mothers have it so easy, when the government isn't forcing them to abort children that exceed their quotas.

Next, Nye hosted a panel discussion comprised of "Rachel Snow, chief of population development at the United Nations Population Fund, Dr. Travis Rieder, ethicist at the Berman Institute at Johns Hopkins University, and finally Dr. Nerys Benfield, director of Family Planning Montefiore Medical Center."

"What should we be doing?” Nye asks.

Benfield says health care and family planning are both important, and the panel nods approvingly. “We need justice and we need education," Snow said. Wait, what? Justice? For whom? The panel does not clarify what's meant by "justice," though Nye asks, "How do we create and export this justice?" Again, what's he talking about? Justice is not something you whip up in the lab: it's meted out, not concocted.

Snow says we can do this by creating “excellent education systems," and Rieder says children take up way too many of the earth's resources. That's when Nye asks, “Should we have policies that penalize people for having extra kids in the developed world?” This is when the show gets downright creepy. Hollingsworth describes the ensuing conversation:

Extra kids. These d-mn people and their existence, am I right? Nye (who, again, decided we all needed to see that abomination from Bloom) is wise enough to set limits on humanity. This whole concept and the ease with which he discusses it is so frightening and evil that I am genuinely appalled at Netflix’s decision to air it.

Rieder says we should “at least consider” a form of punishment for people who have these Extra Kids (TM). Nye impatiently responds that “consider means do it.” Snow, to her credit, jumps in and takes issue with the idea that “we do anything to incentivize fewer children or more children.” Benfield notes the history of compulsory sterilization in America, a practice that was in place as recently as the 1970s. The issue was not come at from a position of justice in the past, she adds. But this time will be different, I guess?

So, if you’re scoring at home, that leaves China’s maternity laws and their recently ended one-child policy as the key points from this half hour of science televangelism.

Oh my liberal facebook friends have taught me what they mean by justice.

 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
I watched one episode of the Bill Nye show on Netflix. It was way too glitzy and shallow for me. And the discussion segment you could clearly tell was edited, unsurprisingly because it's so hard to get a decent discussion segment when you have to put it in a short window and nobody gets to speak for more than about 20 seconds.

I don't like the genre in general since I prefer longer, more substantive discussions. Once you get used to them discussions like on the Nye show or what you see on CNN or MSNBC or Fox just look pointless.

All that said I don't trust Breitbart to tell the clear truth on things.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
I watched one episode of the Bill Nye show on Netflix. It was way too glitzy and shallow for me. And the discussion segment you could clearly tell was edited, unsurprisingly because it's so hard to get a decent discussion segment when you have to put it in a short window and nobody gets to speak for more than about 20 seconds.

I don't like the genre in general since I prefer longer, more substantive discussions. Once you get used to them discussions like on the Nye show or what you see on CNN or MSNBC or Fox just look pointless.

All that said I don't trust Breitbart to tell the clear truth on things.

And I don't trust ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NY Times or Wash Post either.
 

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,542
151
63
What? Your supporting Bill Nye's desire to "punish" couples for having too many children? Wow. You are one far left loon. Are you also for eugenics?
Try to stop being a tool for one second. How many people can planet support? 100 billion? some say 11B but I'm not sure where that comes from, we're a little over 7B now. The planet does not have unlimited resources and population control will be an issue in the future.
Georgia Guidestones
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
Try to stop being a tool for one second. How many people can planet support? 100 billion? some say 11B but I'm not sure where that comes from, we're a little over 7B now. The planet does not have unlimited resources and population control will be an issue in the future.
Georgia Guidestones
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

I'm not being a tool. Are you in favor of punishing people for having too many children as Bill Nye is? Are you in favor of eugenics? More importantly, the group having the most children today are Muslims. Are you in favor of somehow stopping them from having so many children and if so, how?

And frankly, we have a huge planet. I nor does anyone else know what is a sustainable population given the greening of the planet and technology.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,689
1,758
113
I'm not being a tool. Are you in favor of punishing people for having too many children as Bill Nye is? Are you in favor of eugenics? More importantly, the group having the most children today are Muslims. Are you in favor of somehow stopping them from having so many children and if so, how?

And frankly, we have a huge planet. I nor does anyone else know what is a sustainable population given the greening of the planet and technology.
I was actually rooting against Tom Hanks in Inferno.

Start with the old people, bring on the Death Panels.
 

CAJUNEER_rivals

Redshirt
May 29, 2001
72,872
44
0
I watched one episode of the Bill Nye show on Netflix. It was way too glitzy and shallow for me. And the discussion segment you could clearly tell was edited, unsurprisingly because it's so hard to get a decent discussion segment when you have to put it in a short window and nobody gets to speak for more than about 20 seconds.

I don't like the genre in general since I prefer longer, more substantive discussions. Once you get used to them discussions like on the Nye show or what you see on CNN or MSNBC or Fox just look pointless.

All that said I don't trust Breitbart to tell the clear truth on things.
The natural digression of atheism/agnosticism--kill unborn babies, kill new born babies, punish people for having babies.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
The natural digression of atheism/agnosticism--kill unborn babies, kill new born babies, punish people for having babies.

Yeah, kill everyone that doesn't believe/think like us.

Oh wait, I have that confused with Islam and Christianity throughout various stages of history.
 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
Well then you've never heard it. No God. No objective moral standard. Killing babies--no problem.

Believers in the Bible and the Qu'ran have an objective moral standard as outlined in the Bible and Qu'ran but thankfully most of them ignore that and instead use the subjective moral standard that I and most other non-believer use.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
Believers in the Bible and the Qu'ran have an objective moral standard as outlined in the Bible and Qu'ran but thankfully most of them ignore that and instead use the subjective moral standard that I and most other non-believer use.

Very ignorant statement. Very. Have you read the New Testament and the teachings of Christ? He brought with him a new Covenant that replaced the law of the Old Testament. He taught a new way of life, a new way of thinking, a new reality about God.

To claim that Jesus did not teach peace, love, help for the weak and oppressed, turning the other cheek, forgiveness, etc. is a lie.
 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
Very ignorant statement. Very. Have you read the New Testament and the teachings of Christ? He brought with him a new Covenant that replaced the law of the Old Testament. He taught a new way of life, a new way of thinking, a new reality about God.

To claim that Jesus did not teach peace, love, help for the weak and oppressed, turning the other cheek, forgiveness, etc. is a lie.

If the New Testament replaced the Old Testament then why is the Old Testament still a part of the Bible?

I've read some of the Old and New but not all of either. I've read all of the Qu'ran. My point is that those books have a lot of stuff that would be considered bad today but won't don't worry about Christians and Muslims just ignore it (although I sure wish more Muslims ignore it than currently do).
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
If the New Testament replaced the Old Testament then why is the Old Testament still a part of the Bible?

I've read some of the Old and New but not all of either. I've read all of the Qu'ran. My point is that those books have a lot of stuff that would be considered bad today but won't don't worry about Christians and Muslims just ignore it (although I sure wish more Muslims ignore it than currently do).

If you haven't read the New Testament which brought with it a new Covenant that replaced the Law of the Old Testament, then you know nothing and cannot speak with any authority on this subject. The teachings of Christ are there for all to see and his morals were far above yours or any humans. Stick to what you know or read the books in the New Testament. Then you can opine on the teachings of Christ and then you can factually debate this with me. But until you do, you have no room on which to base any arguments.

Yes, the Old Testament is part of the Bible and it's very valuable for its history which lead to the birth of Christ. But Christians follow Christ. That is the New Testament.
 

CAJUNEER_rivals

Redshirt
May 29, 2001
72,872
44
0
Believers in the Bible and the Qu'ran have an objective moral standard as outlined in the Bible and Qu'ran but thankfully most of them ignore that and instead use the subjective moral standard that I and most other non-believer use.
What evidence do you have that most Christians ignore the Bible and most Muslims ignore the Quran?
 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
If you haven't read the New Testament which brought with it a new Covenant that replaced the Law of the Old Testament, then you know nothing and cannot speak with any authority on this subject. The teachings of Christ are there for all to see and his morals were far above yours or any humans. Stick to what you know or read the books in the New Testament. Then you can opine on the teachings of Christ and then you can factually debate this with me. But until you do, you have no room on which to base any arguments.

Yes, the Old Testament is part of the Bible and it's very valuable for its history which lead to the birth of Christ. But Christians follow Christ. That is the New Testament.

So is what I'm hearing that some parts of the Bible (some of the Old Testament parts that have been superseded by the New Testatment) are wrong?
 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
What evidence do you have that most Christians ignore the Bible and most Muslims ignore the Quran?

Well most Christians and Muslims live by modern morality rather than the ancient ones outlined in the Bible or the Qu'ran. And when they insist on using the old style morality we (meaning everybody else) think they're silly. Right? I mean, you're not in favor of slavery, right?
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
So is what I'm hearing that some parts of the Bible (some of the Old Testament parts that have been superseded by the New Testatment) are wrong?

The Old Testament was crucial since it pointed the way toward the messiah. The New Testament told the story of the messiah and the new Covenant from God. If you aren't religious, you have no clue, so a good adage is when in a hole, stop digging.
 

CAJUNEER_rivals

Redshirt
May 29, 2001
72,872
44
0
Well most Christians and Muslims live by modern morality rather than the ancient ones outlined in the Bible or the Qu'ran. And when they insist on using the old style morality we (meaning everybody else) think they're silly. Right? I mean, you're not in favor of slavery, right?
I’m not in favor of valuing the opinions of those have taken little or no time to properly exegete passages about which they propose to speak.
 

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
Believers in the Bible and the Qu'ran have an objective moral standard as outlined in the Bible and Qu'ran

You were good up until then.

but thankfully most of them ignore that and instead use the subjective moral standard that I and most other non-believer use.

And you blew it. The Christian moral standard is far above whatever you heathens come up with.
 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
You were good up until then.



And you blew it. The Christian moral standard is far above whatever you heathens come up with.

Do Christians live today like they did 500 or 1,000 or 1,500 years ago? I would say that in moral terms they live much better today than back then. Were the just not following Christianity then but are following it now? I think modern morality is getting better and religion is aligning with it instead of the religious morality from 1,000 years ago.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
Do Christians live today like they did 500 or 1,000 or 1,500 years ago? I would say that in moral terms they live much better today than back then. Were the just not following Christianity then but are following it now? I think modern morality is getting better and religion is aligning with it instead of the religious morality from 1,000 years ago.

Modern morality is getting better? How do you know this? Comparing today to 1,000 or 2,000 years ago from a moral perspective is impossible. Mores have changed, values have changed. You can point to slavery for example even though it was considered normal at the time. I can point to the millions upon millions of unborn babies that have been murdered. Not to mention crime rates, drug use, evil, barbaric acts that have killed millions (Hitler, Stalin, etc.).
 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
Modern morality is getting better? How do you know this? Comparing today to 1,000 or 2,000 years ago from a moral perspective is impossible. Mores have changed, values have changed. You can point to slavery for example even though it was considered normal at the time. I can point to the millions upon millions of unborn babies that have been murdered. Not to mention crime rates, drug use, evil, barbaric acts that have killed millions (Hitler, Stalin, etc.).

People kill a lot less now than they used to. Hitler and Stalin were recent and they came at a time when there were lots of people and recording devices to tell us about them a lot but generally speaking the farther back you go the more killing (per capita I mean) there was. And slavery. And sex slaves. And tribalism. Yadda, yadda. The bad stuff today stands out so much because there is less bad stuff relatively speaking. If ISISes were all over the place and doing their stuff every day then it wouldn't be news because instead it would be the norm.

Granted abortion is a separate issue that some people have different stances on. But even way back when (a) some primitive abortions were happening and (b) there wasn't the possibility of widespread abortion because the technology didn't exist.

There is a good but long book by Steven Pinker named "The Better Angels of Our Nature" the delves into violence and its history and it's amazing the crap that went on in the past that we'd consider awful today. In the 1600s in France they had cat burnings for entertainment. They'd put cats in a net and lower it closer and closer to a fire as the cats slowly burned to death. This was considered entertaniment!
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
People kill a lot less now than they used to. Hitler and Stalin were recent and they came at a time when there were lots of people and recording devices to tell us about them a lot but generally speaking the farther back you go the more killing (per capita I mean) there was. And slavery. And sex slaves. And tribalism. Yadda, yadda. The bad stuff today stands out so much because there is less bad stuff relatively speaking. If ISISes were all over the place and doing their stuff every day then it wouldn't be news because instead it would be the norm.

Granted abortion is a separate issue that some people have different stances on. But even way back when (a) some primitive abortions were happening and (b) there wasn't the possibility of widespread abortion because the technology didn't exist.

There is a good but long book by Steven Pinker named "The Better Angels of Our Nature" the delves into violence and its history and it's amazing the crap that went on in the past that we'd consider awful today. In the 1600s in France they had cat burnings for entertainment. They'd put cats in a net and lower it closer and closer to a fire as the cats slowly burned to death. This was considered entertaniment!

How do you know this? Have you seen the Middle East? Syria with at least 500,000 dead? Not to mention the deaths caused by murders, evil dictators, etc all over the world. We have no idea how many have died in North Korea, for example. You have zero way of knowing if there is "less bad stuff". Just count the millions upon millions of abortions, killing the most innocent among us.

People have different stances on abortion just as they had different stances on slavery. I for one feel that killing babies is even worse than slavery. I only see a decline in modern moral values. Abortions, cheating spouses, drug use, alcohol abuse, divorce rates, murder rates, etc.
 

op2

Senior
Mar 16, 2014
11,174
547
103
How do you know this? Have you seen the Middle East? Syria with at least 500,000 dead? Not to mention the deaths caused by murders, evil dictators, etc all over the world. We have no idea how many have died in North Korea, for example. You have zero way of knowing if there is "less bad stuff". Just count the millions upon millions of abortions, killing the most innocent among us.

People have different stances on abortion just as they had different stances on slavery. I for one feel that killing babies is even worse than slavery. I only see a decline in modern moral values. Abortions, cheating spouses, drug use, alcohol abuse, divorce rates, murder rates, etc.

People make careers studying this stuff. Granted I'm relying on them to be correct rather than doing the original research myself but google "number of people dying in war over time" or "murder rate over time" or whatever. Check whatever source it gives you since you don't want to just blindly believe what it throws at you.

Even the abortion rate is lower than at any time since Roe v Wade.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
You were good up until then.



And you blew it. The Christian moral standard is far above whatever you heathens come up with.

So you still practice stoning your disobedient children? and those that break the sabbath? and adulterers? and you don't "round the corners of your head"?

Got it.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
People make careers studying this stuff. Granted I'm relying on them to be correct rather than doing the original research myself but google "number of people dying in war over time" or "murder rate over time" or whatever. Check whatever source it gives you since you don't want to just blindly believe what it throws at you.

Even the abortion rate is lower than at any time since Roe v Wade.

Abortion was not practiced legally in this country until Roe. Millions upon millions of babies slaughtered. Since I was born, I have seen a great moral decline.
 

WVPATX

Freshman
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
So you still practice stoning your disobedient children? and those that break the sabbath? and adulterers? and you don't "round the corners of your head"?

Got it.

Displaying your ignorance again. If your going to cite religion, at least know the difference that Jesus brought to Christianity. Your above post is not part of what Jesus taught.