Steven Crowder Says Bill Nye Is Full Of Shit, Again

Submitted by: 5cats 4 months ago in Science


And IAB liberals eat his shit and claim it tastes like chocolate... This is in reference to Nye's Ice Cream cartoon that dealt with the Gender Spectrum, as covered in IAB yesterday here.

Just like Hillary's shit! Fuck that shit, I say! Bill has a Bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering? I have a Double BA... I'm smarter and more qualified than him! But really? His latest bullshit is just that, bullshit. Emotion based, non-science that is 100% politically correct and thus Dogma for the liberal-left.

But it is all lies. All fiction. Just like his AGW lies. Here's tons of proof.

And here's another opinion from someone with a website called "The Red Pill."
There are 32 comments:
Male 40,326
You know who's MORE qualified than Bill?

Yup...
-4
Reply
Male 2,552
5cats
Quantity =/= Quality

Having said that, I would agree Nye's been playing outside his wheel house lately. Wouldn't post a video blog from some political mouthpiece to try to illustrate that point tho..then try to make jokes that Nye is underqualified.
0
Reply
Male 4,051
Well, duh.
-1
Reply
Male 519
It really makes no sense to me why people can't just let people make there own choices and get on with it. The morbid obsession with gender, sexual orientation/preference seems to be just another hang-up in society caused by the bible brigade. Time to grow up. 
1
Reply
Male 522
The thing to remember here folks,is that Crowder is an idiot. That's all.
2
Reply
Male 15,186
'Liberals' are wrong in their dogma about fixed or fluid gender identity and preferences but 'Conservatives' are trying to dictate against these fundamental human rights because they think everyone should live there way and Liberals are trying to counterbalance them.

Here is the truth:

  • Genetic gender exists in 2 states (XX, XY) with very rare, usually fatal variations.
  • Physical gender exists in 2 states (M/F) with numerous not particular common variations (medical intersex phenomena usually due to hormonal imbalance during development, or trauma/surgery).
  • Gender identity is a personal psychological construct loosely based on how one feels affinity for whatever gender is represented by society's labels. Some people's feeling is rigid and unchanging other people may not always feel the same way.
  • Sexual preference is fundamentally no more rigid than say, food preference. 

Both sexual preference and to a lesser extent gender identity is highly affected by societal norms.

Let's use food preference as a proxy for sexual preference. Raise a kid in a vegan society, believing eating meat is evil and gory. Some will always hanker for a bit of sausage or a fish taco, whereas some can't countenance it. I have seen dogs that refuse to eat meat and normally seed-eating birds that like flesh. Some people have very specific preferences, others are less discriminating. Some people change their preferences, others are pretty fixed.

Let's use national identity as a proxy for gender identity. Let's say someone was half Italian and half Native American. Raise them in one society and they will feel a closer affinity for that side of themselves. Raised in both societies, they may feel they are both. What if they are 99% Italian and one distant ancestor was Cherokee? Again it depends; the likelihood is they would feel more European, but not all will feel that way.

To sum up, I believe gender identity and sexual preference are up to the individuals to decide. Nobody else has the right to change them. Yes, technically you CAN brainwash somebody into changing a preference or self-image, but it's stupid, pointless and harmful to even attempt it.

HOWEVER: Bear in mind that sex is a societally divisive topic and expression of some sexual urges can impact others. Light legislation is needed to protect privacy and boundaries (particularly orifices). The lighter the legislation and the better and the quicker we can change to an accepting society the better.

I suspect TG and gay people wouldn't make so many in your face 'liberal' legislative change demands for protection and rights if we would all just naturally acknowledge and treat them as the normal people they are, because they wouldn't be under threat, they would all have equal protection and nobody would have to give a sh*t either way.

I know I am going to p*ss off both Team Gerry and Team 5Cats with my rant, but I have many friends on both sides of the debate and it's as meaningless as a soccer riot.
3
Reply
Male 6,064
Draculya Agreed: XY = Male, XX = Female. Those are the genders. They are genetically determined. With regard to physical genders, there are, of course the rare hermaphrodites, too. 
Gender as a "social construct" is gender identity, not necessarily actual gender regardless of how that person feels about it. As an analogy, consider someone who is 5 feet tall, weighs 300 pounds, and feels that they are normal weight. The fact that they feel their weight is normal doesn't actually make it normal. I have no problem with them feeling that way, except for the recognition that it's not generally healthy, just as I have no problem with Bruce Jenner deciding he's female and changing to Caitlyn, but that still doesn't make it actually physically so. That's "identity", not reality but they do/should have the right to that, too.
0
Reply
Male 3,223
Draculya "I suspect TG and gay people wouldn't make so many in your face 'liberal' legislative change demands for protection and rights if we would all just naturally acknowledge and treat them as the normal people they are, because they wouldn't be under threat, they would all have equal protection and nobody would have to give a sh*t either way."

That is it in a nut shell, however there is one aspect from the "conservative" side of this debate that you missed..."The Bible Says" defense.  Unfortunately we have to pass law after law reminding everyone in this country that we are all free to choose our own paths, and religion is just another choice in life, just like sexuality.  Your "Bible" doesn't override my "Bible".
0
Reply
Male 7,802
kalron27 #STALLSFORALL
0
Reply
Male 15,186
kalron27 I didn't mention religion because religion is just an unfounded third party opinion and therefore invalid. Furthermore, most people pick and choose what bits of religion to believe and what rules to follow.
0
Reply
Male 3,223
Draculya I wish I didn't have to mention it, but it is the main reason legislation is brought forth unfortunately :(
0
Reply
Male 327
kalron27 Except most of those Bible thumpers are cool with gay marriage if you call it a civil union. Just don't force churches to participate. I'm on the fence about bakeries, but that lawsuit in the news was ridiculous.

And the bathroom laws are just common sense for the times. There is no oppression. These should be fought by private businesses using single stall bathrooms or declaring communal bathrooms for all sexes. Things will change with time.
1
Reply
Male 15,186
johncourage bathrooms should be unisex.

There should be a separate area for urinals but if you can use a urinal you are welcome to stand next to me and I don't care if you have to lift your skirt or kilt to do so.

Anyone using a toilet stall has a reasonable expectation of privacy and safety within that stall. I don't care if that person has a dick or a vagina, gay or straight, dresses as a man or a woman. Stay out of my stall and we are cool.

Changing rooms are tricky. Personally I don't care about getting naked in front of someone who is gay or a woman, but not everyone feels that way. Ideally they should be individual. Communally, divide it in terms of common genitalia. Physically intersex people should be able to choose.
0
Reply
Male 40,326
Draculya Women fought for YEARS to get separate restrooms, you'd throw that away for the 0.001% so they can... WTF do they need a 3rd restroom for anyhow? If you are dressed as a man? Use the men's room, and vice-versa.

You forgot public showers, like locker rooms or pools. Men walking freely in and out, loitering, in the presence of children, not one thing on Earth can stop them. That's what was being demanded, and in some places legislated.

Not an exaggeration or "maybe" it has happened already and would be nation-wide if these idiotic laws were passed.

A judge in WA ruled a biological male had a right to sit naked in the women's pool shower area for almost an hour (before the cops hauled him away) a RIGHT TO because he claimed he was a female inside. Dismissed the charges.

Many other examples of this being abused already, been here on IAB and are easy to search for. 

THAT is why we conservatives oppose this sort of thing: these laws ALWAYS cause more harm than any possible good.
-1
Reply
Male 15,186
johncourage I was married in an protestant church. I don't believe in gods. My wife believes in both Catholicism and Buddhist and Taoist gods. The protestant church was the only one that would accept us because I had confirmation documentation from childhood and my wife had no church documentation. It was a complete mockery of both religion and atheism. That said, our marriage lasted.

I think the law should not differentiate between a civil union, common law/ de facto union, and marriage. I think religious institutions should be allowed to refuse to perform rites that are inconsistent with their rules. I think people seeking religious confirmation of their union should be free to find one that accepts them and call it what they want.

America (among other countries) is currently in a constant state of religious and legal conflict between people who are willing to f*ck other people up to gain basic human rights and their opposition who are willing to f*ck other people up to impose their culture on people who don't want it.

It is stupid.
1
Reply
Male 3,223
johncourage " Except most of those Bible thumpers are cool with gay marriage if you call it a civil union. " that right there invalidates your point.  "If you call it"...something else...something "different"; now you have vacated the concept of equality by creating differences.

And no, most "Bible Thumpers" are not cool with anything other than by the book straight sexuality, that is the falsity of following a religion.  While I will agree there are some who actually live by the example of live and let live...there far more out there that use their "belief" as an excuse to just be a plain old bigot yet claim sanctity over others.  
0
Reply
Male 40,326
Remember people! Your sexual orientation is fixed before birth; you cannot alter it! (They tell us)
But your gender? The maleness or femaleness of you? That's 'fluid' and can change hourly! With or without reconstructive surgery... liberal science!
-3
Reply
Male 6,064
5cats Yeah...I agree that no, that's not gender, it's gender identity.
0
Reply
Male 40,326
Here is a clip with transcript from Bill's finale episode:
http://freebeacon.com/culture/bill-nye-suggests-government-should-punish-parents-who-have-too-many-children/

He is seriously discussing penalizing people for having 'too many' children. The panelist does most of it, but Bill is in (apparently) full agreement. Deplorable.

AND they get their 'facts' wrong to boot! It's not "0.1" it's 0.77 tonnes per capita. Again, bad science, fake numbers and idiotic conclusions = Bill Nye.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2009/sep/02/carbon-emissions-per-person-capita
-3
Reply
Male 7,802
What a chowda head. The problem is people can't tell the irony of someone calling random fallacies while  he's guilty of the same thing performing them.  Oh well, keep on living in your bubble
5
Reply
Male 39,572
3
Reply
Male 20,827
Who is Steven Crowder? I can appreciate the spirit of his rebuttal, but I could only get through three-quarters of this clip. If he wants anyone to take him seriously, he's going to have to choose between being YouTubing Rush Limbaugh 2.0 and a serious broadcaster with a little structure put into his delivery -- he was all over the place and it began to feel a little like a conservative Howard Stern Show. 

It's why Bill Nye isn't taken very seriously when it comes to hard science -- he'll make some good points, then go into his dog and pony show with a silly song and dance about sexuality. I did like the ice cream cartoon -- it was a dumbed-down look at sexual identity -- dumbed down so everyone could understand it. If he did the same video, but with scientists, scientific terminology, and turned it into an a traditional educational video, no one would watch. Like it or not, we live in a time where people with Gender Dysphoria or Gender Identity Disorder is a thing -- you can either fight it or go with it. 
3
Reply
Male 40,326
fancylad Steve is a funny guy, he makes tons of very funny videos and does this radio/podcast thing too. This is an exert from one.

Funny, certain IAB Members of the 'liberal persuasion' take every word Bill says as Gospel! Undeniable facts because Bill Nye is NEVER WRONG about anything! He's a scientist after all! :-/ 

Bill's show is filled with lies, falsehoods and purely emotional drivel, pushed out as if it were science! That's deplorable, eh? The guy's been a joke for decades now.
-2
Reply
Male 3,114
5cats greg gutfeld and tom shillue are super funny too right?


2
Reply
Male 5,773
Who He?
2
Reply
Male 39,572
What a maroon.
What exactly is he complaining about? He wasn't discrediting what bill actually said, just the presentation.

It's called MOCKERY. Bill was making fun of the preachers and southern republicans.
2
Reply
Male 40,326
Gerry1of1 Bill was passing off junk as 'science' just like all the other junk he passes off. THAT is what Steve is pointing out. And Bill actually believes people who disagree with AGW should be sent to prison, no ifs ands or butts about it. Compare that to 'mocking preachers and southern Republicans'? It's hard to imagine Bill mocking what he himself is far worse than!!

It is self-discrediting, Bill's pushing a pack of emotions and pretending it is backed up by hard science. It simply is not, it's PC crap.
-8
Reply
Male 39,572
5cats  Bill mocked sexuality conversion. Is sexuality conversion a science in your view?   ..... get some glasses.
1
Reply
Male 40,326
Gerry1of1 Noooo that's a 100% completely different subject. HE's putting up scarecrows and strawmen, that isn't 'science' in the slightest.

There's actual counselling for (usually) men raped as children who grew up thinking this 'made them gay' and thus were incredibly unhappy while leading the gay lifestyle, that is valid science. It isn't even intended to 'convert' anyone, but if you aren't gay? Maybe living as a hetero would work better for you, eh?

Then there's 'religious' conversion therapy that is absolute garbage. Not science either.
-3
Reply
Male 3,223
Gerry1of1 ^this
0
Reply
Male 20,827
Gerry1of1 He wasn't discrediting what bill actually said, just the presentation.

Once again, Gerry1of1 boils down everything I blathered on in my comment down to one sentence. I really need some sleep.
1
Reply