Kevin Hernandez

North Hollywood, CA, United States

About Kevin

Edit profile

Languages

English, Spanish

An idea worth spreading

There are many ideas worth spreading from global warming, providing aid to impoverished people of the world through voluntary programs and government agencies, finding new and ecumenical ways for the vast and diverse religions to cooperate in an ever-expanding globalized world, systematically reducing violence on a large scale, encompassing compassionate and reasonable politics, and having all nations cooperate in international relations. In a sense I believe in any idea that renders upon the possibility of a world of equity, compassion, reason and moral rigidity.

Talk to me about

Anything that amounts to a fairly interesting topic. (Politics, Literature, Science, Comedies, Humanities, etc...)

Favorite talks

Comments & conversations

Noface
Kevin Hernandez
Posted over 2 years ago
What's your TED habit?
Whenever I have an opportunity =D Every day there is something new that we can indulge in order to learn something new. I should make it a habit to watch a TED talk every day.
Noface
Kevin Hernandez
Posted over 2 years ago
How, if any at all! can we minimize the conflicts of religion and atheism.
Bianca, I believe you said earlier that science can be classified as either true science or made up science. Evidently that's false. Seeing as to how once a theory or hypothesis is formulated there has to be consensus among scientists concerning a specific subject. Ask yourself what would be the point for them making stuff up? More in depth perhaps the problem is syntax. What science? It is the study of the physical or natural world using observation and experiment; hence scientific method. The creation story when scrutinized through this method is obviously false. I honestly think Gabo tried his best in informing us about the whole salt cycle in relation to the Earth's oceans (something I do not know the likes of). More to the point he shows how rigorous science can be. But let's say hypothetically he is wrong? What gives you the authority to be right? Unless of course your an expert in the field than perhaps it would be wise to be leave this entire discussion to the scientific community that dwell on these questions. Consensus that has been reached among different scientific inquiries are laid bare when in observance of the real world. The computer every Tedster uses to comment on, I would say, polemic subjects is the product of the scientific method. The same can be said just about everything, whether that be our car we use to commute to work everyday or our smartphones. How else have we advanced as a species? Even if a few scientists did make up facts for whatever reasons (even though that would lay bare the stupidity of why they would) they would be scrutinized by the entire scientific community. The back and forth between you and Gabo is a demonstration of why I began the conversation in the first place. I see countless examples of people who honor their religion, and I don't blame them, but when faced with true empirical evidence of inconsistencies in their belief system they just ignore it and try to find solace. And atheist's render them ignorant.
Noface
Kevin Hernandez
Posted over 2 years ago
How, if any at all! can we minimize the conflicts of religion and atheism.
"the truth is not midway between two falsehoods" Ah but then that would be to assume that atheism and religion are false. Atheist's and devout believers don't feel that way. Religion goes deep with people no matter if God could be rendered untrue or not. " Learning to let go of fear, look past one's one ego and self-righteousness and recognizing the potential value of each human being would allow them to find some understanding and appreciation of each others beliefs" I agree with this nonetheless!
Noface
Kevin Hernandez
Posted over 2 years ago
How, if any at all! can we minimize the conflicts of religion and atheism.
I believe I see the point that Bianca is getting to. Amid all this information-technologies that are at our grasp whether it be Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, BBC, etc etc etc.., it makes it harder and harder to assort all these different sets of information about pretty much anything. What do we believe and what don't we believe? Global warming and evolution are concepts that are backed up by scientific evidence. I believe it because I see/read the facts and evidence. There are a good amount of people who say they don't believe it, but haven't even bothered to research it or ask people with better knowledge concerning the matter. That's why we have experts of various subjects who clearly are better educated than the common man about these subjects. Which brings me back to Bianca's point: there is definitely a lot of "science" that could be debunked, but for that it has a name: pseudo science. There are countless examples of it in the media. My creative writing teacher is making us watch a documentary titled "Kymatica" which is based on "actual" research and yet is full of inconsistencies and redundancies. Pretty interesting though I guess. But the fact of the matter is that if you are willing to question the so called experts then one must actually do the research himself/herself about a given matter before questioning whatever your questioning. Bianca I would love to hear some "scientific theories" that are false and yet don't fall under the realm of pseudoscience. =)