By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor
(CNN)–Famed TV scientist Bill Nye is slamming creationism in a new online video for Big Think titled "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children."
"Denial of evolution is unique to the United States," Nye begins in a YouTube video posted on Thursday. The video quickly picked up steam over the weekend and as of Monday morning had been viewed more than 1,100,000 times.
Nye – a mechanical engineer and television personality best known for his program, "Bill Nye the Science Guy" – said the United States has great capital in scientific knowledge and "when you have a portion of the population that doesn't believe in it, it holds everyone back."
"Your world becomes fantastically complicated if you don't believe in evolution," Nye said in the Web video.
Creationists are a vast and varied group in the United States. Most creationists believe in the account of the origins of the world as told in the Book of Genesis, the first book of the Bible.
CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories
In the creation account, God creates Adam and Eve, the world, and everything in it in six days.
For Christians who read the Genesis account literally, or authoritatively as they would say, the six days in the account are literal 24-hour periods and leave no room for evolution. Young Earth creationists use this construct and biblical genealogies to determine the age of the Earth, and typically come up with 6,000 to 10,000 years.
Your Take: 5 reactions to Bill Nye's creationism critique
The Gallup Poll has been tracking Americans' views on creation and evolution for the past 30 years. In June it released its latest findings, which showed 46% of Americans believed in creationism, 32% believed in evolution guided by God, and 15% believed in atheistic evolution.
During the 30 years Gallup has conducted the survey, creationism has remained far and away the most popular answer, with 40% to 47% of Americans surveyed saying they believed that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years.
Survey: Nearly half of Americans subscribe to creationist view of human origins
"The idea of deep time of billions of years explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your worldview becomes crazy, untenable, itself inconsistent," Nye said in the video.
"I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, that's completely inconsistent with the world we observe, that's fine. But don't make your kids do it. Because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need engineers that can build stuff and solve problems," he said.
Creationists' beliefs about the origins of the Earth are often a narrow focus, based in large part on religious beliefs, and while they reject evolution as "just one theory," they often embrace other fields of science and technology.
Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter
In "The Genesis Flood," the 1961 book that in many ways help launch the Young Earth creationism movement in the United States, the authors write: “Our conclusions must unavoidably be colored by our Biblical presuppositions, and this we plainly acknowledge." Their goal for the book was to harmonize the scientific evidence with the accounts in Genesis of creation and the flood.
The idea of creationism has been scorned by the mainstream scientific community since shortly after Darwin introduced "The Origin of Species" in 1859. By 1880, The American Naturalists, a science journal, reported nearly every major university in America was teaching evolution.
"In another couple centuries I'm sure that worldview won't even exist. There's no evidence for it. So..." Nye ends his video.
I beleive the world was created six minutes ago.
With all the history and memory in place.
Prove that it wasn't!
Mr. Nye is a public spokesperson, a character, parading around as "the scientist." He is well read, educated, and interested in science as subject, but his profession is as a actor demonstrating elementary scientific principles. His job is in performance and pedegogy, not in science or sociology.
He is not a sociologist, qualified to talk about sociatal progress or delay due to philosophical ideology.
He is not a scientist in a lab creating new discoveries to advance the world.
His views are evolution are not based on his research, but upon his readings and are no more valid that anyone else as well educated, read, and intellegent as he is (which is not an insignifigant portion of the population).
Secular evolution is a minority position and has been in the United States for her entire history. This was true during every discovery or advance this country has made. So, how can a sociatal belief suddenly put society at risk? He is claiming a different future outcome than all historical evidence has provided. History has shown innovation from the US, the US's position isn't changing (rapidly), therefore that innovation will stop?
Mr. Nye is putting far too much inportance on one theory. Rejecting evolution has no bearing on physics, astronomy, chemistry, medicine, or a host of other disciplines. Even biologist can get along fine without it, so long as they stick to description (which is the science part of biology) rather than speculate on development (the not-science part).
Why would he care so much about evolution? He doesn't. Science doesn't. Science does not want people to believe in evolution, per se, science wants people to believe in SCIENCE as the ultimate authority in life. Evolution just represent mankinds most common deviation from total acceptance of SCIENCE.
Science does not like being questioned, and hasn't ever since Copernicus questioned the center of universe and carrying right on through anthrocentric global climate change (those "flat Earth" people were scientist).
Science, however, has always resisted the very changes that represent the best of science.
Therefore, whatever the people believe in, so long as it is NOT the science establishment, leads people to question and challenge science to come up with better data, better arguements, or new theories – all of which is the best of science. So, feel free to teach your children to question the establishment, to believe in their ideals, and to challenge those who claim to hold absolute truth (be that religious or scientist). The dissention leads to the strength of this nation in faith, science, and life.
That is the most moronic thing I have ever heard. STFU and go back to listening to Lush Rimbutt.
Your argument is that we should question science but never argues we should question religion. That's sad.
Someone had a mean science teacher in school, and is holding a grudge...
Nope. He's actually a scientist. And thank you for proving his point.
AMEN when scientist have proof of evolution then they can Preach but all they have is theory. They cannot satisfactorily explain how nothing turns into something. They tell us that energy cannot be killed, it is an ongoing fact. The human mind gives off energy sooo that means you do not expire – where does it go. Let them explain that.
Alene. Wow. Where to start? A "theory" (they teach you this in something called a "college") is an established, universally excepted proof. Saying that, evolution is ONLY being debated by religious apologists who won't believe that biological organisms change over successive generations but have no problem with a guy climbing out of a grave after three day and floating into the clouds. If you're a biologist, achaeologist, scientist, medical student, anthropologist, or anyone that is required to actually know and understand this stuff, evolution is NOT in question. It is a question ONLY for people like you.
Bill Nye could not be more corrent on every single thing he mentions on this topic.
The number of posters who refuse to acknowledge or outright deny the evidence is both shocking and depressing. The ones who try to "rationalize" their belief in creationism through incredibly spotty "logic" are even more disappointing because the ones that mindlessly believe the bible are undertandable in their distrust of science. Its the ones who attempt to think this thru and arrive at such a bad conclusion that really concern me. Either they don't understand logic, or they have not researched the facts for themselves (or a combination of both) because there is no way a sane person who is armed with the facts can deny evolution.
Notice how it's evolution vs creationism and not evolution vs creation. Everyone likes to throw the 'ism' on creation but not on evolution to sway you into believing one is faith based and the other is science-based. In fact, both world views can be tested scientifically but ultimately require presuppositions and faith.
You are right – both can be weighed against evidence and reason. One agrees with both, the other agrees with neither.
That's because Creation and Creationism are not the same things (see suffixes and their effect on word meanings) creation can be used for a number of things, from the creation of life in conception to the creation of a new highway. Evolution OTOH is far narrower and refers only to how things evolve and is most generally associated with the Darwin and the Atheist theory of Evolution. Whereas the narrower definition to those who believe in creation by god and god alone is Creationism.
Stop being hypersensitive and realize words are not immediately interchangeable the way you suggest.
THE BIBLE SAYS ONLY THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART THERE IS NO GOD.wait til all you people including scientists stand in front of GOD on judgment day.and realize there truly is a GOD!! WHAT FOOLS!!!
Yeah....ok. Clutch your pearls a little harder, there, kiddo.
A quite old and sometimes effective tactic – declaring that those who do not believe your story are 'fools'. Nobody wants to be considered 'dumb' for not seeing the Emperor's new clothes, or a 'bas.tard' for not seeing the Sultan's new turban, or a 'cuckold' for not being able to see the Miller's gold thumb.
Even Joseph Smith used it when he gathered his 'witnesses' to his golden plates. He told them that only those with 'true faith' would be able to 'see' them.
The ancient, primitive Hebrews who originated those Bible stories were quite adept at manipulative mind-games.
SCOTTA: "wait til all you people including scientists stand in front of GOD on judgment day.and realize there truly is a GOD!"
This is another tired repeti.tion of Pascal's Wager - thoroughly refuted since the 17th century.
- What if the real "God" is Allah, or Vishnu, or Zeus, or Quetzalcoatl, or any of the other of thousands which have been dreamed up over the centuries? Some of them are very jealous and vengeful and will relegate you to nasty places for not worshiping them. You'd better cover your butt by believing in ALL of them and fulfill their wishes and demands.
- What if the real "God" prefers those who use logic and reason and punishes you as a silly sycophant?
- What if the real "God" detests those who believe something just to cover their butts in eternity?
So what you're saying is on judgment day RUN YOU FOOLS?!
Is that you Gandalf?
He won't care, he will be too busy laughing at you.
As per National Geographic’s Genographic project:
" DNA studies suggest that all humans today descend from a group of African ancestors who about 60,000 years ago began a remarkable journey. Follow the journey from them to you as written in your genes”.
"Adam" is the common male ancestor of every living man. He lived in Africa some 60,000 years ago, which means that all humans lived in Africa at least at that time.
Unlike his Biblical namesake, this Adam was not the only man alive in his era. Rather, he is unique because his descendents are the only ones to survive.
It is important to note that Adam does not literally represent the first human. He is the coalescence point of all the genetic diversity."
For 99$ and a DNA swab, you too can get some information on your tree of evolution.
Yes, but plz explain how the genetic EVE is about 110,000 years ago and the genetic Adam is only 60,000. Basic evolutionary biology would mean that superior genes win out and eventually the stronger set would overwhelm the inferior set. It doesn't mean that two people were hanging out in a "paradisaical garden" for an unknown amount of time. I for one am torn. I probably fall somewhere between evolution to intelligent design. I will teach my children to look at everything and come to their own conclusions.
For one to suggest one world view to children, and exclude another shows fear, that the proposed view cannot hold much ground to the other.
Though, evolution has strong points, all and any experiments conducted to prove or give merit to evolution have miserably failed, and thus, even if any were to be successful, it would still be intelligent design, as someone had to make the conditions suitable to "replicate" a proposed condition. It still involves some sort of control and intelligent intervention.
Regardless of which condition the earth would have been, life cannot induce itself, from non living matter. That is an observed fact of science.
Secondly, to propose that the children of our future, only learning religious doctrine would not further assist the development of humanity, is a foolish and ridiculously stupid remark. We, existing today, and reflecting the advancements of our species, clearly show that religious beliefs have not imposed on society in any manner. Our ancestors have brought us here today, and we know for certain, that only today, the view of religious doctrine is diminishing in contrast to the view of any and all of our ancestors.
What a way to disrespect a large group of people in a politically correct manner.
To assume that technology and humanity have advanced due to lack of religious beliefs is a non scientific statement, rather, a statement guided by prejudice and fear of development of other world beliefs that are not equal to or oppose evolution.
So, to further hail the failures in evolution – long live science. Thank you for proving that a theory, such as evolution, requires faith, as equally as believing in a deity of any kind.
Now, if the question of the proposed deities comes abroad, as in, "Which God?" One would have to take the time to research on his/her own to come up with a valid analysis and conclusion.
But please note, for the sake of God (Yahweh), absence of evidence (of which you decide is evidence) is not equal to absence.
For a relationship of any kind to occur, both parties must agree and believe that they exist. This has been the most ignored and forgotten scientific fact when it comes to the argument for intelligent design.
Evolution is truly a blind faith.
Whatever. I'm amazed at the effort that the uneducated go to explain why evolution didn't happen and why the Earth is only 6,000-10,000 years old, despite the obvious reality that the Earth is somewhere in the range of 4.5 BILLION years old, and the universe is in the range of 14 BILLION years old. Bill Nye is correct; to ignore those realities makes it necessary to ignore a lof of other scientific realities about the planet and our existence on it, including the reality of climate change and other related sciences. To understand anything about the planet and reality, one has to understand the concept of deep time.
Further, just because one accepts reality – and the science behind it – does not mean that one knows all the answers (no one knows all the answers, and they certainly aren't in the bible) or that one necessarily denies the existence of God. One can accept God AND science.
But to pretend that the story in Genesis is literally true is idiotic and flies in the face of all reality.
quite to the contrary, evolution has been proven time and time again in the lab. What you are referring to is creation of life, which has several possibles done in labs as well...but in reality we were not there so we do not know. However, getting back to evolution.... Fruit flies are studied to determine things becuase of the short life span, mutations can be tracked more easily then in longer living animals. We use evolution theories in microbe research, in genetic plant research, in livestock research...well just about every field that deals with life deals and uses EVOLUTION. It is a proven fact of life, i know you religious types like to take that word theory for all its worth...well tell you what, start talking the same way about the THEORY of GRAVITY and see how far you get. All theory means is that the exact mechanics are not known yet, not that said actions do not take place.
They should cal you reverend blue jeans. Hack would be better though.
Nothing wrong with either view, unless one tries to rid the other. I think thats the message here.
Another thing Baldrich should have pointed out is that Genesis does not specify that a "day" was 24 hours.
Science and religion doesn't have to conflict.
The real issue is and always has been one trying to remove the other out of the system.
I must say, creationism is usually taught MAYBE MAYBE once a week, as where all sorts of sciences are five days a week.
To help mr Rev there, he is right about evolution... though it may have been observed... it doesn't warrant that this is the case for us humans. Mutation is not evolution. Its an anomaly.
Lets say though that Mr Nye's argument switched poles and he encouraged parents to teach religion and not evolution... would any one support his argument?
I think bill should stick to kids shows.
Every "creationist" should be forced to sit through Lewis Black's highly amusing take on the subject wherein he advises his audience that, if you want to know about what the Bible says, because the Bible is our book (Jews), then ask a Jew. They walk among you.
The Jews wrote that stuff and THEY don't take it literally, so how can anyone else take it seriously? Do creationists also believe in the Tooth Fairy and Peter Cottontail? A fairy tale is a fairy tale is a fairy tale.
Sounds good, Howard, a children's televison host, and a comedian.
What does Lady Ga-Ga have to say about this issue?
Rob, that Nye is a children's television host doesn't diminish his engineering or science credentials. And since Lewis Black is a Jew, he is automatically more of an authority than most of the so-called creationists who've never even opened that "Yiddish Book of Fairy Tales" they take so literally.
"Bill nye slams creationisim."
In other news, Pee-Wee Herman stands up for bycycles, Mr. Rodgers calls for greater Trolley service in the US, and the dude from Blue's Clues asks us all to spport the SPCA.
Bill Nye is a children's television host. He has as much credibility as "Oscar the Grouch".
Unfortunately, Mr. Rodgers is dead.
Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, & Nicholas Copernicus to name a few are scientists who believed in a creator. I suppose the people on this comment section are more educated than these men.
Noel, believing that some super intelligence created this Universe we live in doesn't automatically mean that one also has to believe the Bible's morality tales as if they were the literal truth. They were the attempts of some Bronze Age Hebrew tribal leaders to explain an often bizarre and confusing world to their people in an effort to steer them into some form of social order.
at least 3 of those gentlemen was required by their governments with public;y professing in god. I do not take that as an actual acceptance.
This just shows how little you know about these men and the problems each had with so-called biblical "truths".
Hello, Noel. Is there anybody in there? Anyone that took a high school course in Physics is more educated than Isaac Newton, Galileo, and Copernicus. Newton died in 1737. Galileo in 1642. Copernicus in 1543!!! All but Einstein died at least 100 years before Darwin published the theory of evolution in 1859. By today's standards, Galileo, credited with essentially inventing science by measuring the speed of falling objects, was incredibly ignorant. He knew nothing of engines, atoms, forces, gravity, that water is a compound and not an element, that fire is not an element at all. People were dumb as hell back then, from an education standpoint. Copernicus was another 100 years more ignorant. He was fighting against the Noels of his time that thought, based on the bible, that the sun orbited the earth. Einstein, the only scientist you listed born late enough to have heard of evolution certainly did not believe that the earth was created in six days.
I can't argue with someone that believes that God exists, because there is no evidence for or against there being a God (or an all knowing rocking chair). But if you believe that it makes sense to side with religion when it conflicts with science you definitely don't know anything about the lives or beliefs of Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein.
And this is why Rick Santorum openly advocates against educating your children. Republicans like their followers uneducated and easily influenced. There's no room in a "Christian nation" for people who think for themselves.
Do you mean think for themselves, such as the aborting of 50 million babies, using abortion as a form of birth control? Or maybe the thinking of two men together as the same as a woman and man in marriage? That kind of thinking?
WORD = GOP Association
Old People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Sick People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Poor People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Female People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Non-white People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Non-christian People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Unemployed People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Gay People = Glob of cells that we don't care about. Let them die.
Glob of cells in a womb = Something we PRETEND to care about just to get votes.
Gun Contro = Something ELSE we PRETEND to care about just to get dumb redneck votes.
Rick Santorum is proof that human evolution terminates in the authoritarians of his ilk, and then commences devolving back the to the single-cell life from which all life got started. However there is still hope for the progressive side of humanity to continue evolving into saner beings.
Well Mr. Smarty-Pants Mechanical Engineer, I'm a Creationist who thinks that some form of evolution was the method by which life came to be on this planet. Time is viewed as an elastic thing in th Bible, especially where the Almighty is concerned and if there is one takeaway to the methods of God, it is that human dogma is the single best way to learn first hand about the Divine sense of humor!
I don't think he has an argument with you. He's against "Young Earth" Creationism. He's against the people who take every word in the Bible completely literally and don't think the Universe existed before Adam was created as a fully-formed human being 6000 years ago.
If your creator used the mechanism of evolution to 'create' us, then there is no argument. It becomes philosophical or theological. The argument is against the creationist that cannot accept evidence of evolution, however it occurred.
Evolution is what the brain-dead among us call God.
Angry much, Emolio?
@ Rob The phrase "...whatever we evolved from" leaves a bit of doubt as to the theory of evolution. If you believe in evolution wihout knowing what we evolved from, thats not really a decision based on conclusive scientific evidence. Its a bit thin, don't you think ? So all the banter becomes moot until the next link in the evolution chain is found. Or some other evidence is found. Making the link betwen modern day man and the neanderthals and species of that time is getting more and more dificult for scientists. Read todays Phila. Inquirer, Section C, page 1. See if that don't make you go Hmmmmm......
On the first day, man created god.
I am still amazed that people believe in creationism and strict interpertation of the Bible. If so, let's recap this – there was Adam and Eve who had two sons, Cain and Abel....so how did they procreate? The entire human race is based on incest?
Looks like you have not read the bible a lot. Adam had other children.
They had sons and daughters......
@samson And so...?
so if they had daughters as well, can you answer the incest question?
Sam, read the scripture.
I believe God created the heavens and the earth. I also believe He sent His Son, Jesus Christ to die on the cross for our sins, so that we might be saved. I disagree with Bill Nye the Science Guy. I have no trouble reconciling the things I see (empirical evidence) everyday in our world, with the Bible teachings of creation, the fall, sin, the life, death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the sin nature of man, et. I don't think the Biblical views of man kind, the earth, the stars, et. are inconsistent with what we see and witness.
You may believe that but your beliefs are wrong
Very amusing indeed. How brainwashed are you to believe in such twoddle?
Who created GOD???
apparently you have not really put much thought into it.
Thank you for explaining your beliefs. All I would ask is what evidence do you base this belief on?
Well I really hope, for not only your sake but for all of humanities sake, that you are wrong about your religion. Christianity is the most immoral, illogical, divisve, and just plain evil doctrine i've seen.
I don't wish to be rude, but clearly you haven't looked very closely.
Really? An entire religion based on:
1) Being held accountable for the bad that the first humans did (original sin)
2) Some laws with no practical use that are punishable by death nonetheless (gays need to be put to death)
3) Attempting to scare people into agreeing with you with the threat of eternal torture for finite "crimes, or eternal reward for obedience based on fear of the alternative.
4) Blood sacrifice needed to atone for not agreeing with the bid sky daddy. (Might makes right)
5) Substituted sacrifice in payment for anothers "crime".
Must I really go on?
Ya a guy with a magic wand created the universe and everything in it...do you realize how dumb that sounds??? And "a day to god could be millions of years for us?" ya good calculates time differently...these fairy tales make no sense. If god existed, good people wouldn't die every day in unfortunate accidents, terrible diseases, excruciatingly painful ways etc.
Also, though remember sin entered the world through disobedience, bringing with it death, et. . Read the Book of John in the new testament of the Bible. If you can get a Scofield Study Bible.
You mean read the Bible? A.k.a – "How NOT To Be A Republican"!
jerry – the pure hubris of man to believe that the entire universe has been sullied by a single human action
As long as Christians keep brainwashing their kids, there are going to be creationists.
I will pray for our eyes to be opened and for your heart to be softened.
Jerry, why do you need to pray if God is all knowing?
What is Nye trying to even accomplish here? Does he think that those watching it and holding to a New Earth Creationism belief will suddenly "see the light" as a result of his YouTube video? Or does he think that they will say "You know what? Even though I don't believe evolution is true, I'll teach my kids to believe in evolution, because Bill says so!" Neither one will happen, Bill. If you're honest, the point of your video is simply to call people stupid for believing something that you don't, and that has VERY little affect on the advancement of scientific discovery in this country. It's not an informative video, it's a ridicule stunt.
Saying nothing accomplishes nothing. There are always those parents on the fence, questioning their beliefs, but unsure of how to instruct their kids. Making people aware that the reasoned truth is an alternative to mysticism and darkness can benefit us all if even a few of those parents take the path of reason.
Yes, it is very scientific to believe that matter created itself, that everything we see came from nothing. For evolution, time is god. Give it enough time and the prehistoric soup, which mysteriously appeared, will turn itself into something which will then evolve into something more complicated. It takes tons more faith to believe in evolution than in God. Someone compared it to taking all the parts of a 747, throwing them up in the air, and thnking that in time they will eventually all fall in place and form an airplane. The odds of this, or for that matter, evolution, happening on its own, without any master designer, is so out there that even 100 trillion years would not get it close to any thing we see today. And that comparison implies you have all the parts already made, which is not the case for evolution. Evolutionists simply cannot answer the question of where all those original "building materials" came from. And if you actually believe that absolute nothingness: no time, no space, no water, no matter, no air, etc., can somehow appear on its own, and in time form all we see today, you sure have more faith than I do.
doesn't take faith to believe in evolution it takes intelligence. Fact is that there is proof behind evolution but still no proof a guy with magic powers created the earth or even exists.
Evolution is anything but random, so any anology that that compares it to random events is unsound. There are several books availably that explain how it works. Try reading one.
Acutally you are quite wrong on two fronts. First the odds that youset are not as high as you propose that they be. We know how to recreate a number of the complex components required to assemble a RNA molocule via naturally occuring processes that were very common on the early Earth. Plus you add in the sample space of trilliions of units intermingling for several hundred million years and slim odds are not so slim.
2nd an infinitely powerful God is not bound by time. Any theory is just an attempt to model mathamatically what we observe. Before I flip a coin I can state there is a 50% probability for heads or tails. But God already knows the result. Does it matter if we say God created the world and by the way wills all mass to be attracted to other mass verses modeling evolution and Newtonian mechanics?
Whether God created all or not is just a metaphysics question just as we do not comprehend the fact that us observing particles in an entangled state determines their resultant attributes. I would say that anyone who claimed they proved God mathamatically sans faith is far more arrogant then the most snobish aethiesist.
with enough time, pressure, and heat.. sand becomes glass. same can be said of Coal, with the right combination it becomes a diamond. While I respect what you say. Complex things do form from other materials which in no way resemble the base elements. Can humanity too be a result of this process? My only question in regards to evolution is where it all came from. Grasping the concept of space being infinite is hard to register. To assume a single source put everything here is also hard for me to wrap my mind around.
It takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in an invisible, all-powerful being who requires our humble obedience and for us to WORSHIP him/her/it? Riiiiight. How convenient. Belief in "God" is for people who are frightened of what will happen after they die, so a "creator" and an "afterlife" were invented to make them feel better. We are alive – who knows how it really started, but a chance explosion of particles creating a form of matter over billions of years is more feasible than the existence of a "supreme being." And after we are alive, we die – end of story. It's still scary, sure, but looking forward to meeting a being who doesn't exist makes about as much sense as.....throwing the parts of a 747 into the air and hoping they will fall in the formation of a plane.
there is no conflict between the Bible and scientific findings really...in the account of Genesis, the earth was there already "without form and void". now God being the creator of life would never have something in such a state...so obviously something cataclysmic had occurred to have the planet dark and empty..this accounts for the eons of time that are unaccounted in the Bible...the times of the dinosaurs and man never coincide..that is really big scam that so called science wants people to believe
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.