 |
|
|
|
August 27th, 2012
11:31 AM ET
Bill Nye slams creationismBy 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. soundoff (14,640 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 Next » |
  About this blog
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.  |
|
|
|
So, Bill Nye. What was the source for the Big Bang??? Hello? Dead silence.
The big bang does not equal evolution. Schmuck.
exactly!!
The same question can be asked about god? Where did god come from? Oh yeah, he is god. He's always been here... That doesn't make sense either.
The big difference between the big bang theory and creationism is that physicists acknowledge there is a loophole – called the singularity – and have been trying to explain it for almost a century. Show me a creationist who is actually seeking the truth?
Woah, I think you're eligible for the Nobel Prize with that amazing slice of logic.
Well, you could try looking it up, since you're sitting in front of a computer. Just an idea.
Clearly it was the devil.
Creationists don't claim there was a big bang. They claim the earth is 8000 years old. Who were the parents of Adam and Eve's children? Dead silence.
"We don't know yet" is a perfectly valid answer, and has more credibility than saying "God did it" when your only source is the Bible.
What is the source of god? (Dead Silence)
Using the logic that God has always been, why can't the universe have always been? More to the point, why can't God be the universe, or nature, if you will? There is zero evidence that points to a reactive, merciful god. In fact, quite the opposite is true. Every indication demonstrates that we are here by ourselves. Trillions of prayers went unanswered during World War 2 alone. Besides, you can't have freewill and an interactive god. Those two things contradict one another.
Marilyn Monroe and Joe DiMagio, but it didn't last.
In reply to Erik, you know exactly what he means 99% of people that believe in evolution believe in big-bang, this is not new news.
There are ideas, but no one quite knows, but ..... thats OK.
Science isnt about knowing everything at once, and the BigBang accurately accounts for what we can see and measure today. Does that make it some kind of absolute truth? No but ..... thats OK.
Science isnt about absolutes; if another theory comes along that does a better job accounting for what we can see and measure today, THAT theory would become the prevalent one.
Read up on M-theory, dimbulb.
Creationism and the narrow band of illegitimate science they try to hijack, are just fine for church, but not for education, not for a country striving to keep up.
"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."
Thank Jeebus for the myriad chemicals I use to maintain my self-induced fog of hedonisitic indifference! Without them, I would be absolutely terrified of my fellow countrymen (and perhaps vice versa). What I wouldn't do to be as happily ignorant as this 78%... only they don't seem quite as happy as they should be (wonder why that is)?
Because they need meds too...
SCIENCE IS SIMPLY DISCOVERING WHAT GOD HAS ALREADY CREATED!
EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL CONFESS THAT JESUS CHRIST LORD!
ARE YOU A LONG WAY AWAY?
No, I don't bow to your vicious, hateful jerk of a god.
Seriously brother, as a fellow follower or Christ, you are just being stupid and in need of rebuke. Spouting off generic scripture is not going to show people who Jesus is or win them to the Kingdom of God. Please go away unless you are going to be more sensitive to how those who are against Christ view faith.
This gave me a very theo-erotic visual.
@ Karen. I'm so sorry for whatever has happened in your life to feel that pain from religion. Please know that God is not a jerk and is note hateful of anything but sin. He loves you and cares for you no matter what and chased after to even to death on a cross. No one can argue anyone into faith in Christ, I can only hope you accept this and perhapes open your heart to accepting my apology and not holding it against the Beautiful God that desires you give you freedom and joy for eternity. I apologize again for the actions of the church but am overjoyed at even the thought that God loves you the same amount that he loves a flawed imperfect person like myself.
@ ENGINEER....NOT VERY CHRIST-LIKE "BROTHER" CALLING ANOTHER BELIEVER "STUPID" TALK ABOUT WINNING OVER SOMEONE FOR CHRIST.....WAY TO SHOW THE EXAMPLE!
@ENGINEER....BY THE WAY...KAREN RESPONDED TO MY COMMENT...I DIDN'T RESPOND TO HER. I MADE A SIMPLE TRUE STATEMENT TO ALL WHO ARE COMMENTING HERE!
@Believer
1) Caps doesn't make your statement any more likely to be true
2) Prove your assertion
3) Saying something is true doesn't make it so.
God hates Caps-Lock.
@HAWAII-GUEST
1. MY KEYBOARD IS BROKEN AND WILL ONLY TYPE IN CAPS.
2. ROMANS 14:11
3. PHILIPPIANS 2:11
Then stop typing it's considered screaming and rude.
Both of those speak of kneeling and/or tongues... oh my! I think I need to go visit another sight for awhile...
@believer
Why should I care what the bible says? Useless book that has been written and re-written over and over by men.
@ Believer. Please stope. Yes you are being stupid and you are continuing to show it. Biblical rebuke is tough love, a mature Christ follower would accept advice. And yes I realize Karen responded to you...? What's your point? I was apologizing for your arrogant statement. If you would like to discuss this more in private so we can settle this and talk about Biblical rebuke and how your words can better be used to show people Christs love please email me: bradlpetersen@gmail.com. Thanks
No thanks "Brother" I've had enough "Rebuke" for one day. That's if you calling someone stupid is considered rebuke/tough love!
Where did you ever find it written that name calling is tough love? Also, as believer of Christ, I would have never called God's holy scripture as "generic" as you did in your other post!
Have I just witnessed a miracle? Did God just fix @Believer's keyboard?
Sorry, I don't negotiate with terrorists.
@ Believer. Grow up and read Matthew 23. Jesus calls Pharisees hypocrites and "offspring of vipers".. if that isn't name calling I don't know what is, but guess what Jesus still loved them so ...drumroll please.. tough love! Stop trying to be all holier than thou and arrogant on an useless message board. The wise seek rebuke and correction, you are being foolish in your pride.
Besides you conviently ignored the rest of what I said and focused on the word "stupid" to base your entire argument off of and say that's all the rebuke I gave you, nice way to take things out of context. Typical immaturity in discussions.
Also, as a Christ follower I would have at least quoted the passage correctly and cited its origin. What you wrote is grammatically incorrect and doesn't even exist in the Bible. Maybe you meant Phillipians 2:10-11? Judging from your discussions on here though I shouldn't be suprised that you manipulated God's word and took things out of context to fit your needs. You should be ashamed. Again, you have my email if you want to talk about this instead of hiding behind your retreating arguments.
Carl Sagan, the atheist, once said "If we can get only one intelligent message from outer space we'll know there is intelligent life out there." Here’s the funny thing: when the archaeologist goes into a cave and sees some scratches on the wall, he determines an intelligent mind has been there. We have 600,000 pages of digital information in one strand of DNA and there are actually people who want to say there was no intelligent source to it?
Matter before mind? Honest science says that just isn't so. Even J. S. Mill, no friend to Christianity, said: “It is self-evident that only mind can create mind.”
Wow, 600,000 pages? 800 Megabytes is the correct number with a base 2 bit binary code (extremely simplistic) ... So what you're saying is that the creator of the universe which spans billions of light years across put all his infinite wisdom into creating beings with a genome code of only 800MB? That will fill up less then 1% of a modern hard drive. Our unique genome as compared to a banana can fit on a 1.2MB floppy disk. We're nothing special, we are the result of natual selection.
One strand of DNA has the equivalent of 600,000 pages of information. Not data; information – digital information.
The top atheist in the world – Oxford biology professor Richard Dawkins – says, “If you want to understand life think about digital technology.” Now listen to atheist biology professor Herbert Yockey on DNA technology: “It is important to understand that we are not reasoning by analogy. The sequence hypothesis applies directly to the protein and the genetic text as well as to written language and therefore the treatment is mathematically identical.”
Yockey says DNA is mathematically identical to a language. Question: when has a language ever arisen without an intelligent cause?
I have read with interest the passionate postings from both sides of the debate and the level on intolerance and arrogance is unfortunate. Science prides itself in the use of scientific methods to test hypotheses and anyone who wants to be scientific has to adhere to this. Christianity on the otherhand is about faith- which is the substance of things hope for, the conviction of things not seen. I don't think a Christian has to be asked to prove that his/her God exists- perhaps if that person claims to be Christian the proof is in their transformed life-God is love and if one claims to know Him the he/she must exhibit life. A scientist on other hand by his/her own standard is required to provide proof. As someone joked, "In God we trust, all others must show evidence". I used to worry myself with trying to prove to people the God of my faith but in the end God does not need anyone to "prove" Him and any attempt to use scientific methods to do so results in pseudoscience. You either beleive in Him or you don't. The same is with creation, Hebrews 11:3 resolves this delima for those of us fortunate to receive science education and yet have come to have faith in God. It says," By faith, we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so what is seen was not made out of what was visible". That is a statement of faith to be accepted or not. As a medical doctor, I treat my patients with the best evidence medicine has to offer and have no difficulty dealing with scientific evidence. I have also been humbled many times, when the outcomes or presentations defied logic- a reminder that we don't know it all. So lets tolerate each other and not impose our dogmatic views. Let talk science in the scientific language and discuss faith for what it is- faith.
I'm sure what you wrote is great. It is just too darn long to take the time to read it.
Science is the opposite of dogmatic. If you know the definition of the word that should be abundantly clear. I don't ask that people prove their god... until they start wars and genocide over it. You'd better have something more than faith on which to base motives for murder. Its called group think and can be incredibly dangerous. I also don't want to hear anyone telling me I should share their faith or my soul will burn in eternal h3llfire without some serious evidence. Of which there is none.
Science, on the other hand, is all about skepticism and questioning even widely accepted theories such as evolution. If strong evidence came along to disprove the theory the scientific community would not shut their ears to it. That is unlikely to happen. People pointing out "missing links" etc demonstrate just how feeble the evidence to the contrary of evolution really is.
"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed"
It is most humble for someone to say, they don't know. No one knows, they may believe, but no one truly knows what lies beyond. That is how I view the label agnostic, at least.
Ryan, a person can be an agnostic christian/deist, or an agnostic atheist. "Agnostic" means that you know that something can't be proven or disproven. I don't believe Santa Claus exists, but I am agnostic about his existence.
'Agnostic' is being hijacked by people who claim they have achieved the ultimate zen of clearing their mind and not having a single belief in the matter. Sorry, but I don't by it most of the time. Your belief may change rapidly, but it's extremely hard to think about a subject and not hold any belief about it.
Ryan, a person can be an agnostic christian/deist, or an agnostic atheist. "Agnostic" means that you know that something can't be proven or disproven. I don't believe Santa Claus exists, but I am agnostic about his existence.
'Agnostic' is being hijacked by people who claim they have achieved the ultimate zen of clearing their mind and not having a single belief in the matter. Sorry, but I don't by it most of the time. Your belief may change rapidly, but it's extremely hard to think about a subject and not hold any belief about it.
You aren't required to have proof to hold a belief. In fact, we CONSTANTLY form beliefs about things without proof.
Oops,sorry for the duplication. thought I added that before it posted...
Donna I don't disagree with some of what you say, but to be a true Christian, from what I was taught as a Catholic as a child, is to believe that Christ is the savior and died for our sins, to believe he was the son of God.
I admire his teachings of charity and caring about ones fellow man – however I don't believe he was the savior or son of God. I don't believe that Genesis happened (pretty well proven there) nor do I believe in the Bible as a historical telling of events. I see it as proverb based on a mans life, who in death became something more. I don't believe in the Torah as fact, I don't believe in what I know of Islam as fact. I believe that there are far better moral texts than any of the mono-theistic texts.
I don't believe in any of our religions on Earth. You are right, my beliefs do change, based on my experiences in the world I live in, but given what I have seen, the horrors of poverty around the world like in Africa or the Caribbean, or driving through Mumbai, there can be no single moral deity looking out for humans or he wouldn't allow such horror to occur as it has for centuries. Maybe we sprang from something, maybe we sprang from nothing, I am not as intelligent as a man like Sagan or even Nye, but I know that those telling me that Angels are looking out for me or that a hurricane will hit our nation because we are sinners, these people are delusional and a detriment to society and progressive thought for the betterment of the world we live in.
The more religious a nation, believing in things without question, the dumber it is.
I wonder If I walked up and punched Bill Nye's teeth down his rancid throat if he would not press charges if I claimed I could not help myself since survival of the fittest traits are hardcoaded through evolution in my DNA?
Right, then repent your sin and all will be forgiven........even murder.............LOL
He might say that natural selection has resulted in our ability to make choices and that having social laws against violence are positively selected for by natural selection. You seem to misinterpreting "survival of the fittest" to mean "survival of the most violent," and those aren't the same things.
numbnut, survival of the fittest is the phrase used by Herbert Spencer during the great depression as an expression of social darwinism. Darwin is evolution of the species, of which by your statement certainly have not.
Then again he might not say anything without any teeth in his mouth. And I would say I understand it just fine and since we evolved from animals by accident your laws don't over ride my animal instincts.
Joe, we didn't just evolve from animals, we ARE animals. And social living is as much as a part of our instincts (aka architecture of the brain) as violence is. BTW, love how you are making this argument on the product of intense human social interaction...doesn't throwing your laptop against the wall make your point without all of this messy complex communication?
And this violence is condoned by your God? I belive in God, but obviously not the one you worship. Bill Nye never said anything about God. I think I can believe in God without having a bunch of old, fat, white guys telling me what I have to accept as the truth. Evolution is real. God is real. Creationism is just one group's truth, not the whole truth.
now that's some real christian belief right there. "Believe what I believe or i'll murder you."
christian love at its best.....
Wow Joe, you really exemplify Jesus's teachings well. You must take the bible very seriously. Can you tell me where it says to punch people you don't agree with?
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? (1 Corinthians 1:20)
For the wisdom of the world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness. (1 Corinthians 3:19)
Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. (Mark 13:31)
God's account of how his creation started is objective truth and not subjective truth. If everyone in the world rejected the biblical account of creation, it would still be true anyway.
Unfortunately, for some people, PHD stands for "Post Hole Digger"
You do know that you can not perpetuate an entire species (such as humans) from one single male and female right? That is a scientific fact.
What you don't have evidence for can be rejected without evidence. You can claim it's objective truth, but if you can't demonstrate that it is, then good for you. I pat you on your head and say "there there, you can have your special beliefs if you want, just keep your nonsense to yourself."
Oh Brother
You could indeed, but there would be a lot of learning disabilities from what we know about genetics and breeding within the family.
It also would take a really long time to propagate that many people from simply Adam and Eve in only a few thousand years while eliminating the birth defects this would cause. More likely is that a species evolved and humans came from a previous species and continued its evolution.
Also, the ARC, there is no way, 2 of every known animal made it, first the boat would be enormous, animals would eat the others, the food needed to support so many creatures for so long would be simply astounding and near impossible with modern technology, let alone tech from over 2k years ago. This is another example of a fable, fairy tale, or proverb.
II suppose if you're going to disbelieve science, then the best thing to do is to attack and vilify the scientists. Like Nye says, it makes for a very complicated existence - much like "oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."
In this case it's self-deception - but that only makes the tangled web even worse, hmm? Lots o' luck in life, throwbacks!
But isn't Nye the one vilifying creationists? Pot meet Kettle
" In fact, we CONSTANTLY form beliefs about things without proof."
Yeah but its people who constantly form beliefs about things without EVIDENCE that worry me.
Understanding scientific principles does not require belief of any sort. Those who call science a cult are simply cultists trying to divert attention from their depraved concepts of education.
Ok – I changed my mind. THIS is the stupidest comment yet. Let's all believe in things that don't need to be believed in.
If this is what science has come to – you can have it.
Science is all well and good when it keeps your kids from getting polio, but when peer reviewed, well supported theories contradict your religious text, suddenly science is ridiculous.
If this is your religion, you can have it.
Stop acting like science is just for evolutionists and atheists.
"Peer Reviewed" is only as good as the "peers" reviewing it. In this case, preaching to the choir, and then pointing to the choir to make yourself feel good is clear insanity.
Issac Newton himself was deeply religious, I doubt this science guy knows more than him.
Ironically, some of the most famous scientist in history have been very concerned about god and religion and actually god and religion helped many very very famous scientists to look toward nature for answers about god.
Christianity is all well in good, when it provides you with hospitals, universities (to get all that good learing ;)) and moral law, but when it contradicts your need to feel like your naturalistic religion is threatened suddenly Christianity is ridiculous.
"Christianity is all well in good, when it provides you with hospitals, universities (to get all that good learing 😉 ) and moral law"
It also murdered almost all the Native Americans in this country, it burned people at the stake, it enslaved African Americans and treated women like trash. Oh...that's right you were trying to sugar coat your cult.
Evolution is a theory, not a fact. There are many facts. And there are many theories that fit all of those facts. Evolution ignores many facts. For example, there is a Missing Link. No amount of theory and speculation can change that fact. Evolutionists are unable also to replicate the evolutionary process in a lab. It isn't just a matter of time. Every attempt to prove evolution has failed because, when you try to prove it in a lab, the species never evolves. It either regresses or transforms in a non-evolutionary way. But again Evolutionists simply ignore this fact. Creationism may be wrong. I don't know. But Evolutionism may be wrong also. Again, I don't know. But a scientist is always willing to acknowledge that there may be other, better theories. A religious nut, however, will accept only his own theory as the One True Theory.
"Evolutionism" isn't a word.
You do know that evolution does not occur in a day right? Evolution occurs over many years, so please go back to school and study evolution better.
Well put. But a "religious nut" can come in many flavors, including a narrow minded scientist who is married religiously to his or her scientific mindset. They keep telling us that science can never really decide anything, and is always open for change. This type of belief system can go too far, in that it leaves no room for any real knowledge at all. It's essentially saying "we just don't know anything for sure." Given that, to exclude metaphysical possibilities is inane.
There is not a single "Missing Link." Every creature that has ever lived is a "missing link." That includes you and me and your dog etc. Every fossil that has ever been found is a missing link. Every creature that is currently alive is a missing link. The process of evolution is ongoing and continuous. There is no clear cut division between generations. Offspring always resemble their parents. It is not until you separate the specimens by many generations that you would see any change.
You are a retard. There are countless examples of evolution happening in our lifetime, and even in a lab. Here are 8: http://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/
The reality of it all is that the "pew sitters" and "bowers" are coming to grips with the flaws in their religions and in fifty years the religions of today will be unrecognizable or extinct as the "pretty and ugly wingie flying/horn-blowing thingies" are finally buried in the piles of utter stupidity.
Nope.
It only shows how stupid 46% of americans are. That's what you get in a country that doesn't value education. The education that favors science (provable and repeatable) vs religion (mythological fantasy). We think we are the best country on earth, but that's only because 46% of us are too stupid to know better.
What a moron. No one thinks more of you that you do.
This from a guy that doesn't even know proper grammar or spelling. I think I just proved my point.
These "weekend warrior scientists" with their personal war against God really make me laugh. The truth is everyone worships something – yes, that means you self-aggrandizing atheist. You worship something – most likely science itself, or maybe even you. Don't think putting down God gets you "off the religious hook". You're religious – just as religious as any Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, or Mormon. You just won't admit it to yourself 😉
Do you know the definition of religion? Why do you need to pretend that religion means something different? Just to make yourself feel better?
I just read this article and will admit i have not yet seen this video (which I will do so after I post this):
"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 would just like to say to Mr. Nye, first of all, i really enjoyed your videos growing up, but secondly, many have proposed that biblical views will eventually disappear or fade away as if they were some sort of trend yet, for better or worse, these views have impacted the world for millennia. I would think that it is only fair that, as creationists are expected to at least consider evolution objectively, that evolutionists consider creationism as well. After all, the “theory” as some evolutionists would call it, has only been around for thousands of years...
It's about time scientists speak up and quit allowing themselves to be bullied and walked all over by ignorant, knuckle-dragging theists, who actually know nothing and have a problem with education and knowledge – just like in the middle ages. You either accept ALL OF SCIENCE, or you accept none of it and go back to the middle ages. When it comes to science – YOU DON'T GET TO PICK AND CHOSE!
You reject science? – then give up 99% of what we have (including all of medicine and technology). Our lives are all about science and almost nothing about religion. People still kill people and do really bad things, whether they are religious or not – so what good is it at all?! It doesn't even make people better. Atheists are probably MORE ethical than most religious people (who believe they will always be forgiven).
I think it's wrong to say a salesman is "just here to make a sale" when he works at a car dealership... sorry wrong board...
No Babs, you are on the right board – what you describe is a Christian and Christianity, and sadly, yes, it's just to make a sale.
What kind od brain would believe his father impregnate his virgin sister?
Genesis For The Modern Age
1. In the beginning there was only God and he alone created the void that was the Universe. Then into the void that was the Universe God placed a infinitesimal part of his being.
2. And the void being with out substance was unable to contain this essence of God and so it expanded at a terrible speed releasing unimaginable energies.
3. Where upon God created the four fundamental forces toe contain these energies. The Strong Nuclear Force, the Weak Nuclear Force, the Gravitational Force and the Electromagnetic Force.
4. And with the establishment of these controlling forces expansion of the Universe slowed and the great energies cooled the first elementary partials were formed.
5. And from these partials the first atoms were formed. The initial one having a single proton and electron and God looked down and said let this be called Hydrogen.
6. Then when all the Universe was Hydrogen the Fundamental Force of Gravity caused groups of these atoms to come together in ever larger masses.
7. Where upon when the masses became so large and the Force of Gravity so strong that they started to smash the atoms of Hydrogen together creating new atoms and releasing new energies that illuminated the Universe.
8. And thus Stars were born and there was now light upon the void.
9. Then as the forces within the stars created heavier and heavier atoms the energies generated within became great. Greater in fact than the Force of Gravity. Where upon the very Stars themselves exploded spewing the atoms out in great clouds into the void.
10. Again the fundamental forces came into play creating new stars from the lighter atoms and Planets from the heavier ones. Starting the cycle of Star birth and death.
11. Now it came to pass that the Planets once formed were much cooler than the Stars allowing the atoms of various types to join together according to the Fundamental forces into molecules.
12. Some were simple such as the water that filled the seas some were complex such as the precursor proteins of life itself.
That's rather clever, if only more religious people were flexible enought to incorporate such a story with their faith, they might have less problem with science.
Ever read Asimov's final question, its rather similar, only the cause is the the cause is the cause?