August 28th, 2012
10:37 AM ET
Your Take: 5 reactions to Bill Nye's creationism critique
By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor
(CNN) - Bill Nye does not think that children should be taught to deny evolution, and a YouTube video of him explaining why has gone viral. The CNN Belief Blog's report on the video has generated around 10,000 comments and thousands of Facebook shares since Monday.
There were some broad themes in the comments, reflecting a debate that is largely unique to the United States.
While Christianity is booming in Africa, Asia and Latin America, creationism is not, Penn State University religious studies professor Philip Jenkins writes in his book "The New Faces of Christianity: Believing the Bible in the Global South."
Here are five schools of reaction that have emerged in comments:
1. Those using this controversy to bash religion
Atheists love the Internet, as we've chronicled on the Belief Blog. While they may be a small portion of the population, they seem to make up about half our commenters. It was their chance to join with Nye and cheer him on:
2. Those who say wait a minute, being a creationist isn’t necessarily being anti-evolution
Lots of folks from the theistic evolution camp came out to say that believing God was involved doesn't automatically make you anti-evolution.
3. Those who say that science is stupid and that young Earth creationism rules
Young Earth creationists, who believe the Earth is about 6,000 years old, appeared to be out in force in the comments.
4. Those who say Nye should stick to his area of expertise
This tweet was the most polite remark we could find on this subject. Other comments and tweets, not so much.
5. Those who say CNN is cooking up controversy where none exists
Lots of people suggested we were generating a story instead of covering one.
For the record, plenty of other news outlets covered this story, pointing out that Nye's video was posted on YouTube just before the Republican National Convention opened. Turns out that Nye taped the segment awhile back and had no say in when it would be released.
Thanks for chiming in. The comments are open here, and you can always hit us up on Twitter @CNNBelief.
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.
This debate is worthless. The real answer is to teach ALL theories. Evolution, Creationism, Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Iroquois Creation Myth, Greek Mythology... and then let the kid decide on his own. Anything else puts your kid at a serious disadvantage intellectually, and then the Communists win.
First you must teach them what a scientific theory is which you yourself do not even grasp. You might also want to learn the scientific method. Teach your kids the theory of gravity and germ theory as well.
Not enough time in the school day to entertain nonsense. Is that a real surprise to you?
Wow, are people that bad at recognising satire?
Teach your kids the theory of gravity and germ theory as well.
The gravity part is easy.
When you trip, you dont fall up.
It all comes down to the fact that people don't know what evolution actually means. Evolution does not mean that humans came from monkeys. Evolution does mean that there is a change in genetic make up over time. Evolution does happen. It is a bacteria adapting resistance to anti biotics over time. It is a race of people getting taller or shorter over several generations. It is a species of plant gaining broader leaves or larger fruit over several reproductive cycles. It has nothing to do with how we got here, and a lot to do with how we've responded to our environment over time by inadvertently changing which genes are more prevalent in our gene pool.
Ignorant people also confuse evolution with abiogenesis or how life began. The theory of evolution does not, nor will it ever explain HOW life began so you creationists can stop with your straw man war against that.
“A proper understanding of creation, especially an understanding set forth by a thinker such as Thomas Aquinas, helps us to see that there is no conflict between evolutionary biology or any of the natural sciences and a fundamental understanding that all that ‘is’, is caused by God,” Professor William E. Carroll of Oxford University’s theology faculty"
“Evolutionary biology is that area of science which helps us to understand better the origin and development of human beings, but whatever those arguments are in evolutionary biology they, in principle, do not conflict with the fundamental understanding that all that ‘is’ is created by God,” Carroll said.
. . . “God causes the world to be the kind of world which it is and the natural sciences help to disclose what kind of a world we have,” Carroll explained.
. . . “One of the great insights of the Pope, which he continually emphasizes, is an enlargement of reason, a recognition that rationality is not limited to what the natural sciences do but that there’s a larger sense of rationality that includes both philosophy and theology,”
EX -P, don't obfuscate the primary prenuptials with rasberries. Often, the pertinent cat presents fabled necessities in the parking chamfer. Realize your net precedent. Triangulate! Save the best for the alligators. Ever the bastille notches the orchestra but Wendy is not green and horses will capitulate. Filter out the log from the turnstile and cry prevalently.
So there brown stare. Feed your inner walnut and resolve. Subject your lemon to the ingenious door in the presence of snow and animals. Aisle 7 is for the monetary cheese whiz. Faced with the kitchen, you may wish to prolong the sailboat in the cliff. Otherwise, rabbits may descend on your left nostril. Think about how you can stripe the sea.
Regale the storm to those who (6) would thump the parrot with the armband. Corner the market on vestiges of the apparent closure but seek not the evidential circumstance. Therein you can find indignant mountains of pigs and apples. Descend eloquently as you debate the ceiling of your warning fulcrum. Vacate the corncob profusely and and don’t dote on the pancreas.
Next up, control your wood. Have at the cat with your watch on the fore. Aft! Smarties (12)! Rome wasn’t kevetched in an autumn nightie. (42) See yourself for the turntable on the escalator. Really peruse the garage spider definitely again again with brown. Now we have an apparent congestion, so be it here. Just a moment is not a pod of beef for the ink well nor can it be (4) said that Karen was there in the millpond.
Garbage out just like the candle in the kitty so. Go, go, go until the vacuum meets the upward vacation. Sell the yellow. Then trim the bus before the ten cheese please Louise. Segregate from the koan and stew the ship vigorously.
And remember, never pass up an opportunity to watch an elephant paint Mozart.
Let's assume for a moment the Creationist universe. If what a Creationist believes is true, we all have to admit, with the evidence that nature provides, The Designer is a very bad designer when it comes to biology. If you could invent anything you could think of, wouldn't you do your very best job? Would you slack on purpose, or make mistakes? The Creationist view is that of a PERFECT designer, hence a perfect design.
So let's examine one of many small and very obvious design mistakes. One that is often trumpeted in the Creationist community as a reason not to believe in evolution- the mammalian eyeball. Let's all do a quick experiment and see if anyone can expand on this thread with the answer.
Extend your arms all the way out in front of your face. Make the thumbs-up sign with both hands, and then rotate your fists so your thumbs are pointing at each other. Now close one eye- it doesn't matter which. Slowly widen your arms, making sure your thumbs are always pointing at each other and are in the middle of your vision of the one eye that is open. If you are doing this correctly, on of your thumbs will disappear when your arms are making a V shape away from your chest just at the right spot.
Creationists- can you take a guess or know the answer to why that happens?
No response? Perhaps this discussion is so filled with virtual that no one wants to talk real science. It's no wonder we are so divided. Very sad state of affairs. Engage in a real way, and perhaps people will wake up. Stop with the name calling, please.
I don't care what you teach your children. You have all already screwed the kids up more than any shrink can repair. you think religion is gonna fix them?? you are nuts.
" Pope Benedict XVI launched a new foundation at the Vatican aimed at building a “philosophical bridge” between science and theology.
“I don’t think most people necessarily see science and faith as being opposed but I do think there is confusion as to where to put faith and where to put science in their life,” said executive director Father Tomasz Trafny.
“So the question for us is how to offer a coherent vision of society, culture and the human being to people who would like to understand where to put these dimensions – the spiritual and religious and the scientific,” he told CNA on Jan. 19.
The Science and Faith Foundation will be headquartered at the Holy See under the leadership of Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, President of the Pontifical Council for Culture."
Its funny, now that the church is losing "suckers" they're looking to compromise to keep their business afloat.
They have been doing so for centuries. It's a total bs religion. Even more so than the others.
Religion is a belief in a system based on “faith” which is defined as a belief without logic or reason. Those who believe in a God based on the Old Testament, suffer from a cognitive disability to correctly reason because there is absolutely no archeological or other witness to support this account of a God.
While a scientist cannot discount there could be a God, there is absolutely no basis to substantiate such a premise. The argument that Man and our Universe is so complex and unexplainable, that they must have been created by a super-natural power, is false logic. If so, it would follow then, that anything that cannot be explained would have been created by such, or the same power. As an example, remember when the Church preached that the Sun revolved around the Earth? To even think otherwise 500 years ago was blasphemy. Now it has been accepted that our planet revolves around the Sun, and their are billions of solar systems like it.
We never stop in our quest for understanding the REAL truth! We should be teaching our children in school how to reason. Teaching Creation is stepping backwards
Why can't I say there is no God? While other say there is a God but they cannot prove it?
agree jack.....teach kids to think for themselves and educate children... stop trying to impose beliefs (evolution or creationism)
Evolution is not belief it is a scientific theory. Your creationism is not a scientific theory it is as real as 7 virgins waiting in heaven when you blow yourself up. Read a book!
Actually, they're suffering from brainwashing done at a young, impressionable age.
but what is REAL? what is the truth? the big bang theory? is that the truth? i think that idea is as far fetched as creationism.. there is no proof of the big bang either.. so everyone, let's just agree to disagree lol. no one knows, just believe what you want and let the other guy believe what he wants.. creationism isn't even taught in schools so what's the beef? there is no proof either way so let it be, jeez..
Bill Nye along with many others say things like this because they don't want our kids thinking critically. They want them to accept their evolutionary worldview as fact without question and ultimately deny God. If the evidence for molecules to man evolution were so strong, they wouldn't mind a competing theory. What's wrong with presenting both creation and evolution and let the kids form their own hypotheses and conclusions. Is that not what science is all about. That's all creationists want in our schools. It's the evolutionists that are close minded and are trying to shut down creative thinking.
An 'evolutionists' mind is only closed to religious BS with no basis in science.
The problem with that is that evolution and creationism are not opposing views. Evolution means that there is change in genetic make up over time. It has nothing to do with how things got here. Also, creationism is based on faith while evolution is based on evidence. I am not saying there is anything wrong with having faith, however science is based on tangible, observable evidence and there is no tangible, observable evidence for creationism. Creationism should not be taught in a science class for that reason.
Creationism is not a Scientific Theory it's nonsense like getting 7 virgins for martyrdom. Grow up!
Yes, that's what science is about, and the theory of evolution could certainly withstand it. The problem is that by definition, Creationism is asking that same child to IGNORE the evidence of his senses, critical thinking, logic, and common sense, and believe something another guy tells him that is completely and utterly unverifiable. If that same child wants to question the theories that make up evolution, he can learn, educate himself in a variety of sciences and conduct his own studies to verify what he has been told. Creationists simply tell those who disbelieve creationism that they must lack faith in God and thus are going to hell, cuz I said so, end of discussion.
Are you also ok with having astrologists having equal time in an astromony class? How 'bout we welcome witch doctors equal time in a class at med school? I mean, you want to be fair, right?
Bill Nye has all the relevance of a small pile of crab crap on the ocean floor.
And you are?
Except he's 100000x smarter then you.
R99, yet here you and thousands of others are, reading and commenting on an article about him.
I just feel sad for the non-believers on here and everywhere else, for that matter. God has worked miracles in my life. Believing in God does require total faith. Many people don't have the patience to have total faith, because it's too hard or takes their whole lifetime on earth before they see a reward. In this day & age, if they can't have something immediately, then it bores them. God has carried me, in moments, when I could not carry myself. I'm sure, as soon as others ready my post, they will immediately begin making fun of me. That's okay, go ahead, knock yourself out. Do whatever it is you need to do, to make yourself feel good. There isn't anything you can say that will shake my faith. I hope if you all ever do have a real crisis or struggle, you will consider opening up to God. Just so you know, I was raised in a VERY non-religious family. I never gave God or organized religion any thought. I did go to Vacation Bible School with my neighbor. Of course, I would be the only little girl there, that never had a parent come see me sing or see my art work. I did not seek out God in earnest, until 15 years ago. I'm so glad I did. Also know, I'm not a Bible thumper, nor do I attend church every week. I go when I feel the need to pray or sing with others. God is in my heart everyday and there are times, when his presence is so strong, I feel I could take anything that life dished out. This is not meant to be a sermon, it's just my experience. Nothing Bill Nye says or any other non-believing Scientist can shake real faith. I suspect I have a lot of people standing with me. Ok – go ahead, say what you need to say. 😉
Thanks, I will. You're mentally deranged.
Please tell me what one of your miracles were?
The delusional opiate is working overtime on this one.
The terrorist who flew airliners into the World Trade Center had unshakeable FAITH.
Faith means you have no evidence. It just means you BELIEVE. You can believe in the Easter Bunny, or that 32 virgins await your death.
The step away from the cave took rational thought. Rational thought is a powerful force. Use it.
Note: If you are convinced you feel the presence of a positive spirit in your life, good for you. But don't be quick to think that spirt is related to an organized religion. Look at the posts of those from organized religion on these pages. Hard to believe there is a God behind those posts.
But if God has performed miracles, in your life, you don't need faith; you have proof.
Linda, you statement about needing to go out and sing with others is quite understandable. However, if you are overlooking community choruses, opera groups, or just jam sessions, and choosing churches as a way of creating song, you are doing this because 1. you live nowhere near a city where likeminded creative people gather to enjoy song together, or 2. you have never considered your need to sing as anything more than "praise the lord" material. And that is the result of your lack of education. Get educated. Read some philosophy. You write like someone who is almost ready to take the plunge, but keeps saying, "No, no, it's too deep!" It's not deep. It's You.
Believe bones in a museum are real, or a book written two thousand years ago full of un realistic claims?
Hmmmmm, tough call for more than half America, not so much for the rest of the civilized world.
The terrorist who flew airliners into the World Trade Center had unshakeable FAITH.
And you have faith because you believe that.
Is your faith because that is what your government told you ?
Your government would never lie to you,
and your religious leaders would never lie to you.
Science tells me different.
I am supposed to believe in god with no proof.
Yet, i am called a nutcase because science tells me a different story about 911.
You are right about one thing.
It all depends on what you want to believe.
Again, i will take science everyday.
Just a show of.. well not hands, but I'm just curious: How many Atheists, in this forum, came from a religious upbringing?
I know I did.
Born, Baptized, Communion, Confirmation, Marriage
Im sure it has to be most. Indoctrination before you are capable of thought works pretty well for the religious.
Yup, me too. Very devout family and upbringing.
Catholic seminary for three years while a teenager. I really believed that stuff. Then it dawned on me, OMG, this is all just pretend, looking quite real because of artwork and music and literature. Then I moved on to the real stuff and never looked back. Very happy now, and I don't waste a second of this life yearning for some other "life after death". This Life is so spectacular, I wouldn't dream of denigrating it by inferring that it was second rate to The Second Coming. That rude little mind set is crucial to wrecking everything around you, and pretending it doesn't really "matter", because the Big Reward is on its way. It does "matter". It is the material world.
I suffered through twelve years of catholic school. I was continuously brainwashed from as far back as I can remember. I now feel that forcing religion on children is serious child abuse. What you believe or try to convince yourself to believe, largely depends on where you were born and not much else. Ya'll would likely be muslims if you had been born in the middle east. Hatch in the bible belt and you almost certainly be a christian. China? Most likely you'd be an atheist. That explains a lot. Christianity is a lie. So are all the other religions. There are no gods. Produce one if you can. I'm not fussy, any deity at all will do.
I can't say I was. And I have Oral Roberts to thank for that.
Brought up in the Church of Christ. My grandfather was a deacon.
Raised Roman Catholic in Waltham Mass.
Now the air is a liitle easier to breathe.
Things make more sense.
No more guilt trips.
Life is not perfect.
But its a lot better.
What some people call God, i find its just
the natural universe.
ooohhhhh noooooo, mr bill. you've gone and done it now.
the only thing to say in any conversation on religion is....... 'pay no attention to that man behind the curtain'...... the great oz has spoken.
Anyone who says "religion" clashes with "science" is either: (a) a simpleton who is entirely ingnorant of the issues either scientifically or theologically; OR (b) an educated, but intellectually dishonest, individual who is just too insecure with his own personal belief systems to appreciate and respect the entirely rational human belief systems of others.
In all history, the vast majority of the world's scientists were leargly neither agnostics nor atheists. Even today, I think there are many uneducated people on these forums who would be SHOCKED at how many reputable religious scientists and scholars there actually are in the world.
The truth is this: the justification and the ridicule based on differences in personal belief is the new age "racism" and "bigotry." Anyone who knows anything about science knows fully well that science does NOT have all of the answers, and is equally far from having those answers. Ask any believing or non-beliving cosmologist you want, we still don't even know the MAJORITY of that which makes up the Universe. Likewise, there is nothing in science that even remotely supports or proves the existence of a magical primordial pool wherein inanimate rocks humped to create the first carbon based DNA strand from non-carbon materials in order to create the "first life" – i.e., the same first life that not only SURVIVED, but THRIVED and MULTIPLIED in what would have certainly been the most toxic, deadly and uninhabitable environment to life in the many million history of planet earth.
Prove to me the existence of said accidental and magical soup god (the same anyone has yet to even remotely replicate in even the most technologically sophisticated labs in even FAVORABLE life environments in any form), before you can say the burden of proof is on believers to prove the existence of their God. Prove to me the magical soup god. You can't do it? Then there is equally no rational basis for athesim over religion.
Indeed, when are we as humans going to recognize that patterns of personal belief are part of the wonderful things that make us, as humans, DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why indeed is it more noble for the magical and accidental soup god believes to denounce the beliefs of theists and their belief in a so-called magical "sky fairy." Since when is it more justifiable and appropriate to ridicule our fellow men based on inherent human differences of opinion, culture, heritage, and personal belief (which are not supreficial) over the more superficial differences of eye color, skin color, gender, and race?
My challenge to everyone would be this: regardless of our human differences in belief, can we not start recognizing that we are all members of the same human family? Can we not recognize we are all on the same team? Can we not recognize that it is just not good enough anymore for us to exercise only superficial tolerance while, at the same time, justifying absolute bigotry that is more than skin-deep?
Yay, I am a superficially tolerant person (but, secretly a bigot with respect to differences that matter most and are less obvious). Yay, I can respect people based on their superficial attributes of gender, eye color, hair color, and national origin (but secretly wish for the mass genocide of men, women and children based on differences that matter most and are less obvious).
Neither the believer nor the non-believer "faith" camps are exempt from fault in this regard. It is time we start recognizing that the only REAL enemies of humanity are those who simply cannot exercise and afford human respect, decency, tolerance, understanding, and respectful behavior towards those who differ from them in culture, heritage, thought processes, opinion, and personal belief.
To Bill and many others in both believer and non-beliver camps I would say this, "Grow up already, children. Your absolute devotion to your own beliefs and your disrespectful and arrogant declarations are not part of the solution; they are very much rather part of the PROBLEM. It is not your position to tell other people how to or how to not raise their children. There are many people in soceity that are just as intelligent, reputable, and/or educated as you (if not more so) in these matters who do not share your absolutism nor your belief. You are more than welcome to share your personal opinions with others and those who would like to hear your opinon on these matters. However, once you cross the line of assuming (falsely) that your subjective opinions and beliefs are the only rational opinion for all people everywhere AND you communicate that opinion in a HIGHLY offensive, arrogant and disrespectful manner, then you are not only not just unenlighted and uneducated, but you sir are a jerk and bigot in the most serious of degrees and, if you knew anything of history, a potential and severe cancer to our attempts to build a more tolerant and understanding and successful society."
You are totally wrong but I sincerely appreciate the effort.
How about this for a little cancer: Go fu*ck yourself!
They evidently clash on numerous issues.
Go phuck yourself Mr. Smartypants.
Science doesn't deal in "beliefs" it deals in facts. That's the difference. They are totally separate. Evolution is a fact. Religion is a belief, without any credible evidence whatever.
VA – that might be unfair. do you really know if "Here a Little . ." is even physically capable of such a thing?
Sweetheart, the "vast majority of scientists" you refer to were born into a world and a mind set that DID NOT ALLOW the type of discussion we are having here now. In my own childhood (more than) a few decades ago, there was NO PUBLIC FORUM for discourse. So go on with your bad self claiming that your survey of the world scientists indicates they were religious. They simply had to talk around the issue, for fear of disturbing people like...um...you.
The level of your ignorance about your own ignorance regarding science is staggering. Open your mind and learn something don’t just spout cliché’s. Then your indignation for others who are not as ignorant as you just magnifies your original lack of intelligence.
Actually, not wrong at all. There are PLENTY of good and reputable believing scientists and cosmologists in this world. However, the fault is with both camps. This "us" versus "them" mentality is absolutely the problem, always has been and always will be. Theism is no more rational that atheism and vice versa. None of us are exempt from asking questions as to why and how we came to be and what is the purpose of life, if any. Many will find their anwers in theism, others in atheism.
From my personal experience, most rational and educated people tend to find their answers through both theism and science. For most believers, science is not a stumbling block to faith, but much rather helps enhance and individual's faith and belief in God.
I am sorry, but there are many among the most reputable scientists both now and throughout history who are full and devout theists. There is no rational basis to claim that a belief in science is mutually exclusive from a belief in God or a God. There is NO WAR. The "us-versus-them" mentality between believers and non-believers is a destructive fallacy.
Those individuals who are simply too misguided, ingnorant, or (in the alternative) educated but insecure to denigrate and disrespect the culture, opinions, though processes, and personal belief systems of others are not the "heroes;" but rather the bigots who cannot recognize that this imaginary war is one they (from their own fears) have created.
The only irrational point of view is the one that fails to accept and recognize its own limitations and unanswered and unproven "holes" and the one that seeks to hide those "holes" and its own insecurities with arrogant absolutism, hypocritical demonization, and unfounded and unjustified denigration of opposing views.
You can immediately retract the "throughout history' part of your statement, Here Very Little. Most of the scientists prior to the 20th century would have been completely disparaged and discredited had they admitted being atheists or agnostics. I doubt very much that most of them would have been believers had they been born in this day and age.
Atheism isn't an encompasing belief system, and gives no answers to purpose or whatever, and it doesn't try to. It's an answer to a single question. That's all.
Now, as for respecting beliefs or whatever. When someone wants to try and pass of religious assertions on the beginning of the universe and pass it off as science, I have no respect for that because they are showing absolutely no respect to the scientific method.
You need serious help and an 8th grade science text.
Nice try, but no cigar, son.
As I said, there are many uneducated forum dwellers here who would be SHOCKED to find out just how many scientists still believe in their resepctive religions to this day. In case you have not noticed, the internet has been around for well over a decade. There are plenty of young scientists who do not see science as being a threat to their faith, but rather see quite the opposite. These scientists and scholars do not discard their faith due to lack of dialogue, but much rather because they see science as enhancing their belief.
As I said, there are only two type of individuals who find the need to deal in absolutism and openly ridicule the belief systems of others: (a) those who are entirely ignorant as to glaring "holes" with respect to their own belief systems, or (b) those who are educated and aware of the "holes" and seek to hide their insecurities through absolute denigration of opposing views. Which one are you?
Plenty of young scientists who believe in god, you say? Then you should be able to cite them and your source of this information. List these religious "young scientists" and describe their area of specialization with appropriate cites to back up your claims.
@Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son
Your personal subjective doubt on what past scientists in history would have or would have not believed is nothing more than an assumption and a fallacious argument. Objectively prove to me that your assumption is correct, Tom Tom. Grasping at straws much to support our unjustifiable intolerances and personal bigotries? Not to mention saying NOTHING of as to the fact of the number of CURRENT theist scientists in this world.
I would also argue, no offense, but your understanding of the histories and the devotion of past theist scientists in history is highly disturbing.
Thank you, Tom. Always nice to have you around. This joker thinks I want a cigar! I would like him to retire his sweeping generalizations and get down to a little citation, too.
Burning at the stake, for starters, would bring everyone in line for a few decades, if not centuries. Blackballing, failing to publish or employ would be the more modern version. And don't call me "son".
You lost everybody either after the first sentence,
or the third hour.
You may want to catch up "Building blocks of life found around young star." Aug 28, 2012. The magical god soup you ridicule, just a matter of time and scientific study. Not to mention synthetic DNA being used by Dr, Venter in his lab to create artificial life, May, 2010.
Bill Nye is an inappropriate and unqualified spokesman for this cause. He is promoting evolution as as a religion of its own, to which we must adhere or risk excommunication from the altar of science. Science is nothing if it doesn't question dogma and make progress. What we call evolution now will itself evolve and seem primitive or even ignorant in a relatively short time. Let's teach our kids how to question and make progress, rather than worry about which dogma to recite in front of them.
Evolution was questionned, then it was proven to everybody who isn't retarded.
Yes, but all parents nudge their children in one direction or another about many things. So why not nudge them in a sensible direction – away from religion.
Evolution will evolve, but it will still be evolution, because that's the way life progresses. There are a few controversies over some of the exact mechanisms but the fact of evolution is real. It's a tiny bit incomplete but the facts speak for themselves.
Mr. Nye is highly qualified to make his statements about evolution. Yes, "questioning" is fundamental to science. But grasping at straws is not. Look at the posts of the religious on this site. They brag about their "faith". They writhe in joy that while they have NO evidence to support creationism, they BELIEVE.
Two thumbs up for Billy.
Billy, and you, can go to Hell.
Pride's a sin Bobby, so I guess we'll see you there.
Aw, Robert, that is not a good christian response.
How can you go somewhere that doesn't exist?
Billy, and you, can go to Hell.
In the middle of what could have been a good conversation,
you had to go all third grade, and make stupid.
Miss Fox much ?
God created evolution, evolution created us. Elegant, and so simple to grasp that it's beyond 99.9% of the people in this debate, especially the fundamentalists on both sides of it. Richard Dawkins and Pat Robertson are brothers, they just don't know it.
Which god are you talking about? There are so many. Did you know Bill Maher found Jesus Christ? I believe he found him in the Philippines. Do you really need a god to feel secure? Grow a pair for chrissakes.
There are so many things stated as fact in your bible that science has proven wrong so I'm sorry they don't co-exist. At least not your faith,
You ain't no wordsmith.
God created evolution....
The bible says that god created heaven and earth.
Everything god created was good.
So if god created evolution, his original design was flawed
and he created evolution to fix his mistakes.
Nice god you got there.
Well at least he was smart enough to fix mistakes that never should have happened.
I love the guy that said I'm an engineer and a " first hand witness to the risen Christ." What are you about 2000 years old? Oh I forget religious rhetoric is protected under the law. Being an idiot is obviously also allowed. I'll tell you what.........I'll believe in your invisible man in the sky when all of you pastors and reverends, especially the mega wealthy like Billy Graham, start paying your taxes on all this income you have "donated" to you in "love offerings." What a crock!
Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. People need to learn what words mean before they use them.
My first thought is, what about all the people in the world who will swear they are first hand witness to other gods and their deeds. How can the religious reconcile that in their minds? I believe more strongly than you so I must be right. You better believe pretty strongly because there are very smart and very religious people who don’t believe the same thing you do. Smoke and mirrors is the only answer.
" first hand witness to the risen Christ."
Bet Jesus was glad to find the guy who poked a spear into his side.
By the way, the bible says the first to see the "risen" Jesus
was Mary Magdalene.
This guy has a lot of "Splainin" to do.
Or maybe lay off the bad acid.
Its all going to boil down to a fight eventually. When two parties can't agree on something, it envitably leads to bloodshed. That is human nature. Get it over with already.
The fight has already begun. The religious have been losing ground for some time now. We only await the death blow.
Among young people, 31% express doubt about the existence of god. Once the old folks die off , it will be a whole new ball game.
Godoflunaticscreation: I don't think Jonathan was being metaphorical.
If he's threatening violence then he must be of the religious.
I was not being metaphorical. I was being very literal. Disbelief in molecules-to-man evolution will never die out and despite CNN's claims to this being a purely USA situation, it is quite prevalent in most of the world. Nothing short of eradication will win this fight.
"If he's threatening violence then he must be of the religious."
Threatening violence? Not likely. I am merely stating the logical outcome of this heated debate. Humans have repeated this pattern many, many times in the past.
Are you looking forward to it?
"Are you looking forward to it?"
What an odd question. Of course not. Reasoned speech is the pinnacle we should always strive for in settling any conflict but sadly, human nature won't allow for such a thing. Not everyone is endowed with the tools or the intelligence enough to get their message through in a reasonable manner and will, no doubt, resort to violence out of frustration and anger.
I ask you, when criminals refuse to submit to authority in every instance and, at every opportunity, attempt to subvert the law and escape; what is done with them? Keep in mind they are highly 'dangerous' and can not be 'controlled' in a reasonable manner.
Its all going to boil down to a fight eventually. When two parties can't agree on something, it envitably leads to bloodshed. That is human nature. Get it over with already.
Sounds like the Republicans and Democrats.
I think i will side with the Democrats.
I would rather help the poor, than feed the rich.
Using probability to find evidence for the non-existance of God:
If you understand probability you will understand that over the course of many trials there will be alot of results that will fail and a few results that will succeed based on the probability. This is proven time and time again in the lottery. If you find out that 5 people won the lottery, you can predict the number of losers based on the probability. If earth is a perfect planet for life to form and that probability is low, then if earth was created by chance, then there must be a very large number of planets that or no good for the formation of life. Based on what we have observed, there are approx. 150Billion x 200Billion x 5 planets that exist in the universe. We have only studied a few thousand and all are bad for the formation of life. Once we have seen millions of planets and mybe found some that have life, we can better understand the probability of earth's existance and of life forming. And this will support chance as the creator of the universe, not a God.
Keep in mind it's not proof of no God, it's evidence that supports random chance. I know scientists and skeptics hate to fall into the evidence argument as they want to stick to proof. But it creates a divide that cannot be crossed. If a creationist wants to say the existance of earth is evidence for a God we can say all the dead planets are evidence of no God.