Your Take: 5 reactions to Bill Nye's creationism critique
Commenters were fired up about Bill Nye, creationism and evolution.
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:

midwest rail:
"If you're watching 'The Flintstones' as if it were a documentary, you're doing it wrong."

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.

"As someone who is a born again Christian, (senior) mechanical engineer in the technology industry, and a firsthand witness of the risen Christ, I just want to say that Bill Nye is on the right track. It is understandable that both sides seem to be entrenched in their own position, but did anyone ever think that both are correct, and that the truth lies somewhere in the middle?"

"I believe in God, I believe in creationism and evolution. I think that we all came from one man and one woman (God created), and I think that the human race has evolved from this paring. I am a Christian and I love science, learning about our world, and I appreciate the contribution that science has made. But my soul/spirit also need God's love."

"FYI, 'Science Guy': One can believe in evolution and creation at the same time. They are not incongruent.

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.

"As a creationist, why would I want to debate an evolutionist? It (is) all a matter of FAITH. You either believe, and have faith in, what Christians call 'THE WORD OF GOD' or not. No debate. TRUTH IS TRUTH WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT.

The people who perished in the Great Flood, in the Bible, didn't believe it was going to rain until it was too late. Better start knocking on the door of the ark before it closes."

"Creationism isn't even taught in public schools. Evolution is. So if you want your children to have Christian beliefs, then you really need to home-school them or find a good Christian school. Unfortunately not the other way around!

"It seems to me that evolution requires just as much faith as creationism. You're just putting your faith in our human powers of observation and believe that what we have thought up based on those observations is correct. We've got a few hundred years at best, of scientific observation, that has now told us that one giant, explosive, random event started a chain reaction that, over billions of years resulted in humans, and flowers, and viruses, and dinosaurs. The belief that the unfathomable intricacies of every living thing on our Earth formed themselves completely at random seems just as fantastical to me as believing in a creator."

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.

"Thanks Bill ... but leave the teaching of my children to me. ..."

[tweet https://twitter.com/watsup1101/status/240168918109523968%5D

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.

Tony Montana:

"Another example of CNN's mostly one-sided reporting. No wonder Fox is (No.) 1. Hopefully CNN will put on both sides in the future if for no other reason than their ratings. Parts of the Bible are dated and contains metaphors. ***SCIENCE IS SIMPLY AN OBSERVATION OF GOD'S CREATION.*** Humans did not make the solar system, billions of stars in billions of galaxies. 'ET' didn't make the universe either. Even if 'ET' did what made 'ET.' "

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.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Belief • Creationism

soundoff (2,811 Responses)
  1. StuporDave

    Just why do we stick so firmly to that which we were taught at 4 years of age?. Did you then have the critical analysis tools that might have helped you sort through the material, deciding for yourself what fit and what did not? We human possess the ability to reason for a reason, several actually. Please use it.

    August 29, 2012 at 1:07 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      "why do we stick so firmly to that which we were taught at 4 years of age?"

      I think we actually do, and it may be because what we are learning in our infancy and our young childhood literally determines aspects of how our neural pathways get wired. Much of our personality and thought patterns is formed in our early childhoods. That goes to the heart of what Nye is pleading for: stop wiring children to immediately default to magical explanations rather than seeking answers.

      August 29, 2012 at 9:05 am |
  2. gar

    I love the comment to the science teacher from the theist: "leave the teaching of my children to me"
    The ignorance behind that comment is about as pathetic as it gets.

    August 29, 2012 at 1:01 am |
    • manbearpig

      I know. Ignorance and arrogance is a dangerous combination.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:12 am |
  3. dualbabies

    People who study the human cell know there is statistically no way it happened by chance. We just have not yet figured it out. True science will always prove the existence of God, He set this world in motion according to it. So if our science and theology don't match, we have our science or theology wrong. No sense arguing about it. Keep searching for the truth. Ask Galileo.

    August 29, 2012 at 1:00 am |
    • Simran

      "statistically no way it happened by chance"
      And by your statement I should presume you are a Cellular Biologist! So please give some more details of those statistics.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:04 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      everything you just wrote is wrong. scientists, in general, don't believe in god. they have a much higher rate of non-theism than the general public. basically, the more you study science, the less you believe in god.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:05 am |
    • Mike V

      Google: Argument From Ignorance

      August 29, 2012 at 1:07 am |
    • manbearpig

      No one said it happened by chance, you idiot. It's didn't. But it certainly wasn't the work of a magic sky fairy.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:07 am |
    • dualbabies

      Why are you so angry? I am not a cellular biologist, but I have studied and taught human anatomy, including the cell and I must say I am wowed! It is incredible! Truly, it would take more faith on my part to believe that it came to such a level of complexity from a single cell floating in the slush. I like how my microbiology book worded it, "scientists are not sure how a living cell came from inorganic material". But that is not my point.

      My point is that not all the evidence is in. I think God had a part in that living cell coming from the inorganic and you truly don't have enough evidence to the contrary. Primordial slush sound pretty much like hogwash to me. But true science, will eventually show us. I'm not closed minded so don't you be either.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:37 am |
    • Athy

      Life didn't start with a single cell. It came about with various amino acids and other minerals combining to form a much smaller molecule that could replicate itself. This then became more complex over many millions of years until a rudimentary cell resulted. Much of the earth was covered by water, lightning was striking everywhere, hot water was issuing from suboceanic fissures, sunlight was burning everywhere. This went on for a few billion years. Is it beyond your comprehension that a self-replicating molecule of some type might have been formed given the number of opportunities for it to happen? All it would take is one, which would then start the evolutionary chain leading to more and more complex lifeforms. This is a far more plausible explanation than some mysterious god deciding to create life for some inexplicable reason. Where did the god come from? You creationists just don't make any sense.

      August 29, 2012 at 3:08 am |
    • Simran

      @dual babies,
      I am not angry, I just asked a question "what are the statistics you speak about?" Please specify. Good to know you have taught anatomy, well I have used it in my clinical practice. So you see, we have similar fields. And hence, I ask you to be more specific than just say there are statistics. Coz if there are, I would like to know what I am missing here???

      August 29, 2012 at 5:41 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      dualbabies: I have great respect for nursing and for nurses. You guys do wonderful things in this world. That said, I work in a university with a strong nursing program, and I have served on some of it's committees. Unless your program was much different than ours (and accreditation standards make that unlikely), there is not actually much science education in the curriculum, let alone advanced cellular biology. The result is an unfortunate amount of "woo woo" among nurses (e.g., therapeutic touch, auras, and so on). My point is that there may be quite a lot about cellular and pre-cellular life (and statistics, for that matter) that you are not taking into consideration.

      August 29, 2012 at 9:18 am |
  4. broken record

    Ah, I remember back in the day when the kids used to argue about whether or not the earth was flat. Priest would always come out and beat the round-earthers and heliocentrics, make them drink hemlock and so on. Those were the days.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:59 am |
    • lamb of dog

      These days they have to sell you that earth is flat bs. No more hemlock.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:03 am |
  5. sumguy

    Religion has killed more people than world wars, religion is the original political tool/lie, religion takes away freedom of thought.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:52 am |
    • manbearpig

      Also, when you think about it objectively, it's really fvcking ridiculous.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:59 am |
    • ScottCA

      For sure religion has killed far more people than anything else. Religion has been used as a means of gathering armies and an excuse to kill since its first conception. Even the Christian God Yahweh Saboath, is the Hebrew god for war. Moses needed to raise an army this is why he force the Jews into strict worship of Yahweh the god of war.

      In addition religious ignorance has held medical science back and continues to do this today. leaving countless blind and dying that could have been cured had Christianity not held back stem cell research.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:06 am |
    • ScottCA


      August 29, 2012 at 3:16 pm |
  6. ScottCA


    August 29, 2012 at 12:46 am |
    • ScottCA

      I absolutely love the end of this one. It is what I have been saying in different words for a long time.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:48 am |
    • Fluffy the Gerbil of Doom

      ^ Like

      August 29, 2012 at 12:59 am |
    • Simran

      Great, provided people can actually understand what it means.
      I wish there were some like options here.

      August 29, 2012 at 6:15 am |
  7. lamb of dog

    America is sealing its decline with its lack of rational thinking. This is some seriously scary stuff.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:45 am |
    • ScottCA

      Very much so. But Atheism is growing faster than any religion has ever grown in the US. The tide has turned and we will put up one heck of a fight against ignorance.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:50 am |
  8. ScottCA


    August 29, 2012 at 12:44 am |
    • ScottCA

      I highly recommend all of Professor Pinker's books. They are all New York times best sellers, and he is one of the best writers and most intelligent writers I have read. My major was Psychology and this guy is a fantastic mind in the field.
      His writing is witty and fun to read, and all filled with information that explains almost all types of human behavior.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:58 am |
    • Simran


      August 29, 2012 at 6:19 am |
  9. Damon

    Why do people of faith pray before eating their wonderful food instead of praying for the people who do not have any food. Look at all the children being killed everyday in Syria, why not pray for them? Oh wait, because prayer doesnt work. Silly me, I forgot

    August 29, 2012 at 12:40 am |
    • tbon

      could it be that you are the one god is waiting to hear from?
      Syria is all your fault for being so stubborn.
      see? we can both make dumb comments.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:48 am |
  10. JKM

    The world is filled to the brim with people so obsessed with what the contents are of everyone else's head. So much so that we forget to live in the present and we underestimate the positive effects of living a good / centered and "present in the moment" life. God has an eqvelant, it is called Evolution. They are one in the same. I am not anymore a Christian than an atheist. However confusing that statement may sound, be aware that the world is perfectly paired in opposites. They work together flawlessly in every aspect of life as we know it. And the ultimate opposite of Creationism is Evolution, and together, perfectly paired, so they will stay. Without them we would never be able to learn what drives life or how deeply we can and should live our own. Believing in one alone without understanding the value in its opposite is only providing half the education, half the potential and ultimately only half the reward. Have you not ever studied your opposite...? Or are you always using only one half of your brain? No matter what your belief, unless you can find the blending points, the middle per say (of anything), you will never have full understanding or be totally complete. That's a universal law of irrefutability.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:37 am |
    • JKM

      tbon – You you are demonstrating the exact behavior I am talking about. Thank You.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:55 am |
    • t3chn0ph0b3

      Taoism doesn't fit here. If you're talking about good and evil, you'd make sense. Evolution and Creationism are not paired opposites in the Taoist sense.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:55 am |
    • Simran

      I appreciate your repsect for both JKM, and do see a lot of people around me sharing the same view. No body (at least the scientists) are trying to tell you here that you should stop believing in God. God is a spiritual journey, and yes some people like me think it is okay to be moral and spiritual without believing in God.
      That is exactly not the issue here. The issue is CAN GOD BE INCLUDED IN SCIENCE TEXTBOOKS? Science is evidence based, and if there were evidence for god, there would be no argument.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:58 am |
    • JKM

      Simran, I do believe that in order to fully understand the world – The Whole World – and all the people in it, we must always present both sides. At this point in time, the belief in God (and whatever processes are behind our belief in God) has contributed to our evolution as humans. So it is also now a part of how science must see the world. the battle between and proof for and against good and evil will always be spiritual in a sense, whether or not one believes in a God at all. It is from this perspective I believe they should place such information in the textbooks of science. Whether or not God exists may be debatable, however the insatiable belief in God that humans have is not debatable as a part of and as an influencer in our lives, our world and our evolution. Other people should never decide what you believe. That is for the individual alone. Both science and religion must find the middle and respectfully allow the other room for inspection by all who wish to investigate.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:15 am |
    • dualbabies


      Is there no evidence for creation? Can you just have a "Big Bang" without something igniting it? Can it just happen? Can you look at the complexity of the human cell or DNA and say statistically, "That just happened'?

      I don't disagree with natural selection, but as a nurse I have seen unnatural survival. There is too much that has not been understood to dismiss any idea because it is tied to God just like it is to assume that it is true because it is linked to evolution. True science will find the right answer eventually.

      Should we dig our heels in and shout the party platform like the politicians? I don't think scientists should. We should be after the truth regardless of what we might find. There is as much evidence for creation as there is for evolution, maybe more. It's wrong to not tell both sides.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:19 am |
    • Simran

      I dont think scientists are stopping anyone from investigating other possibilities. The whole truth cannot be known by science alone and i dont think (I am not going to speak for others here) that the whole truth can be known by putting God in the equation.

      Now, if you say Big bang couldnot happen by itself (first Big bang is not the theroy of evolution), okay I will agree with you God made it happen. But then, I am going to ask " What made God happen?" You see where we go with this – we will just be going around in circles. If God can happen from nothing, why cant nothing energy itself come from nothing? Why should I believe in a supernatural being????

      August 29, 2012 at 1:35 am |
    • JKM

      dualbabies, I appreciate your feedback.
      Actually there was a relatively new discovery of what is being called "The God Particle." It is a particular, a very tiny piece of matter that seems to pop up literally out of nowhere, out of no "matter" at all. This is being used to more intensely validate the Big Bang Theory.
      However, just as there is always an opposite to everything in the universe, there to shall be an opposite to the so called God Particle. Except they haven't found that just yet. One discovery will lead to the next until finally science can one day explain what continues to exist outside of what we know as matter / or what we call Life.

      August 29, 2012 at 1:38 am |
    • Simran

      " At this point in time, the belief in God (and whatever processes are behind our belief in God) has contributed to our evolution as humans."

      Please shed more light on how belief in God has helped us evolve more? Yes, you may have evolved spiritually, but as humans???? What aspect of humanity do we talk of? The aspect where we do not tolerate people with different beliefs, the aspect where we use the name of god to kill others, the aspect where we use the name of god to suppress our women and minorities (gays for instance)???
      I did not know that electricity was made in the name of god, that fire was made in the name of god, that this internet was made in the name of god, that my medical science had anything to do with god!!!

      August 29, 2012 at 1:39 am |
    • Simran


      " Whether or not God exists may be debatable, however the insatiable belief in God that humans have is not debatable"

      Is that the argument you make for placing creationism in science textbooks? really?? That the overwhelming majority believes in god, so it should be there. Since when did science become about people's polling opinions or beliefs???
      Well, by that standard, we would never have been able to progress beyond the "Earth is the centre of the universe" point – since the overwhelming majority then believed that to be true!

      August 29, 2012 at 1:47 am |
    • JKM

      Everything is connected Simran. Just because the most evolved minds can't yet explain something does in no way mean that it can't be true. There is always possibility in the unknown. And I'm afraid we may never know it all, at least not in our lifetime.

      Yes, that is exactly what I base my argument on. That the simple recognition many people have for existence outside of what they understand to currently be physical matter, should not in anyway be counted out as an influential factor in human evolvement. And yes, for every one of the factors you mentioned history will talk of the influence that belief in God has combined to give us the unique perspectives regarding modern day medicine, prejudice and even the way ancient humans thought about fire and water. The belief in a God has contributed to and changed the way the human race has evolved, whether one believes it or not.
      Have I mentioned "The God Gene?"

      August 29, 2012 at 2:14 am |
    • Simran

      I dont think it would be appropriate to brong in the god gene, bcoz there is no sufficient evidence for that either. So I dont like to use it in any of my arguments. However, you still make your argument saying that "Concept of god has helped evolution whether I believe it or not" without providing any substance to the evidence, pretty much like saying God exists whether you believe it or not.
      The topic of debate is WHETHER WE SHOULD INCLUDE CREATIONISM as alternative scientific theory. And I am yet to hear any solid argument from your side in its favo'.
      Let us review the points you make till now:
      1. Belief in god has helped us evolve. I ask – prove that. Pick history, pick politics, pick science, whatever you like.
      2. It has been the belief of the majority – My argument – Are we deciding by polling here. Please provide your counter-argument.
      3. Creationism has not been proven – you say that yourself. In fact, I didn't even go into the realm of god gene or god particle coz we do not know enough as yet. U bring them up and support my argument.

      Science is not threatening religion you see. Religion is just feeling threatened. Give sufficient evidence for creationism and I shall accept it. But if the evidence is – Hey we found a flaw in evolution (refer Cambrian explosion, u have not explained macro-evolution, complexity of DNA etc etc, and of course if you read at their site – THE BIGGEST EVIDENCE IS GOD TOLD US IN THE BIBLE!!!!) – I will call it insanity. I do not challenge religion. I challenge it's interference in science.
      Now why is it that no other religion seems to be worried about creationism???? Greek civilization was technologically far advanced than the people who wrote Bible. Hindus have a rich (though partially lost) heritage of the 4 Vedas and the Upanishads. They were so far advanced in every field including surgery and plastic surgery, and metaphysics. Now some divisions of Hinduism do not believe in creation and some believe in multiple gods – that gods reside in Swarg Lok. Why not accept that concept as well and incorporate it.

      August 29, 2012 at 5:59 am |
    • JKM

      Simran, because no side of any debate is completely valid without thouroughly discussing and presenting every aspect of each side first. That's one reason why you include the argument for God into science textbooks. It's why any teaching material which is working itself towards the ultimate truth, must always be presented in light of its opposing or otherwise opposite consideration. No matter how obscure or invalid it may sound to some, the ultimate value in understanding the truth can only be seen when ALL considerations are on display for everyone to see.

      Your asking me to present information which proves why Creationism should be entered into textbooks next to proven evolutionary processes. I don't deny evolution. Not for a second. So for me evolution is also a truth. However, I always ask that someone also prove that God or something that equates to God, does NOT exsist. And the definition of proof is a variable depending on which individual and which mindset examines it.

      We can't use your personal definition of proof as the definitive example of what is correct and true for the whole world. What we can reasonably do is examine and present the many differing faucets of what can be viewed by some as evidence, as well as examine and present the ability and lack of ability to both Prove and Disprove anything in this world. Both sides must be placed next to each other for a fair and reasonable assessment to occur. period. I'm not telling you that God exists regardless of what you believe. I'm telling you that God exisists to other people regardless of what you believe.. And you must make room for that.

      Perhaps God is of a substance which the human body can not perceive? Perhaps God is real? Perhaps God is not? The answer is not as important when the debate is about how the possibility of Gods exisistamce effects evolution. And that's the discussion we're having, and the only right answer is to then present the varying considerations, proof and lack of proof in the world up against what science is calling concrete.

      And of-course, a belief in something DOES in-fact affect the way something evolves. Just as the lack of belief in something effects the way it evolves. That's something they teach in elementary school. The processes by which this occurs is still in the discovery phase and I suspect it may stay there for a long time. Afterall, evolutionary processes are still being discovered also. But does that mean science should always omit the unknown? In proper theory you must always leave room for the possibility of what may or may not come to pass. Otherwise your assessment may turn out to be a half-truth or not even a truth at all. It's happened to science more than once.

      If God does exsist, I suppose he is not of the flesh... Since if he was I would assume we would have some kind of physically-scientific evidence. But that is not to rule out his exsitance completely. Your perceptions are limited by the tools you use to realize them. Perhaps that is the core that the real debate should be about. If we should only consider truth to be what science can prove, then perhaps people in antiquity should have properly believed that the earth was flat. Oh.. Wait a minute.. That's exactly what people did. Science could only come so far, and so that was the truth of that time. However, as science moved forward, we found out that the original "facts" were all wrong. Do you see what I'm saying here? Just because we don't have what some people deem as proof of Gods exsistamce, doesn't mean that he doesn't exsist. Actually, some believe quite the opposite. I personally had a heart attack at the age of 14 and was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital. I had an experience which was not of this world and I was able to also speak of very detailed things which were happening in the lives of people in my life while I was dead. And for the record, I don't believe in the Bible as the accurate word of God. I don't believe in almost anything it says. I can't see how if God actually intended to us to obay his "law" he would have been so ignorant as to give it to us in such a way that people would be able to change it, add to it, take it apart and re-present it in different ways. Afterall there are I believe 26 different versions of the bible. Doesn't make any sense to me. But that doesn't mean God is not real.

      It would be fair for science to admit it doesn't consider anything to be current proof of God's exsistamce. However, it should allow room for that argument to occur. Not exsist in solitary ignorance because what it is willing to except as proof hasn't been found yet. And the same can be said for religion. Both sides must make room for the other. I believe both do exsist. I just don't see either side being able to claim complete victory at this time and as such, both sides must always be represented.

      As far as how human evolutionary processes have been affected by the belief in God, I think you should look no further than google. Perhaps what you will find will seem as complete garbage to you and perhaps what you will find may ring a bell. Try it. I've always lived life by the adage that if there is anything you are not sure about, or disagree with or against in any way... Research it, learn about it and find a balance. I can't define what "proof" should be. Each of our experiences in life are unique and perhaps that's the way it should be. I respect your time and conversation here. Perhaps these posts will help another readers assessment of the total picture and from there we will have another unique point of view in the world.

      August 30, 2012 at 4:07 pm |
  11. Wake Board Daddy

    It was the ever expanding universe discovery that led to Mr. Albert Einstein's reversal of his prior athiest belief into the creationism belief in a higher power (God). Scientific fact that's indisputeable. The universe is proven to be ever expanding. So that means that when reversed it was generated from a single point. Therefore, who or what was responsible for setting it into motion????????

    August 29, 2012 at 12:35 am |
    • lamb of dog


      August 29, 2012 at 12:48 am |
    • ThinkingMan

      That's false. Einstein never believed in Creationism. Stop spreading lies.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:59 am |
  12. ScottCA


    August 29, 2012 at 12:35 am |
    • ScottCA

      Hey it worked =-) now I need to learn to do it in disquss.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:36 am |
    • Simran

      Good 🙂

      August 29, 2012 at 12:46 am |
    • b4bigbang

      Your guy in the video begins one of his talks by
      *quoting the Son of God's Golden Rule and pronouncing that it is the basis of all moral systems*
      then concludes by saying that there's no room for faith in our existance!

      Wow! What brilliance!

      August 29, 2012 at 3:18 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      Claiming to be wise, your boy Pinkie becomes a fool.
      Yes, see Pinkie become a fool right here in living color.

      August 29, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
  13. randomthoughts

    Dinosaurs. Hello. The same carbon dating you used to verify the shroud of turin. I am not bashing religion, but don't you think it is a fear of dying and just nothing after that? Christianity is at times, the biggest hypocrisy with the commandments. I guess you don't need me to list the things that are right and wrong. Give your donations to the richest business (Apple aside) in the world.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:34 am |
  14. Damon

    You wont debate it because why would you debate something you have no choice of winning?
    Seriously, go to. http://Www.godisimaginary.com and spend 5 minutes there, with an open mind by the way. Dont worry, we all know you will just make up what ever excuse fits the answer you need thats right for you.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:34 am |
    • TruthInAtheism

      A wonderful site. should be required reading for all humans

      August 29, 2012 at 11:26 pm |
  15. ArthurP

    In the beginning God and the Misses were, well you know, and he was being very attentive to the her which eventually resulted in a very Big BANG!!!! The reverberations of which are still detectable today.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:29 am |
  16. tony

    Religion teaches you to be meek and happy while Big Oil razes the environment and sells you more cars and air you can't breathe any more.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:27 am |
  17. ScottCA

    These blog guys decided to deactivate Disquss comment posting, when it was only the atheist posts that were getting likes.
    It will be funny to see what happens to the theologists when they cant sell religious lies anymore. I guess they will need to find a new con, Maybe business leadership courses.

    August 29, 2012 at 12:21 am |
    • Simran

      Posting a video is pretty simple. Just copy the URL and paste it here.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:27 am |
    • ScottCA

      My links get filtered out.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:29 am |
    • hairy_fedd

      glad you liked the Symphony of Science video, here's another


      August 29, 2012 at 12:33 am |
    • ScottCA

      This one speaks to the fact that the reality of science is far more consoling than all the lies of religion. The truth we have discovered through evidence is far more fantastic than anything the limited imagination of religion could have dreamt of.

      If the religious could only realize that there is nothing to fear in giving up the lies, and everything to gain by learning the truth. It is like sick people too afraid to go to the hospital and find out what is wrong.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:42 am |
  18. hairy_fedd

    More of these idiot 'scientists'


    August 29, 2012 at 12:19 am |
    • ScottCA

      Thank you very much. I wish I knew how to post videos

      August 29, 2012 at 12:24 am |
  19. John Bunyan


    August 29, 2012 at 12:16 am |
  20. hairy_fedd

    The only reason the news networks jumped on this is because Nye used to have a TV show for children. Any other engineer or scientist that had said this would have been ignored.

    Here's something we should get outraged about.


    August 29, 2012 at 12:10 am |
    • ScottCA

      Absolutely. Religious ignorance and ignorance regarding Global warming are a connected problem. Ignorance in any form will lead to unnecessary suffering of people.

      August 29, 2012 at 12:33 am |
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
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.