home
RSS
Creationists hit back at Bill Nye with their own video
"The idea of deep time ... explains so much of the world around us," Bill Nye said in the viral video.
August 31st, 2012
04:34 PM ET

Creationists hit back at Bill Nye with their own video

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

(CNN) - Bill Nye's viral YouTube video pleading with parents not to teach their children to deny evolution has spawned an online life of its own, with prominent creationists hitting back against the popular TV host.

"Time is Nye for a Rebuttal," Ken Ham the CEO of Answers in Genesis writes on his website. Answers in Genesis is the Christian ministry behind the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky.

Nye's criticism of creationism went viral earlier this week, after being posted last Thursday.

"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," Nye says in his Big Think video, which has been viewed nearly 3 million times.

Ham writes that Nye is joining in with other evolutionists who say teaching children to deny evolution is a form of "child abuse." That idea comes in part from the atheist scientist Richard Dawkins, who in his book "The God Delusion" argues against exposing children to religion before they are old enough to fully understand it.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

"At AiG and the Creation Museum, we teach children and adults the truth concerning who they are in the Creator’s eyes — and where they came from," Ham writes. "We tell people that they do have purpose and meaning in life and that they were created for a purpose. "No, we are not just evolved animals as Nye believes; we are all made in the image of God."

Ham is the public face of a group that academics call Young Earth Creationists, though they prefer to be called Biblical Creationists. They believe in a literal interpretation of the creation account in the book of Genesis found in the Bible.

The Creation Museum also produced its own rebuttal video on YouTube that features two of their staff scientists, both Ph.Ds, David Menton and Georgia Purdom.

"[Nye] might be interested to know I also teach my young daughter about evolution and I know many Christian parents who do the same," Purdom says in the video. "Children should be exposed to both ideas concerning our past."

For the past 30 years, one popular method for Creationists to advance their cause has been to make an equal-time argument,with Creationism taught alongside evolution. In the late 1980s, some state legislatures passed bills that promoted the idea of a balanced treatment of both ideas in the classroom.

In 1987, the issue made it all the way to the Supreme Court, where a Louisiana "equal-time law" was struck down. The court ruled that teaching creationism in public school class rooms was a violation of the Establishment Cause in the Constitution, which is commonly referred to as the separation of church and state.

A key point between most scientists and many creationists is the timing for the origin of the world.

Your Take: 5 reactions to Bill Nye's creationism critique

Nye's argument falls in line with the vast majority of scientists, who date the age of the earth as 4.5 billion years old and the universe as 14.5 billion years old.

"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 says in his viral video.

Young Earth Creationists say the weeklong account of God creating the earth and everything in it represents six 24-hour periods (plus one day of rest) and date the age of the earth between 6,000 and 10,000 years.

"Yes we see fossils and distant stars, but the history on how they got there really depends on our worldview," Purdom says in the museum's rebuttal. "Do we start with man's ideas, who wasn't here during man's supposed billions of years of earth history or do we start with the Bible, the written revelation of the eyewitness account of the eternal God who created it all?"

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

Polling from Gallup has shown for the past 30 years that between 40-46% of the survey respondents believe in Creationism, that God created humans and the world in the past 10,000 years.

The most recent poll showed belief in atheistic evolution was on the rise at 16%, nearly double what it had been in previous years. The poll also found 32% of respondents believe in evolution guided by God.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Belief • Christianity • Creationism • Science

soundoff (5,973 Responses)
  1. Edo

    I find it interesting that the very foundation of the trolls and athiests are the theorys put forth by these scientists that "Believe in God or a higher power" kinda funny doncha think?

    September 1, 2012 at 10:32 pm |
    • Gadflie

      The scientists that I am arguing in favor of are Einstein, Hawking and Darwin. None of which believed.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:36 pm |
    • Answer

      The funniest thing ever is that of a religious tard coming up with this one liner: "prove that no god(s) exist".

      September 1, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      What I think is really funny is that you write the word "athiests" and expect others not to laugh at you. Idiot.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:38 pm |
    • common nonsense

      Virtual no modern scientist believes in Creationism. There was a link earlier that showed 99.9% of scientists believe in evolution.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:38 pm |
    • Edo

      If I were writing a paper I would be concered with spelling...Idiot.
      I was arguing for an Architect not that Evolution does not exist...merely that Evolution is part of Gods design.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Is this sarah palin? Doncha think.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:41 pm |
    • Edo

      @lamb of dog
      Why do you result to childish insults when presented with an Argument? I presented data...maybe that data is flawed and I proposed a position. You respond with Insults...Troll Much? I think you are posting in the wrong forum probably should be posting on Yahoo.

      At least Common Nonsense came up with an Argument and some data that I could look up.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:47 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      "Result"?? I think you mean "resort", little one.

      Stop posturing. You're looking ridiculous.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:48 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Actually Edo, you presented a logical fallacy pretending to be an argument. Common among creationists.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:49 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You haven't presented any argument (which is not capitalized unless it's at the beginning of a sentence, by the way).

      September 1, 2012 at 10:50 pm |
    • Edo

      Tom I am not posturing just stating my opinion on the matter and backing it up with what data I had. If I wanted a spell checker I would paste anything I wrote into word. Once again I know how to spell and have written papers where spelling and punctuation matter...I CoUlD WrItE LiKe this does that change the position of the posting?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:56 pm |
    • Edo

      Gladflie please explain...

      September 1, 2012 at 10:57 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You shouldn't need to use a spell-checker to write like someone who has a brain, Edo. You haven't presented any "data" at all. Your unsupported and poorly expressed opinions are all I see here.

      If you don't want to be laughed at, don't be laughable.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:59 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Then you come back at lamb of dog and accuse him of "resulting" to insults and tell him HE'S the one who should be posting at Yahoo?

      Are you kidding me? I wouldn't take you seriously now if you WERE Einstein, after that performance.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:01 pm |
    • Edo

      I presented data...you deny the information that I posted as data?
      Data a known or assumed fact that is used as the basis for a theory, conclusion, or inference

      Maybe it was a poor assumption but you sir are wrong that I havent presented any data.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:02 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Edo, look up "Appeal to Authority". Educate yourself. It might do you some good.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:02 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      I'm not a "sir" and I'm not wrong. You haven't presented any "data".

      September 1, 2012 at 11:10 pm |
    • Edo

      Tom sorry In my effort to be polite if I called you Sir,
      The information I posted was supporting data...whether that data was flawed or not remains is unimportant in this discussion. You cannot discount data simply because you dont think its relevant.

      Gadflie I will check out the link thanks

      September 1, 2012 at 11:16 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Posting a list of scientists who you claim 'believe' is NOT DATA, you moron.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:18 pm |
  2. Edo

    There is no need to deny evolution in my opinion...God Created everything, God is everwhere, at everytime and in everything.

    God created the perfect machine...The complexity of which boggles the mind. Scientists just have recently come to understand how a bee flies and dont really have an in depth understanding on how a cut heals.

    God made us in his image so we are able to think and come up with theories ourselves but scientists dont really understand anything yet.

    According to this list,...94 believers to 8 non believers...I believe that percentage would be 92%.

    Nobel Scientists (20-21 Century)
    Albert Einstein Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish
    Max Planck Nobel Laureate in Physics Protestant
    Erwin Schrodinger Nobel Laureate in Physics Catholic
    Werner Heisenberg Nobel Laureate in Physics Lutheran
    Robert Millikan Nobel Laureate in Physics probably Congregationalist
    Charles Hard Townes Nobel Laureate in Physics United Church of Christ (raised Baptist)
    Arthur Schawlow Nobel Laureate in Physics Methodist
    William D. Phillips Nobel Laureate in Physics Methodist
    William H. Bragg Nobel Laureate in Physics Anglican
    Guglielmo Marconi Nobel Laureate in Physics Catholic and Anglican
    Arthur Compton Nobel Laureate in Physics Presbyterian
    Arno Penzias Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish
    Nevill Mott Nobel Laureate in Physics Anglican
    Isidor Isaac Rabi Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish
    Abdus Salam Nobel Laureate in Physics Muslim
    Antony Hewish Nobel Laureate in Physics Christian (denomination?)
    Joseph H. Taylor, Jr. Nobel Laureate in Physics Quaker
    Alexis Carrel Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic
    John Eccles Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic
    Joseph Murray Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic
    Ernst Chain Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Jewish
    George Wald Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Jewish
    Ronald Ross Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Christian (denomination?)
    Derek Barton Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Christian (denomination?)
    Christian Anfinsen Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Jewish
    Walter Kohn Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Jewish
    Richard Smalley Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Christian (denomination?)

    Nobel Writers (20-21 Century)
    T.S. Eliot Nobel Laureate in Literature Anglo-Catholic (Anglican)
    Rudyard Kipling Nobel Laureate in Literature Anglican
    Alexander Solzhenitsyn Nobel Laureate in Literature Russian Orthodox
    François Mauriac Nobel Laureate in Literature Catholic
    Hermann Hesse Nobel Laureate in Literature Christian; Buddhist?
    Winston Churchill Nobel Laureate in Literature Anglican
    Jean-Paul Sartre Nobel Laureate in Literature Lutheran; Freudian; Marxist; atheist; Messianic Jew
    Sigrid Undset Nobel Laureate in Literature Catholic (previously Lutheran)
    Rabindranath Tagore Nobel Laureate in Literature Hindu
    Rudolf Eucken Nobel Laureate in Literature Christian (denomination?)
    Isaac Singer Nobel Laureate in Literature Jewish

    Nobel Peace Laureates (20-21 Century)
    Albert Schweitzer Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Lutheran
    Jimmy Carter Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Baptist (former Southern Baptist)
    Theodore Roosevelt Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Dutch Reformed; Episcopalian
    Woodrow Wilson Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Presbyterian
    Frederik de Klerk Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Dutch Reformed
    Nelson Mandela Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Christian (denomination?)
    Kim Dae-Jung Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Catholic
    Dag Hammarskjold Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Christian (denomination?)
    Martin Luther King, Jr. Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Baptist
    Adolfo Perez Esquivel Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Catholic
    Desmond Tutu Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Anglican
    John R. Mott Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Methodist

    Founders of Modern Science (16-21 Century)
    Isaac Newton Founder of Classical Physics and Infinitesimal Calculus Anglican (rejected Trinitarianism, i.e., Athanasianism;
    believed in the Arianism of the Primitive Church)
    Galileo Galilei Founder of Experimental Physics Catholic
    Nicolaus Copernicus Founder of Heliocentric Cosmology Catholic (priest)
    Johannes Kepler Founder of Physical Astronomy and Modern Optics Lutheran
    Francis Bacon Founder of the Scientific Inductive Method Anglican
    René Descartes Founder of Analytical Geometry and Modern Philosophy Catholic
    Blaise Pascal Founder of Hydrostatics, Hydrodynamics,
    and the Theory of Probabilities Jansenist
    Michael Faraday Founder of Electronics and Electro-Magnetics Sandemanian
    James Clerk Maxwell Founder of Statistical Thermodynamics Presbyterian; Anglican; Baptist
    Lord Kelvin Founder of Thermodynamics and Energetics Anglican
    Robert Boyle Founder of Modern Chemistry Anglican
    William Harvey Founder of Modern Medicine Anglican (nominal)
    John Ray Founder of Modern Biology and Natural History Calvinist (denomination?)
    Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz German Mathematician and Philosopher,
    Founder of Infinitesimal Calculus Lutheran
    Charles Darwin Founder of the Theory of Evolution Anglican (nominal); Unitarian
    Ernst Haeckel German Biologist,
    the Most Influential Evolutionist in Continental Europe
    Thomas H. Huxley English Biologist and Evolutionist,
    Famous As "Darwin's Bulldog"
    Joseph J. Thomson Nobel Laureate in Physics, Discoverer of the Electron,
    Founder of Atomic Physics Anglican
    Louis Pasteur Founder of Microbiology and Immunology Catholic

    Great Philosophers (17-21 Century)
    Immanuel Kant One of the Greatest Philosophers
    in the History of Western Philosophy Lutheran
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau Founder of Modern Deism born Protestant;
    converted as a teen to Catholic
    Voltaire French Philosopher and Historian,
    One of the Most Influential Thinkers of the Enlightenment raised in Jansenism
    David Hume Scottish Empiricist Philosopher, Historian, and Economist,
    Founder of Modern Skepticism Church of Scotland (Presbyterian)
    Spinoza Dutch-Jewish Philosopher,
    the Chief Exponent of Modern Rationalism Judaism; later pantheism/deism
    Giordano Bruno Italian Philosopher, Astronomer, and Mathematician,
    Founder of the Theory of the Infinite Universe Catholic
    George Berkeley Irish Philosopher and Mathematician, Founder of Modern Idealism,
    Famous as "The Precursor of Mach and Einstein" Anglican
    John Stuart Mill English Philosopher and Economist,
    the Major Exponent of Utilitarianism agnostic; Utilitarian
    Richard Swinburne Oxford Professor of Philosophy,
    One of the Most Influential Theistic Philosophers

    Nobelists, Philosophers, and Scientists that believe in Jesus

    – Alexis Carrel
    – Albert Einstein
    – Arthur Compton
    – Robert Millikan
    – Francois Mauriac
    – Sigrid Undset
    – T.S. Eliot
    – Mother Theresa
    – Albert Schweitzer
    – Theodore Roosevelt
    – Frederik de Klerk
    – John R. Mott
    – Kim Dae-Jung
    – Martin Luther King, Jr.
    – Jimmy Carter
    – Blaise Pascal
    Source(s):
    http://www.adherents.com/people/100_Nobe…

    We are fearfully and wonderfully made and just a study on the intricate designs and function of His creation is enough to humble me. Once you get to know Him, you will come to learn that He actually does rock!!!

    September 1, 2012 at 10:29 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      When you have to misrepresent so much to make an argument, chances are you're arguing an untruth.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:32 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Kid, just because Einstein was born Jewish, doesn't mean he was a believer. He described himself as an agnostic. Other than that, the argument is just an appeal to authority. Laughable.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:32 pm |
    • TheVocalAtheist

      You definitely creep me out.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:33 pm |
    • Answer

      Here we are today of those men that have contributed to science and now all the religious freaks are running scared of the sciences today.. why is that?

      Why is science making your religions now irrelevant that you now have to cling to their deaths like they are a token from your delusional god?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:35 pm |
    • Edo

      Agnostic is the belif in a higher power do you deny that? Why would it creep you out? Just stating facts or are you only interested in arguing non-facts? come up with some data or shut up maybe?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:36 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Edo, you really need to look up the definition of Agnostic. Your ignorance is showing.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
    • TheVocalAtheist

      Is that Edo or Ego?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Where you wrote "we don't understand" you should have wrote "I don't understand"

      September 1, 2012 at 10:38 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      "He really does rock, once you get to know him." Straight off the Youth for Christ bandwagon.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Edo according to yourself you need to shut up. You don't even know what agnostic means.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
    • Edo

      Agnostic- somebody denying something is knowable: somebody who doubts that a question has one correct answer or that something can be completely understood

      Looks like my understanding is correct...Basically that you cant prove he/it exists but you also cannot prove he/it does not exist. So the folks on the list either believed in God or were not sure He did or Did not exist

      That sum it up?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:50 pm |
    • Edo

      Once again attempts are correcting grammar or spelling are just distracting wastes of time...I know how to spell and failing that I know how to use a spell checker. The issue here is I dont want to waste my time getting it all right for a bunch of folks on a forum...The arguments and positions are what Interest me.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:52 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      It's only a retard that could think agnostics believe in a higher power.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:55 pm |
    • Edo

      Rational Ill dumb it down for you with a link....
      http://www.ehow.com/how_2074813_become-agnostic.html

      September 1, 2012 at 10:59 pm |
  3. common sense

    evolution...the greatest hoax of all time

    September 1, 2012 at 10:25 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Wow! Did you come up with that yourself?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:27 pm |
    • common nonsense

      Oh I see the confusion. Religions ask people for money, so you are assuming science does the same. Therefore science is a hoax.

      No it turns out that science doesn't ask for money. That's entirely in the purvey of religions.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:30 pm |
    • Answer

      When all of you religious freaks are dead and your religions have fallen away – we'll finally be able to rejoice in freedom.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:30 pm |
    • TheVocalAtheist

      God...the greatest hoax of all time

      September 1, 2012 at 10:34 pm |
  4. Martin

    Nye is an engineer, not scientist, who received the "Humanist of the Year" award in 2010. Hmmm.....

    September 1, 2012 at 10:25 pm |
    • niknak

      He is a scientist by any and every definition of the word.
      Sorry you are not that good with the English language to understand.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:30 pm |
  5. common sense

    "A five million year old piece of bone that was thought to be the collarbone of a humanlike creature is actually part of a dolphin rib...The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone." (Dr. Tim White, anthropologist, University of California, Berkeley, quoted in New Scientist, April 28, 1983.

    September 1, 2012 at 10:25 pm |
    • Answer

      Typical weak arguments from retard creationists.."look one thing is wrong.. they must all be wrong."

      Get a fvckin clue you moron creationists.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:27 pm |
    • donna

      Only the mystical think they are infallible.

      September 2, 2012 at 3:42 pm |
  6. common sense

    "When the blood of a seal, freshly killed at McMurdo Sound in the Antarctic was tested by carbon-14, it showed the seal had died 1,300 years ago." (From W. Dort Jr., Ph.D. - Geology, Professor, University of Kansas, quoted in Antarctic Journal of the United States, 1971.

    September 1, 2012 at 10:24 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Sorry kid, not peer reviewed.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:26 pm |
  7. common sense

    http://scienceagainstevolution.org/v5i10f.htm

    September 1, 2012 at 10:15 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Ooh, an argumentum ad populum. Here's a fun rebuke in the same spirit. http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve

      September 1, 2012 at 10:17 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Common sense is that name a joke?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:23 pm |
    • common nonsense

      FYi that website says "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence to creation-science..."

      Not exactly a majority...

      September 1, 2012 at 10:25 pm |
  8. common sense

    If evolution is a fact, why do many scientists still advocate for intelligent design? The only FACT here is that evolutionists have succeeded in creating an illusion of fact and acceptance of their doctrine. If anyone dares contradict their beliefs, they resort to childish name calling and self righteous rants.

    September 1, 2012 at 10:14 pm |
    • common nonsense

      Which scientists?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      No credible scientists advocate retarded design.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm |
  9. ScottCA

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uioxhkcnhc&w=640&h=360]

    September 1, 2012 at 10:09 pm |
  10. daniel

    Rest In Peace William Sanford Nye. You will be missed.

    September 1, 2012 at 10:04 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      He's more alive than ever.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:05 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Rest in peace, daniel, you guys are on the way out.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:09 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Daniel why don't you jump on your dinosaur and ride off into the sunset.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:14 pm |
  11. vincent

    Once more for effect Gadflie: if evolution is true, we descended from whatever, then why, please tell me why there is STILL debate over evolution vs. debate. One would think since the question has been finally answered, mankind can put away all his beliefs, that the governments and nations of the world would have finally let the TRUTH out to all. And finally, once more for effect, we see Tremendous Design in the universe, down to the smallest particle of DNA. And you want me to believe it is all the result of blind chance........????? Sorry my man, but that takes more imagination- and more stretching of the bounds of credulity for even me. You go on and believe what you want.....Let the evidence take you where it may......Your theory remains so.............What bothers me is that supposedly intelligent people like yourself see the world as just coming into being without a Designer.....Honestly, all name-calling aside......that is really and truly idiotic, and displays an intentional lack of intellectual curiosity........"Darwins's Black Box, by Philip Johnson........Get it, and enrich yourself.......save the name calling for the gym........I wish you well.....

    September 1, 2012 at 9:57 pm |
    • Gadflie

      That's simple. Because people like you are willfully ignorant. It's really that simple. Now, it's your turn.
      Just for amusement. Let's see exactly what evidence would you accept as sufficient to show that evolution is indeed a fact. How about the absolute gold standard? If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:58 pm |
    • Gadflie

      I've read Darwin's Black Box. I found it amusing. Not a single argument in it that wasn't either a logical fallacy or a misuse of math. Not one.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:59 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      VinTroll

      Who created god?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:04 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      vincent, you have presented not even a glimmer of evidence for creationism.

      Maybe that's because, other than the bible, there isn't any.

      Really, it's deplorable that people are this ignorant about science.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:05 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      So since your little brain can't fathom creation you just decide it must be some sky fairy.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:05 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      "Tremendous Design" => What would I do if I were God and knew what I know. I don't think I would design the Universe and everything in it down to the last detail. I'd let my associate fire things off with the BigBang – repeat as necessary until things were right for the emergence of life with the features of evolutionary dynamics. Sit back and watch.

      Programs I write in real life develop fantastic (apparent) complexity from only a few rules. That makes me feel good. I can reflect on my Tremendous Design.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:09 pm |
  12. Many Stupid People Here

    There's a lot of people here who have not read the Bible and are just talking out of their rear end. They talk simpleton talk because they are too lazy and full of themselves to even try to learn any other side besides Maybe a friend of theirs told them there is no God. That is why they are just fools. A good debater on the side of evolution (although none found on this string) learns all the sides of a subject to present a good argument – unlike what I've seen here. Here, you just have a bunch of stupid people mouthing off as if they think they know something – and again, are too stupid to really research it out.

    September 1, 2012 at 9:53 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Ok, let's start the debate with some standards. Let's see exactly what evidence would you accept as sufficient to show that evolution is indeed a fact. How about the absolute gold standard? If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:55 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Have you read the texts of every other religion?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:56 pm |
    • End Religion

      debating your fictional book would be as silly as debating the deep universal truths of a collection of Calvin & Hobbes cartoons.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:00 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Oh, look. It's science only? back again. Too embarrassed to appear under her original moniker, I guess. No wonder.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:03 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Hey stupid person. If all your "research" comes from a stupid book written hundreds of years ago you're pathetic.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:08 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Hey stupid person. If all your "research" comes from a stupid book written hundreds of years ago you're very pathetic.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:10 pm |
    • religilous

      Reading the Bible is not "research". It's just a bunch of words written around 300 AD by people, not one of who ever met Jesus.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:10 pm |
    • cringe

      religilous:
      "It's just a bunch of words written around 300 AD by people..."

      Not quite. I guess it's a smidge better that you believe that than believing the Bible's supernatural fantasies, but you do not have your facts straight.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:47 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Eric, so you admit that evolution from one species into another is indeed a fact?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:59 pm |
  13. Rational Libertarian

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWVshkVF0SY&w=640&h=360]

    September 1, 2012 at 9:45 pm |
  14. Branson

    Agree with Nye, children need to be educated about evolution and that it is indeed a fantastic lie woven by the non-believer.
    Which child does not like fairy tales? the greatest fairy tale of the 21st century- the evolution tail 😉

    September 1, 2012 at 9:39 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Are you retarded?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:42 pm |
    • Maxx

      It might behove if u call urself a 'national retard' and a not 'rational ......'

      September 2, 2012 at 7:19 am |
  15. religilous

    I'm a creationist. I have faith that religions are created when a guy with no other skills starts telling stories about how everyone is going to Hell if they don't give him money.

    September 1, 2012 at 9:39 pm |
    • Eric

      Gadflie
      Thats like me asking what proof do you have God does not exist. Which cant be answered, you cant prove a negitive.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:22 pm |
  16. Gadflie

    I'm finding it amusing that Vincent's argument basically boils down to "I'm ignorant and that means that evolution is false".

    September 1, 2012 at 9:30 pm |
    • vincent

      and I find it equally interesting that you cant answer serious questions with facts, you only regurgitate information without proof of its' validity, and call it theory.. Then, without answering my questions, you condescendingly question my intellectual dishonesty.......So much for your intellectual honesty....I have not heard one word from you on the question of transitional species, or the existence of vestigial organs, only two, just two of the many problems with evolution. So,here is my suggestion to you my smug, ignorant friend......YOU do your research on those two topics, 'splain them to me so even an ignoramus such as I can impart your superiority in matters of the intellect. So, for all you readers out there, please help my friend Gadflie do something other than run from the questions put to him, and insult where reason should suffice......I may be ignorant in some matters, but I am certainly not a pmpous ass. u, unfortunately, cannot say the same. You insult rather than argue....Come to think of it,,, that sounds like a bit like the Democratic presidential playbook.......Could it be, could that be the reason for the lack of "put up, or shut up" comments from you, dear sir........methinks it to be true

      September 1, 2012 at 9:42 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Vincent, how many transitional species would I have to list to satisfy you? And, exactly how are vestigal organs a problem for evolution? If anything, they are an obvious problem for creationism.
      And, why did you avoid answering my question to you. Here it is again for your convenience.
      Just for amusement. Let's see exactly what evidence would you accept as sufficient to show that evolution is indeed a fact. How about the absolute gold standard? If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:46 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      I've got a question Vinny which you don't seem to want to answer. Who designed the designer? Who created god?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:48 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Poor Vincent is following the dishonest creationist playbook. Never answer questions. Especially about what kind of evidence you would consider valid. If you do, they just might be able to produce it and then you would have to admit that you're wrong. Instead, either give implausable requirements (an ant giving birth to a grasshopper), keep changing the evidence requirements, or come to a forum such as this and require explanations that take textbooks of data. But, he doesn't realize that his dishonesty is clear to everyone. If not, he would answer my query.
      If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:51 pm |
    • Eric

      RL

      God has always existed....he is without time he was, is and is yet to come. The fault in your line of thinking is God is bound by time. Time was created by him inside the universe he created. We are constrained by it not God.

      an easy way to think about it is if time doesnt exist you always are, will be and are yet to come... Pretty impressive concept for man to understand thousands of years ago.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:05 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Eric, where's your evidence? Got any? No, you don't. Neither does vince. All he has is a bunch of ellipses.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:08 pm |
    • Eric

      So where is the evidence for Macro evolution? you believe it but there is no evidence. How did the cell form? Where is the proof? But once again you believe time and random chance...
      So you believe without evidence... sounds like we are not that much different.

      Even the bigbang has never be observed only infered.

      So I ask where is your proof.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:13 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      How do you know god has always existed? Maybe he was created by a lesbian fruit fly? Or maybe the universe has always existed and keeps reoccuring cyclically?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:14 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Eric, let's start with macro evolution. Another word for this is speciation. So, let's see what you would accept as evidence. How about the absolute gold standard? If I can show you evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:15 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Macro-evolution is just micro-evolution over a billion years.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:15 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Macro and micro are terms you creationists made up to attempt to defend your pathetic inability to deny that evolution has occurred and continues to occur, Eric.

      Do all you read the same stupid propaganda? You all post the same nonsensical crap over and over.

      Why don't you take a science class, Eric, instead of just refusing to learn?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Eric is hilarious. He demands proof yet offers none.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm |
    • Eric

      I would accept it if for any Modern mammal you go back 3 nodes on the "tree of life" and show me hafl the 150K or so transitional forms that would be required to have existed to change slowly over time.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:18 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Yeah. He's a lot like Chard that way. Only a bit less intelligent, if that's even possible.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:19 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      A variation can take place over one generation. 150k wouldn't even be that far back.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
    • Eric

      lamb of dog
      why is it funny I am telling you what I believe, I am not the one claiming I know because I have evidence.
      ...we have emperical evidence...

      I have faith.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Eric, I asked presented you a query. You avoided it. Why? Here it is again, just to see if you are intellectually honest. If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:21 pm |
    • Eric

      I dont think you get where I am comming from yet... I do believe in natural selection.. to what extent we do not have proof.
      Now lets assume Darwin was completly correct it still does not take anything away from God for all we know thats how he did it.

      But at this point there is not enough evidence that one can reasonably conclude that.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:25 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Yet you state that you understand god and time. And that your god exist and is in control of these things. And you have 0 proof. Its hilarious.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:28 pm |
    • Eric

      Gadflie
      I did answer it 4 posts above yours

      September 1, 2012 at 10:28 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      I'm we, and I don't know. Neither do you.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:29 pm |
    • Eric

      Yes I believe. That is the point.
      It is faith.

      Just like we believe the bigbang happened... it has never been observed.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:33 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Eric, no you did not. You answered a strawman that you came up with. My query was very specific. Read it carefully.
      If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:34 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Evidence that the Big Bang occurred has been shown. Evidence of god has not. The fact that you don't understand the meaning of evidence is not relevant, Eric.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:36 pm |
    • Eric

      No but if you yac show me even 10% of the transitional forms that connect me to a pigon since we share a common ancestor 10% shouldnt be that hard.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:39 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You failed to answer the second part of the question, Eric. Why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:41 pm |
    • Eric

      Tom I said observed the oldest or youngest picture of the universe we have is we believe about 400,000 years after we believe the bigbang happened. the cosmic background radation image.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:41 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Eric, again, you avoid the entire query. Read it again. If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:44 pm |
    • Sidney

      Meanwhile Eric has no evidence that he can present for his god, and it has charateristics that are incompatible with each other.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:46 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      "the cosmic background radation image."

      Which is more evidence by a long shot than you've presented for your god or your statement that he did it.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:47 pm |
    • Eric

      Tom once again I am not trying to disprove scientific discovery. I personally believe the bigbang happened. still doesnt mean God didnt do it. I just stated by your standards we have never observed it. But yet we believe it.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:50 pm |
    • Eric

      Gadflie
      I know where you are trying to go.. I believe evolution is a fact I never said I didnt. I said there is no evidence between forms. where is the proof I and a guppy have a common ancestor. There should be evedience in the fossil record. We have not found it.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:54 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      We accept that it occurred because there's evidence to support it. There is no evidence that you've presented anywhere that supports the existence of god. None. You have faith, not facts. I have facts. I don't need to suspend disbelief and pretend that some being must have "done it." I am able to accept that we might not know all, but that doesn't mean there's a god. If you can present any evidence to convince me otherwise, go right ahead. You have consistently failed to do so every single time you have posted.

      What I don't understand is why people like you cannot simply say that you don't have any evidence but you believe anyway. That would at least be honest. But instead, you continue to pretend that science is wrong and that there is a god controlling all things.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:57 pm |
    • Really-O?

      @Eric –

      In science, theories are not "believed", they are accepted as useful models for describing the preponderance of empirical evidence. The two are profoundly different.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:58 pm |
    • Eric

      Tom I did say that....

      I never said science was wrong. I said I believe it to be correct, however there is not enough evedience to conclude I have a common ancestor with a bat. I said a coupe times it is faith, that I believe.

      I never said wrong, only the current evidence is lacking on a couple points. One day we may have that evidence, or maybe it doesnt exist, we do not know.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:02 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Eric, so you admit that macro evolution (evolution from one species to another) is actually a fact?

      September 1, 2012 at 11:04 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      And you are wrong, Eric. There IS sufficient evidence and it doesn't require faith to see that. Just an understanding of basic science and a rational mind. You are missing one or both.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:06 pm |
    • Leo

      Where is the evidence of life coming from non-life or abiogenesis?

      Or do you have faith that someday it will be revealed?

      September 1, 2012 at 11:11 pm |
    • Eric

      Is it possibe suer i think so between species I can think of a few the what ever moth been awhile.
      Species is the lowest division. Which were divided and defined by man. But lets move up the ladder 1 rung to family. can you show me that.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:13 pm |
    • Really-O?

      @Eric –

      I'm not aware of research pertaining to your relation to your "guppy" ancestors, but I think you'll find the following edifying:

      -The protein coding genome for humans and mice is, on average, 85% identical (~50% of the total genome is identical)
      -The human and gorilla genome is 98% identical.
      -The human and chimpanzee genome is 98 – 99% identical.

      Can't you see a pattern here?

      September 1, 2012 at 11:16 pm |
    • Eric

      Tom I would put my mind against yours any day. Lets see I would be willing to take a random IQ test I would bet I would out score you by close to 30 points.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:16 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Eric, so when you asked "where is the evidence for macro evolution?" you already believed that enough existed to show that macro evolution was true? Then why did you ask?
      And, family is two rungs up from species. Genus is next. But, it is your turn. Since you admit that speciation is a fact, and changing to a different genus would only require more of the same mechanism, what evidence do you have that there is something preventing that from happening?

      September 1, 2012 at 11:19 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You'd lose, Eric. Bet on it.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:22 pm |
    • Really-O?

      @Eric –

      Seriously, using terms like "transitional forms" outs you as a creationist/IDer/theistic-evolutionist; if none of those describe you, why do you seem to be unaware of any of the "transitional" fossil evidence?

      e.g.
      Ardipithecus -> Australopithecus ( a new genus)
      Australopithecus -> Ho'mo habilis (a new species)

      The evidence is out there.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:34 pm |
    • Really-O?

      @Eric –

      ...sorry...error...Ho'mo habilis is also a new genus.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:40 pm |
  17. Darwin

    Remember when that scientist stirred the waters and created a universe? Yeah me either!

    That's for you Tom Tom 🙂

    September 1, 2012 at 9:25 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      What's your point?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:28 pm |
    • nostrilpenetration

      Actually particle physicists see spontaneous particle creation during high energy collisions all the time. They've done it millions of times.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:29 pm |
    • Darwin

      Point being man and science has not created it... We only observe Gods work.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:33 pm |
    • Darwin

      Alright great scientist... Spontaneously create a fly... It is small enough, shouldn't be too hard.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:35 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      I get your point. You're mental.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:36 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Darwin, I'm sorry, but your argument is laughable. God, per Occam's razor, is the least likely correct answer to any question.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:36 pm |
    • Darwin

      Only someone that believes this is all random is mental. Study the spiritual realm a fraction of the amount you study the physical and you too will believe.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:39 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      I'm too busy studying Middle Earth. Also, who created god?

      September 1, 2012 at 9:41 pm |
    • Darwin

      So create a fly... I'll even be satisfied with a ant... They are pretty basic.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:42 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Darwin, since only Creationists claim that anyone thinks it's totally random, I have to agree. But, scientists know that gravity itself is a wonderful organizing force.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:42 pm |
    • religilous

      Biologists indeed have been able to spontaneously create organic molecules simply by combining ammonia and some other chemicals, then stirring them up in the presence of an electrical charge. We haven't created a fly yet, that may take another 50 years or so, but we have been able to reproduce the primordial soup from which we all evolved.

      You see, science is self-consistent. If it wasn't, we'd try to find better explanations.

      Unlike religion, which is just some guy who came up with a story so that you would give him money.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:48 pm |
    • Darwin

      Science is cool. I was fascinated with it most of my life... But the spiritual is just as exciting and rewarding. Darwin started out in school studying God and he was shown the mysteries of life.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:49 pm |
    • Darwin

      @Religilous well your about 14 billion years behind God

      September 1, 2012 at 9:53 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Darwin, imagination and fiction are always fun. But, "God did it", in spite of being applied to so many questions as a place-holder answer over the years, has NEVER been shown to be the correct answer.
      Oh, and Darwin realized that the whole God thing was bogus later in his life.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:53 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Darwin, apparently fictional characters, like your god, require a head start.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:54 pm |
    • Darwin

      @gadfile so it's all random? If not, where's the start? There is another realm that is not so easily observed but God will show us if we ask.

      The point of Darwin is that he believed when he asked God... I understand he got entangled with the religious folks and it shook his faith... But doesn't discount his beginning.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:01 pm |
    • Darwin

      Even Rekigilous makes the point that biologists are mixing the right chemicals for something to happen.... Wow sounds like the second verse of Genesis.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:03 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Sorry Darwin, no physicist or biologist says it's random. That's something your creationists made up. And, Darwin, like most humans, was indoctrinated into a religious belief system. But, he educated himself out of it.
      So, here's a query for you. Just for amusement. Let's see exactly what evidence would you accept as sufficient to show that evolution is indeed a fact. How about the absolute gold standard? If I can show you sufficient evidence of every single evolutionary step between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed), each step testable and verifiable by any test or standard that you like, would you then accept that as sufficient evidence that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:07 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Darwin, you write quite a bit like this idiot who called himself Brophy. He was a moron, almost as ignorant as you are.

      Don't quit your job at MickeyD's, sweetie.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:13 pm |
    • Darwin

      I don't doubt evolution... It is God's method. I take issue with man removing the power and glory of God out of it.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:14 pm |
    • Darwin

      Oh there you are Tom Tom... What have you created today? A man... A universe? Yeah I didn't think so.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:16 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Like someone else here, muttonhead, I'll ask you if I have a million or so years to do it.

      You really are unbelievable stupid. You must be a Poe. No one could be that ignorant in this day and age.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:18 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Darwin. Obviously sky fairy isnt helping you find peace. Your brain is all over the place.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:19 pm |
    • Gadflie

      Darwin, then please present your evidence for the existence of god. Something that is more convincing than the evidence for Leprechauns please.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
    • Darwin

      Oh the name calling... Wow you must be a brilliant scientist. Oh wait... That is the characteristic of the uneducated.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      If you're an example of god's handiwork, Darwin, he's a lame-azz god, or he likes making jokes.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:21 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Sure, Brophy, everyone here is uneducated except for you-the guy who thinks "your" and "you're" are interchangeable.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:23 pm |
    • Darwin

      If I told you my conversion... You wouldn't believe anyway... I already tried that. Now I just try to get people to think a little... Planting seeds so to speak.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:23 pm |
    • Darwin

      Lol Tom Tom.... I misspelled a word then you comeback with your ghetto slang? Striking!

      September 1, 2012 at 10:25 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You stupid git. If you want people to 'think a little', why don't YOU start first? You haven't made a cogent statement once on here. You're a moron if you imagine anyone thinks you're a worthy opponent.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:26 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      It's Brophy all right. Total pea-brain.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:27 pm |
    • Darwin

      Oh please no more names. Tell me something scientific that disproves god.... Let's see what you got.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:29 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Where did you find stupid tree seeds?

      September 1, 2012 at 10:29 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Tell me something scientific that disproves the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:30 pm |
    • Darwin

      Oh the intelligence being displayed.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:31 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      There is no way to prove or disprove the existence of your sky fairy. Your statement is ridiculous. So you deserve to be called stupid for even making it.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:32 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Yup, same dumb-azz tactics he used day after day as Clown Question Bro.

      "You can't prove there isn't a god." Lather, rinse, repeat.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:33 pm |
    • Darwin

      Sky fairy... Spaghetti monster.... Stupid?.... Are you guys in third grade

      September 1, 2012 at 10:35 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Most third graders are infinitely more rational than you. Answer the question.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
    • Darwin

      What question? All i'm getting is name calling and childish statements.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:39 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Remember when Brophy answered the question "who created god?" Yeah, neither do I. Neither does anyone else.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:43 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      The question is could you please disprove the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:44 pm |
    • lamb of dog

      Ask a stupid question get a stupid answer.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:46 pm |
    • Darwin

      Not sure who Brophy is.... But the answer is unknown as it is not stated. He most likely has a father as we do. This I do know... God is real. There is a story in the bible that will open eternity for you. Ask and it will be given. Seek and you will find.

      Or keep thinking you are soo smart... And call everybody names.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:52 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      OK, you're retarded.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:56 pm |
    • Darwin

      Ok rational... If there was a book about this spaghetti monster you are so fond of, and this book had certain promises in it, and I was experiencing these promises, I would not disprove it but would believe.

      September 1, 2012 at 10:57 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gospel_of_the_Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

      There you go. By tour logic, you now must believe in the FSM.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:03 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      "Don't know who Brophy is."

      And you wonder why you have zero credibility.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:03 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      Your.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:04 pm |
    • Darwin

      Ok so you give me satire. Note my qualifications for belief above.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:07 pm |
    • Darwin

      You have zero credibility Tom Tom ... All I get from you is childish antics. I have been led and taught through the spirit... If it sounds like another person that speaks of the spirit then I praise God. Maybe you should pay attention.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:11 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      You keep on dodging questions and changing your own rules. You're a cretin. Grow up and grow out of your fairytales.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:12 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Brophy, save your pathetic outraged dignity act for someone as stupid as you are.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:13 pm |
    • Darwin

      And the names again... Shows weakness my friends!

      September 1, 2012 at 11:14 pm |
    • Darwin

      Gonna call it a night. I do believe in God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. God bless us all!

      September 1, 2012 at 11:26 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      The only names you've been called are the ones you earned by your performance here, you lying sack.

      September 1, 2012 at 11:28 pm |
  18. Davin

    Bill Nye could do a better job than Romney and Obama together.

    September 1, 2012 at 9:23 pm |
    • Rational Libertarian

      And Frank Zappa would be better than all three. If only we could bring him back to life.

      September 1, 2012 at 9:30 pm |
  19. mama kindless

    Damn – huge thunderstorm rolling thru – hopin that Joe Pesci doesn't strike me.

    September 1, 2012 at 9:23 pm |
  20. Deutsche

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZIHsqpRXvA&w=640&h=360]

    September 1, 2012 at 9:23 pm |
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
Advertisement
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.