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. Scary stuff

    The prevalence of creationism in American discourse is proof that universal suffrage was a terrible mistake.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:34 am |
    • CarrotNoggin

      Or, one could argue, vice versa.

      September 1, 2012 at 1:09 am |
  2. Chuck

    I've always wondered why an almighty god needed to rest. I've also wondered why god who is without sin is a jealous god, which is one of the seven deadly sins.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:32 am |
    • sn0wb0arder

      because he was created by man.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:36 am |
    • Topher

      Jealousy isn't always a bad thing.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:37 am |
    • ViperGuy

      Remembering that there are different meanings for jealousy, His jealousy is one that exacts exclusive devotion. The same that a man would be jealous of his wife kissing another man. It's a natural reaction that God even put into us. As far as him needing to rest, it's clear that he doesn't need to rest to get back his strength, the Bible says he has dynamic energy. His rest was simply to gaze upon and look at what he had accomplished. And also to, when you "rest" from a project, you don't stop and go to sleep on the spot. You go do other things until you come back and finish it.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:55 am |
    • CarrotNoggin

      Seems like you've done a lot of wondering and not much investigation of your own.

      September 1, 2012 at 1:07 am |
  3. Eric

    I grew up in a fundamentalist church, certain that the Bible was literal truth. The trouble, I have since learned, is that it doesn't actually *explain* anything, and neither does any other religious text. There are decent sentiments expressed, such as "honor your parents", but the golden rule does that, and without acceptance of slavery and genocide that need apologies. Sociopathic behavior can be perpetrated by religious or atheist people, but as Hitch said, it takes belief in a supreme being (God or Stalin or Dear Leader) for good people to do bad things. My being raised in such fundamentalism did nothing good for me that couldn't have been done without it, and closed my mind off to all sorts of avenues that science would have opened up.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:31 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      >>>"and closed my mind off to all sorts of avenues that science would have opened up."

      Since there are those of Science and are of Faith as well..... if your mind was closed and theirs were able to remain open to science.... isn't a failure on your part?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:39 am |
    • Topher

      What do you want better explained?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:44 am |
    • RillyKewl

      Well, Eric, at least you grew out of it. Most smart people eventually do. We can't help it. We ask questions.
      Good for you.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:47 am |
    • ViperGuy

      That's because nearly every religion today it what the Bible describes as False Religion. Most churches are not approved by God and their parishioners suffer the consequences. The churches and religions since the second and third century have mislead the entire world, and have really been silently working for Satan. The Bible said this would happen, the result is what we see today. God allowed it to happen so that all creation could see what a world ruled by Satan would be like. But he won't let it stay this way for much longer.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:50 am |
    • sn0wb0arder

      viperguy – "silently working for satan"

      that is a classic. you just can't make stuff like that up. thanks for the laugh.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:58 am |
    • CarrotNoggin

      Eric, I think you had a bad experience, which I feel bad about. Not all church environments are healthy. There's always plenty of ammunition to refute any belief, if you want to. But a bad experience or perception of poor doctrine doesn't mean it actually is that way. It takes a lot of time and effort and courage to explore the depths of science, evolution, and creation and form an honest, sincere worldview and my experience is that very, very few people ever care enough about their destiny and future to put much effort into that.

      September 1, 2012 at 1:22 am |
    • Eric

      Well, I did grow out of the religion, mostly because when I moved from small town Nebraska to New York City for work, I met all sorts of people who, according to the "one true God" I was taught about, would simply burn in hell. Those people, it turned out much to my consternation, were really nice, decent people who helped others out of the goodness of their heart, not out of fear of punishment. They proved to me that one didn't need to invent an author of creation to be a boon to society, and certainly didn't need the tribalism of "our God is better than your god" to be happy or to bring happiness to others. And so I learned that.. neither do I.

      As far as my 'failure' to embrace science and religion equally, I argue that doing so is just a compartmentalization of contradictions to avoid giving up something of comfort. Franklin and Maxwell and Rutherford could have 'explained' lightning with "because God wills it." Taking such a comfortable tack would not have been decried from the pulpit, but it wouldn't *explain* anything, whether they appealed to the "one true GOD" or any of the 10,000 other gods invented by humans over the millennia. Instead of punting, they admitted their ignorance about cause, and investigated. They got it wrong (or only partially right) a hundred times but eventually did figure it out without invoking a supernatural creator. How does this relate to the article? I argue that it's better for society if kids learn that we don't know everything, and that our 'purpose' is to push back the frontiers of what's explained, and be humble in that we need to respect the data, not the 'authority' claimed by some old guy just because he invokes YHVH or whoever. Telling kids that it's only important to be on the "right team" frankly degrades us into a tribalism at least as bad as that of destroyed civilizations we shake our heads at. Is it child abuse? It is probably not so in the traditional sense, but I think it does damage humanity's chances for long-term survival. If we do nothing about how we damage the biosphere because we believe God will save us from ourselves, I think we're selling ourselves a bad future.

      Besides, remember that old joke - The civil defense announcement on the radio says "the river is rising and you must evacuate." Fred say's "No, the Lord will provide." The neighbors beg him to leave as the water laps across the road, but he refuses: "The Lord will provide." The cops show up in a boat as the water engulfs the first floor of his house, but he won't leave. The National Guard shows up with a helicopter as he clings to the antenna on his roof, and yet he says "The Lord will provide." Fred loses his grip and drowns. Having lived decently, he faces Peter at the pearly gates and asks why, with his steadfast faith, he was allowed to die. Peter shook his head: "We gave the government enough sense to create a civil defense system. We sent your neighbors, the cops in a boat and the national guard in a helicopter. Whaddya want???"

      September 1, 2012 at 1:49 am |
  4. GregE

    From Genesis:
    "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died." <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died." <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE
    "And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE

    September 1, 2012 at 12:25 am |
    • ViperGuy

      Seems impossible until you later read the account where God cut the days of man short to 70 or 80 years after the flood. Our bodies were designed to live forever, but because of sin, God changed our DNA to live much shorter lives. Those people that lived hundreds of years were closer to perfect according to the Bible. But they had to suffer the punishment of sin and die within a day to God (2Peter 3:8). It hard to think that someone could live that long because we don't live that long today. But for those that lived in that time, it was not uncommon to live several hundred years.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:44 am |
    • CurmudgeonTx

      If a simple turtle can live half that long, how is it not conceivable that humans could have at one point in time?

      September 1, 2012 at 3:21 am |
    • redzoa

      At viperguy and curmudgeon – Sorry, but in addition to infectious disease and cancer, humans are limited in their ability to effectively replicate their cells indefinitely (for example, telomere shortening, spontaneous mutations, etc). There is zero evidence indicating any human has ever lived beyond 122.5 years. The argument of God changing DNA is a pure appeal to magic. As magic can explain anything and everything, it effectively explains nothing. It only demonstrates the proponent's inability to point to any verifiable evidence.

      September 1, 2012 at 3:39 am |
  5. Fang

    Gosh, religion blinds people to the truth. How much scientific evidence was presented to prove the earth is only 10k years old?! Oh, none. The folks that belive creationism are the decendants of the same neanderthals that thought the world was flat and that the earth was the center of our solar system.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:25 am |
    • Topher

      You do know there is evidence that supports a young Earth, right?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:32 am |
    • Lucifer

      The thing about the xtians is that they all hang out with each other. They don't get out in the world to have their beliefs challenged. Their arguments become ridiculous circles of nothing. Based upon a lack of proof, they say, but their whole religion has no proof.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:33 am |
    • CarrotNoggin

      Lucifer, you're right. I'm a Christian and I agree with you. Christians ought to educate themselves much better on why they believe what they believe. But that doesn't change what's objectively true or not true. I admit it doesn't give you a very good or convincing start but don't you think it's your responsibility to look into things yourself rather than rest your investigation based on your perceptions. I get the sense that most of the evolutionists that have sounded off here are woefully ignorant and uneducated about creationism and base their entire conclusions upon what they see others doing and hear them saying, rather than their own thorough investigation. Are you're the ones who claim to be the educated ones!

      September 1, 2012 at 1:31 am |
    • Beez

      Topher, there is no such "evidence". You are scientifically ignorant; stick to hysterical mass hypnosis & mythology.

      September 6, 2012 at 1:52 am |
  6. ELH

    Just take God out of the discussion. Of course, without the God crutch, creationists haven't a leg to stand on so their argument fails totally.

    Creationism cannot stand on any, I repeat, any scientific grounds. None. No science nor reputable scientist can bolster the creationist's position.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:23 am |
    • workinprogress

      so now teaching my children about God and my faith is considered a form of child abuse?! And this is where it will all start.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:29 am |
    • Lucifer

      No work in progress.. it's not child abuse. You teach your children about god, the tooth fairy, the easter bunny and santa clause. Its not abuse. It's fun to believe in make believe things.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:34 am |
    • Beez

      From the perspective of warping and poisoning inquisitive, open young minds: yes, it most certainly is abusive. Look, it's Tinker Bell – for real!!!!

      September 6, 2012 at 1:54 am |
  7. Ang

    Where's the "LIKE" button for Robert D @1216? Very good post!

    September 1, 2012 at 12:23 am |
  8. shelly

    Deny evolution? Really? ROFL!!!

    September 1, 2012 at 12:22 am |
  9. Mark

    People have the right to believe in the religion of their choice, no matter how ridiculous it may be...just don't teach it as "fact", because it's not. "Belief" does NOT equal science.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:21 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Is evolution a fact or theory?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:22 am |
    • shelly

      Amen! Pun intended.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:23 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      In science, theories are concepts that explain facts. There are the facts of evolution – DNA, fossils, inheritance, taxonomy, morphology, and on and on – and then there is the theory of evolution by natural selection that explains those facts. Theories are not less than facts or laws, theories explain facts and laws.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:27 am |
    • Lucifer

      Xtians? Where is the proof your fairy tale is true? There is NONE, except your quotes. Any lack of a full explanation of evolution or origin of species does not PROVE your fairy tale.
      There is ZERO proof that anything in xtianity (which rymes with insanity) is true. None of it...
      It is not equal to ANY scientific theory or fact becuase even evolution has SOME proof. You blieve has NONE.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:31 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Theories are "attempts" to explain or achieve fact. So, I take your response is that Evolution is just a theory. Its not saying that the study of Evolution is bad. Its just that some of us have been able to handle both and still not become the radicals we see on both sides.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:33 am |
    • CarrotNoggin

      #1
      "And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died" <– TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE

      Why? The body naturally self-regenerates and NO ONE has been able to figure out why the body slows down and eventually dies. Where is the FACTS, the EVIDENCE that this is impossible. Do you see how you are so adamant about your "truth" and yet it's no more than a belief. Can you support that with evidence. There is more evidence that the human body naturally heals and regenerates than contrariwise. Evoreligionists!

      #2
      "In science, theories are concepts that explain facts. There are the facts of evolution – DNA, fossils, inheritance, taxonomy, morphology, and on and on – and then there is the theory of evolution by natural selection that explains those facts. Theories are not less than facts or laws, theories explain facts and laws."

      Now wait there – "...concepts that explain facts" You see, there you evolutionists go again. Where did you get that concept? And to whom does it "explain" the facts? It explains it to you because you BELIEVE the concept already as your pre-supposition and so OF COURSE it explains the facts. There are no FACTS of evolution. There are facts of science that appear to support the theory of evolution but only because you want them to. See, it's all belief. Science is like the tiles of a mosaic. Belief is the glue that holds it all together. So keep your belief out of science and let science be the pure discipline it should be. Darwin extrapolated macro-evolution from some observations of finch beaks changing over time (which I doubt even that he could have scientifically observed). Belief.

      "...theories explain facts and laws." So my theory is that evolutionists are really just desperate to cover up the truth that they will be held accountable to God at the end of their lives and, like all human beings, would rather be free of that terrifying truth. See! My theory explains the facts about why evolutionists talk about evolution as solid scientific fact when in fact it is just their belief. So this kind of flimsy rationale gets you nowhere.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:45 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      MfMR, they are indeed attempts to explain, but it is still not really accurate to think of scientific theories as "just theories." There is no higher level of explanation in science than a theory. It is cliche, but it is absolutely true that evolution is just a theory to the same extent that atomic theory, heliocentric theory, germ theory, etc. are "just theories." Each of these will in all likelihood be augmented and improved upon in the future, but none of these are in doubt or are in danger of going away. If anything, I suspect that evolutionary theory (natural selection) will be subsumed in some larger theory of biological change much as Newtonian physics was subsumed by Relativity. It will not be found to be false, it will be found to be just part of a bigger picture. The discovery of DNA and genomics since the time of Darwin have already done this to some extent, but they strengthen and specify, rather than weaken, the original theory.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:49 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      CarrotNoggin: "Now wait there – "...concepts that explain facts" You see, there you evolutionists go again. Where did you get that concept? And to whom does it "explain" the facts?"

      That is not the meaning of theory to "evolutionists," that is the meaning in science. And it explains facts to those crazy scientists who lie behind the computer you are using, the microwave in your kitchen, the medicines you take, your Sammy Hagar CD that you're probably listening to, the safe water you drink, the temperature in your house, the flame retardant in your carpet...need I go on? There's not some special kind of science that "evolutionists" use. Nobody is trying to trick you. You might as well be throwing rocks at the sun.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:59 am |
    • CarrotNoggin

      I just realized that this whole "forum" for debate is rife with armchair philosophers making very confident assertions that there is absolutely no shred of proof that creationism is true or compatible with science. That's terribly ignorant and PROOF that these people have probably never lifted a large book about creationism in their life but rather have been couch potatoes watching Bill Nye and making daring conclusions about the world based on what?

      September 1, 2012 at 1:04 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      Nice retreat to an ad hominem attack – the last refuge of the bewildered.

      September 1, 2012 at 1:19 am |
  10. Hyper

    The question is not about evolution vs. creationism. The question is: why did this universe come to be? Why is there something well designed, instead of nothing?

    September 1, 2012 at 12:18 am |
    • Gadflie

      What makes you think there is a "why"? And, well designed? Yea, right.

      September 1, 2012 at 1:03 am |
  11. CarrotNoggin

    Did Bill Nye say we need to believe in Evolution? Science is establishing truth based on reproducible, observable facts. The rest is belief. It's just as hard to believe all this beauty and complexity came from nothing. Where are the missing fossil records? Where is evidence of all those intermediate species? Evolutionists have a great way of explaining these massive holes in their beloved theory away. No one was around during those supposed billions of years, so it's all just speculation and extrapolation and a lot of faith to believe in evolution. What's funny is that evolutionists presents themselves as the educated ones and yet I bet they've never ready any of the very credible academic works on creationism. Ignorance, belief, faith, missing facts, inconvenient truths... So who's accusing who here? It's obvious there's a whole lot more at stake here than just childrens' upbringing. Evolutionists are vehemently defending something very precious to them that is just as untenable as the creationism they mock.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:18 am |
    • Brain Hertz

      I think you're conflating "belief" with "faith".

      In the sense that Bill Nye is using the term, belief does not necessarily imply a belief based on faith; it also includes a belief based on evidence. This is a common usage of the term.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:29 am |
    • CarrotNoggin

      I think you're playing very subtle semantics. I believe that God created the world. Bill Nye believes that mindless, natural processes created this world. If you want to call one faith and the other belief, that's just word games. Neither "believer" can PROVE they have science on their side. They can only SAY they do. The glue of both positions is belief. That's my point. If you want to create a variant called "faith" for those whose belief includes a god, I'm okay with that but it's really a baseless argument to say it's okay for Bill Nye to have belief in evolution and not for another to have belief or "faith" in God. The presupposition is that creationist's ideas have no parity with scientific fact and evolution has complete parity. That's just not true and anyone who says there is absolutely no scientific basis for creationism is just ignorant, unread, and wrong and can't prove that.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:56 am |
  12. Dennis

    Goat herders from 5000 years ago is where everyone should turn to learn about the universe.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:16 am |
    • CurmudgeonTx

      Well, those 'goat herders' WERE quite a bit closer to the time it all happened...

      September 1, 2012 at 3:13 am |
    • Beez

      No, they were not comparably closer. BAAAHHHHH

      September 6, 2012 at 1:57 am |
  13. Robert D

    I am just curious but how many here that believe in evolution realize that you are part of a religion? After all, it is the theory of evolution. It has not been proven. Since those who adamently believe that evolution is true do so on faith. Look up the definition of faith and allpy it to evolution. Evolution is a religion because the only proof that exists is faith in it. It would be interesting to push this point in court and have evolution banned frmo being taught under "separation of church and state'.

    THose of you who are going to flame me for saying that there is no proof to back up evolution, Three is no hard evidence that can't be refuted. A few to get out of the way....

    1) If all the planets in the solar system came from one source (a blob that flung out parts that became the planets or dust and particles that gathered...whatever), then why is Venus tilted sideways AND rotates backwards with no large craters to indicate an impact that could have knocked it sideways. Uranus is similar, it is tilted over 90 degrees and is 'on its back'.

    2) Lunar dust. Ever wonder why the lunar lander had those six foot poles on the landing pads? They thought that *maybe* the dust would be that thick. That is if the moon was really millions upon millions of years old. However, as we all saw (or have seen) that the dust is only a few inches deep. Why would that be? because it is not as old as the religion of evolution teaches.

    3) "But a galaxy that is 25 million light years away would require 25 million years for light to travel to Earth." Well, no. Sicentists have recently proven that to be false. Remember the big news when scientists proved that the speed of light was not the fastest speed in the universe? Light can be bent and manipulated by gravitational forces. This would reduce the time required for light to travel a given distance compared with the previous galactic speed limit of 300 million meters per second.

    4) The fossil record. If there have been creatures living and dying on Earth for billions of years and each only having a life span of 20 to 30 years (on average), where are all the fossils? They should be everywhere! but they are not. Also, where are the intermediate animal fossils? Where are the fossils of animals that changes slightly over the centuries or millenia? Certainly there is at least one from all the different species that are on earth.

    4b) If the 'lower' animals evolved into the higher animals, then why do we still have 'lower' animals today? If we evolved frmo apes, then why are there still apes today? I have asked this before and the answer that was given was that not all creatures evolved at the same pace. Well, if that were true, where are the intermediate apes? Surely there are still some of them around.

    5) I love it when someone says that the Earth's atmosphere was composed of _______ way back when it was first formed. First time I heard this in school I raised my hand and asked, "So we know for a fact that the composition of the atmosphere contained that. So, can you tell me, where is the sample? If we know exactally what the atmosphere contained billions of years ago, an atmosphere that does not exist now, then certainly there must be a sample of it here that was studied. Where is it?"

    So evolution is a religion because it is a worldview that is based on faith in a belief system that has no physical evidence that can be proved.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:16 am |
    • Dennis

      Evolution isn't something you believe, it is something you perceive. You either understand it or you don't.
      Evolution is a fact. The Scientific Theory just explains the process. So right from the start, your argument's hinge pin falls away and everything after.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:20 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      "After all, it is the theory of evolution. It has not been proven."

      You are disqualified from an informed discussion of science from the start. Anyone who throws that out there immediately identifies themselves as scientifically illiterate.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:22 am |
    • Gadflie

      Robert D, the amount of ignorance in such a short post is astounding. But, here you go.
      Evolution, like gravity, plate tectonics and germ theory is both a fact AND a theory. The fact is that there is no actual doubt it happens, the theory is our best explanation.
      Now, for your laughable numbered arguments.
      1-3 have nothing to do with evolution. Even you should know that.
      4a, Are you so ignorant that you think that fossilization is common? Really?
      4b, If your ancestors came from Europe, why are there still people in Europe? I love this piece of creationist claptrap. It's a fine piece of evidence of a total lack of reasoning capacity. And, lower and higher animals is a misnomer. If you really don't understand why, I'll be happy to laugh while I explain.
      5, again, not an argument against evolution. Try to keep on track, ok?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:26 am |
    • Robert D

      Please post a link to evidence to the contrary. Something that is 100% irrefutable. Something that makes the theory of evolution something that can stand on its own merrit and not on faith. Please.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:27 am |
    • sn0wb0arder

      evolution is the only argument based on actual observation and evidence.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:27 am |
    • ViperGuy

      I agree with everything you said, except that point 3 doesn't even need to be a problem because the Bible is very clear that a Creation Day is not a literal 24 hour day because 2 Peter 3:8 says that "a day for God is as a thousand years". We don't know how long a creation day is, but we do know God doesn't live in a realm where a day is 24 hours. In fact, the "last days" which mankind has been living in for the past hundred years, is also referred to "the last hour". So time for God is not the same as time for us. If he needed millions of years to created the universe, or millions of years to create the earth, it was nothing for him because time is relative. We don't know how long the creation day to create the animals took. If he created dinosaurs a million years ago and, in his infinite wisdom, waited for them to serve their purpose to fertilize the land or whatever he intended, he had all the time in the universe to wait that day and and finish the rest of the creatures as he saw fit. A hundred earth years to God is a mere passing of an hour. And we don't know how many hours is a day for God!

      September 1, 2012 at 12:29 am |
    • sn0wb0arder

      irrefutable? i see you pose the old "god of the gaps" argument.

      attributing something to mythology simply because we don't have all the answer is intellectually lazy.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:30 am |
    • Gadflie

      Ok, let's see what you would accept as irrefutable. How about the absolute gold standard. If I could provide you with evidence of every single evolutionary step (each different sub species) between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed). Each step verifiable by any means or test that you choose, would you then consider that sufficient evidence to show that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:31 am |
    • zapper

      If everyone was like you we'd still be hunter gatherers with a 30 yr. lifespan. Just because YOU can't wrap your head around evolutionary theory doesn't mean it's incorrect.

      I'm guessing you also think the CIA killed Jack Kennedy and that Obama was born in Kenya, right?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:32 am |
    • Robert D

      Evolutonist believe that the age of the earth and the universe is billions of years. If the different aspects of evolution are in question, such as age of the universe and earth, then the theory requires more thinking. For the moon to be young and not old is a mark against evolution on the basis of the requirement for age. Same goes for the distances to other objects in the universe.

      As for the planets, if they all came frmo one source then they should all be moving in similar directions. THey are not. Evolution can not explain this.

      The fossil record...yes fossils are not too common but if the earth really is as old as evolution claims then there was a lot more time for the statistics to make a few more fossils then there are. And as for the intermediate animals (something of a cross between a fish and what evolution claims that it evolved into), where are those fossils? The process to change from one form to another required a lot of time according to evolution. So, where are the fossils of these animals?

      And the 'lower' animals... I went to public school. That is what the text books called them. If humans evolved from apes then awhy are there still apes?

      The point about the atmosphere... Evolution can't explain the atmosphere and how it is 'known' to have been composed of what evolutionists claim it was composed of.

      Just like in the political arean, democrats can not debate anything because facts and logic elude them. I have only read replies to my post that are attempts to insult. I have yet to read a reply that actually explains anything.

      Cheers.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:36 am |
    • Robert D

      Gadflie

      Ok, let's see what you would accept as irrefutable. How about the absolute gold standard. If I could provide you with evidence of every single evolutionary step (each different sub species) between two different species (species defined by the strictest scientific standard, they do not interbreed). Each step verifiable by any means or test that you choose, would you then consider that sufficient evidence to show that evolution is indeed a fact? If not, why not?

      That would be nice if you could do that. You would be the first to do it. But it will be hard to do since you won't be able to find anything in the fossil record to conclusively prove the point. Other tests? I curious to read what you may be referring to.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:40 am |
    • Gadflie

      Robert D, I understand that you are almost totally ignorant of the theory of Evolution but here is a clue. Evolution doesn't cover ANYTHING until AFTER the first life form appears. Try to keep up.
      And, how many transitional fossils would I have to list to get you to admit that there are some?
      Robert, if there are a lot of grasshoppers in an area, they all eat a certain type of grass. Then, another type of plant comes and one of the grasshoppers evolves to eat it and passes these genes on. Eventually the two evolve into different species. But, since the grass is also still there, why should the first one die out? It's funny that I actually had to explain that.
      Again, the theory of evolution doesn't even pretend to explain the atmosphere. Why are you pretending that it does?
      And, that was a fun ad-hominem attack at the end, are you that desperate often?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:42 am |
    • Gadflie

      Robert, you didn't actually answer my question, why is that? I asked that if I could provide what I stated, WOULD YOU ACCEPT THAT AS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT EVOLUTION WAS INDEED A FACT? If not, why not.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:43 am |
    • PopeurbanII

      #2.) Why would the moon be collecting dust when it does not have an atmoshere? The footprints from Neil Armstrong are still there im not sure where you came up with that theory.
      #3.) Einstien is still correct with e=mc^2. Nothing can go faster then the speed of light as of now( you're refering to the neutrino which still inot faster then light.)

      September 1, 2012 at 12:44 am |
    • Robert D

      And so far every comment that is aimed against me has been more of a 'mud toss' than an actual rebuttal. Like I stated earlier: evolutionists are like democrats. They try to dodge the issue rather than man up and try to debate the issues at hand. Since no one has been able to post a reply that is something other than an attempt at an insult (except for the one who claims he can conclusively prove is point), I am going to call it another fail against evolution.

      Good night.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:44 am |
    • Chris

      We would tell you to read some scientific papers, unfortunately you would not understand it.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:45 am |
    • Gadflie

      Robert D, I addressed EVERY SINGLE ONE of your points. Now you run when I put you on the spot. Intellectual coward.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:46 am |
    • Chris

      I find it funny you are ripping on Democrats for "dodge the issue rather than man up and try to debate the issues at hand" Have you listened to Republicans lately? Creationist are just like them.
      Romney Pollster: We Won’t ‘Let Our Campaign Be Dictated By Fact-Checkers’
      Paul Ryan: "At least 6 lies during his RNC acceptance speech"
      Numerous ads about the "You didn't build that" When obviously Obama was talking about infrastructure
      Romney ads lying about welfare reform. And I could go on, but I'm sure you'll totally miss my point

      September 1, 2012 at 12:51 am |
    • PopeurbanII

      BTW, it is not Evolutionist that came up with the age of the universe; see Edwin Powell Hubble(physcist), Albert Einstien (Physcist), Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître ( PRIEST and physcist), Allan Sandage (Astronomer). Now go learn College physics, Calculus, and your answer will be solved. Please, I am a student in Engineering and Physics, do not the disiplines of science mixed up. Most of the questions you ask were discover by basic observations of nature.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:55 am |
  14. frank

    it's funny that these "intellectuals" don't believe in GOD but pray to him in a time of need.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:16 am |
    • Dennis

      Poseidon hear our prayers.

      Yeah, it would feel just like that.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:21 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Dennis are you in need of a horse?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:25 am |
    • PopeurbanII

      I dont run to a Mythological god when im in need? I go out and solve my own problems -like an adult. By the way, that statement is an insult to Buddhist and Taoist.

      September 1, 2012 at 1:00 am |
  15. radiowidow

    The headline would be a little more accurate if it read "Mythologists hit back at Bill Nye with their own video."

    September 1, 2012 at 12:16 am |
  16. Angel

    An astronomist I studied under once told me that scientists are either atheist or very religious. All scientists believe in the Big Bang. The difference lies in what each interprets the cause of the bang to be and what force was in charge immediately thereafter.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:14 am |
    • Brain Hertz

      An "astronomist"?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:31 am |
  17. Dennis

    Ken Ham. LOL

    September 1, 2012 at 12:13 am |
    • Robert D

      Dennis

      Ken Ham. LOL

      September 1, 2012 at 12:13 am | Report abuse | Reply

      Oh yeah... Obama Bigger LOL

      September 1, 2012 at 12:18 am |
  18. Tammy

    GOD created the world and every thing in it. He created man in his own image. I 've never seen an ape on that cross. Have you people not noticed that the more society takes GOD out of everything, the worse the world gets. I'll pray for you ignorant people that would rather be monkeys than men/women. Jesus Christ died for you too. He shed his blood to pay for your sins. He gave his life for us. What have we done for him? God created the world, Man destroyed it. I believe in one TRUE GOD, and i'll be with him in Paradise; He told me so: John 3:16

    September 1, 2012 at 12:12 am |
    • rjaddow

      No, No, No. The more people DON'T take responsibility for their lives and the lives of those children they raise, the worse the world becomes. Has nothing to do with God and EVERYTHING to do with the job YOU choose to do as a parent and member of society.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:15 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      "Have you people not noticed that the more society takes GOD out of everything, the worse the world gets"

      If you're referring to the last 50 years or so it also corresponds to the rise of the Born Again Christian movement. Have you people noticed that the more Born Again Christians get into everything, the worse the world gets?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:16 am |
    • Gadflie

      Tammy, compare the middle ages, with rampant disease and horrible living conditions but almost universal belief with today. So much for your argument.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:17 am |
    • Lucifer

      Umm Tammy, you have never seen a man on a cross, does that mean your religion is fake?. And as for you Tammy, I will not pray for you, but I do hope you can open your eyes and see the truth. Fiary tales are nice, but they are not science.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:22 am |
    • Robert D

      The world is getting worse the more that God is taken out of things....

      Let us tale a look....
      People wanted God taken out of the public schools, is it safer to go into public schools or to private religios based schools?

      People have moved away from a moral lifestyle and now we have AIDS and HIV, pre-teen pregnancy, kids killing thier parents and other kids because of trivial matters. People have strayed from living a life that is selfless and kind and they have moved to a belief that they have no responsibility to others, always putting thier own interests first.

      Compare that to how things were. I think that you will see that the proviberal "moral compass" is not pointing "north" anymore for many people. Sad thing is that those people believe it does not matter which way the moral compass points.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:25 am |
    • Gadflie

      Robert D, it's safer in a public school on average than in your own home.
      The murder rate, the crime rate and the divorce rate are all going down. The average lifespan is going up. There went your argument.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:28 am |
    • zapper

      "Have you people not noticed that the more society takes GOD out of everything, the worse the world gets."

      Actually, it seems to me the more we take god out of things the BETTER the world gets. We no longer eat each other (much), science-based medicine and health care extend our lives, the secular rule of law has resulted in many nations having long periods of peaceful existence, etc.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:36 am |
    • PopeurbanII

      More religion + schools = false safety
      More gun CONTROL + schools = safety

      September 1, 2012 at 1:05 am |
  19. ViperGuy

    The Bible says in 2 Peter 3:8 that "A day for God is as a thousand years." It never said the earth was created in six literal 24 hour days. How could it start saying "on the first day" referring to literal earth days when the earth was "formless and waste" before he chose it? God didn't live on the earth and doesn't live on a planet, and every planet has a different length for a day. So a day for God is not a finite number and depends on the application. A creation day for God lasts much longer than the punishment day in Genesis where God said "In the day you eat from it you will positively die". That day was 1000 earth years. Adam lived to be 930 years old and died within that "day" of 1000 years. And the Bible even explains that he lived that long because he was closer to perfection. It wasn't until after the flood that God cut the days of man short to 70 or 80 years on average. In other parts of the Bible a day is actually a year. So both sides have a misconstrued understanding of the Bible.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:11 am |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      How long does it take God to spin one full revolution on his axis as he orbits the sun? That's how long his day is.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:19 am |
    • ViperGuy

      ...And also revolve around which sun? We can't even imagine what heaven is like. It resides in the spirit realm. Time can be whatever he deems necessary for the moment. He can probably even stretch time or even bend it. Our minds operate to perceive 1 second as one second, but God could live out an eternity in one second, examine every possible motive or thought in one second, as if it were forever. On the flip side, the Bible says he is very patient with us. He can make time fly to himself as if earth years were minutes.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:36 am |
    • Adam

      You're an |diot. Average Life expectancy was ~40 years until the industrial revolution. That is factual throughout human history.

      Modern Science has expanded our lives, not your magic sky wizard.

      September 1, 2012 at 12:44 am |
    • ViperGuy

      Average life expectancy for an Israelite was 70 to 80 years like today. Why? Because they were required to life by Bible code, which meant strict cleanliness which prevented widespread disease. They didn't know what germs were, but knew to go bury their dung outside the camp or city.

      September 1, 2012 at 6:58 am |
  20. bao

    i fricking LOVE bill Nye, and people like him every day make me glad to be alive in this day and age. It gives me hope for the future.

    September 1, 2012 at 12:10 am |
    • ViperGuy

      A future with no hope. You live and die and that's the end. Why are our brains designed to hold thousands and even millions of years worth of memories and information?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:14 am |
    • Dennis

      ViperGuy – Lying or Jesus or just ignorant?

      September 1, 2012 at 12:26 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 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.