Slashdot Mirror
Bill "The Science Guy" Nye Says Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children
timeOday writes "BigThink has released a video missive by Bill Nye ('The Science Guy') in which he challenges the low level of acceptance of evolution, particularly in the United States. He does not mince words: 'I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, in your world that's completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that's fine, but don't make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need people that can — we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems.'"
uses the theory of evolution?
and he is of course as the current fashion requires dismissing the huge body of evidence that shows that There Is An Order to things
i would put that the first couple picoseconds of Time are beyond what Science can state as Truth and also show me an entire line of Fossils that show how a Proto-Quadraped became say a Horse (with complete skeletons at each stage).
oh and how is it that we are finding Fossils in ground that should have been washed off the Land surface a half million years ago??
Every Scientist needs to start assuming
In The Beginning [GOD|BANG]
and then go from there.
(oh and some sort of Plasma explosion can in no way shape or form prove that a Big Bang Occurred)
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
It led to an interesting discussion. I posted the following comment:
"I like Bill Nye's approach to a lot of scientific teaching, loved most of his TV show growing up, but he does not in any way put forward an argument for evolution or against creationism in this video. He simply waves his hand and says - without offering a logical, this 'leads-to-that' argument - that by not believing in evolution your world view is inconsistent. I'm afraid that doesn't pass muster for me, though I would be interested in hearing a more in-depth discussion on the subject from him.
Personally, I don't believe in *macro* evolution (one species evolving into another) - and yet my world view is 100% functional and, I believe, logical. The great thing in the end, though, is that if evolution is true my worldview remains intact: evolution itself is not integral to it one way or the other :) I believe God created the universe and everything in it, and while I believe He did it within the literal amount of time described in the Bible it would also be entirely believable that He did so over eons and used evolution in the process - it would not change the fact that He did it!"
My friend replied saying that just because I disagreed with the video didn't mean I should disparage it. I almost couldn't believe what he was saying: I felt like I had been very respectful in my comment, and I was responding to a video that I felt was disparaging my position (not the other way around). Thus I replied with this:
"I in no way meant disrespect! I tried to use very civil words in my comment above, and if I came across impolite in any way then I apologize.
However, I do find it somewhat funny that your reaction would be to accuse me of disparaging something I disagree with when that is exactly what the original video you linked to was itself. Bill Nye, who again I respect greatly for his skill at combining education and entertainment, put forward the following:
1) The idea that the denial of evolution is unique to the US - which I very much doubt, as both Christians and some other religions (Islam, in particular) tend to hold views that contradict with macro evolution.
2) That not believing in evolution - which we cannot measure and observe in a lab - is comparable to not believing in plate tectonics (which we can observe and measure).
3) That we need good scientists and engineers, and therefore should not teach our children creationism. This in effect implies that someone cannot hold a creationist viewpoint and also contribute in those fields, which is preposterous (I personally know several scientists and engineers who hold beliefs similar to my own, and who are still very effective in their work - and I have read the works of many others who are much higher up in their respective fields).
These things all disparage creationist viewpoints, without any actual argument from logic about why evolution is right. That was all I was trying to point out previously, and I tried to do so in every bit as nice and calm of a way as Bill Nye portrayed in his video."
I have not yet heard back from him again.
William George
I'll take the ramblings of a madman with several honorary Ph.Ds over the ramblings of a backwoods redneck 'murican any day.
When I was a child, I thought as a child... 1 Cor. 13:11
Perhaps now that you are older you might consider buying a study Bible and studying what it says about the whole timeline from Gen. 1:1 to the end. You won't find any place in it where it says Gen. 1:1 was 6,000 years ago. There's plenty of leeway for an old earth, dinosaurs, evolution, and all the rest. If you stop to consider just when Satan rebelled against God (since he was already fallen at the time of the Garden of Eden in Genesis yet had led nations from earth in rebellion against God as told in Isaiah), an older earth is indeed required.
The Bible doesn't dwell on this because it is a book speaking of God's relationship to man and his relationship to God and how to get back together again in the end. It doesn't get in the way of science (or at least there are reasonable ways to sort out the scriptures that leave room for science to exist without breaking what the Bible says and for the Bible to be correct without breaking science).
Give God another chance - you might be pleasantly surprised. Just read the Bible on your own terms and make sure what you hear actually lines up with what it says. You won't have nearly has many problems with God if you do that.
I too would like to see some of the old science shows come back - but we are cursed with hour upon hour of reality TV.