Slashdot Mirror
How Did Bill Nye Become the Science Guy?
An anonymous reader writes "Whether he's debating creationists, taking selfies with President Obama, or 'Dancing with the Stars,' Bill Nye the Science Guy is no stranger to the spotlight. But what about the man behind the public persona? How did Bill Nye become the Science Guy?(video)
Bill Nye has made his debut on the PBS series, The Secret Life of Scientists and Engineers, to reveal the story of how he rose from being a young comedian from Seattle to becoming a science icon.
In his profile, Bill Nye talks about his early days impersonating Steve Martin, why bow-ties are important in the lab (and with the ladies), and how Carl Sagan's advice helped to shape his hit television show."
He was created by God just as you see him now.
Almost Live - a weekly half hour comedy skit show in Seattle in the 80s is what made Bill Nye.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
My favorite comedy from Bill Nye was Speeeeeeed Walker, a super hero that always adhered to the rules of the International Speed Walking Association: Heal Toe! Heal Toe!
That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
You just described 2/3 of Slashdot.
Table-ized A.I.
Please, editors, for the love of science, do not allow bit.ly links in summaries.
http://bit.ly/1gkfa7z
is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KkKejZnazw
"Bill Nye: Change The World" by user "NOVA's Secret Life of Scientists and Engineers".
Most scientists told him not to debate the creationists as it only brings more attention to them.
They already have plenty of attention. More than half of Americans believe in some form of creationism (young earth creationism, intelligent design, or "evolution guided by God"). The percentage in many other countries is even higher. "Ignoring them" isn't working out so well.
How did he become "The Science Guy" Because nye rhymes with guy, and he probably has a penis.
I'm okay with this, as long as we can call it 'B'.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Need I say more?
Yea, but Bill Bye fell into the same trap all sciency types do. He didn't argue evolution, he argued against the creationists idea of Intelligent design. There is nothing incompatible with Intelligent design and evolution. If there is a God that created the universe then, that God also created evolution and therefor science is simply discovering Gods work. He should have made that point and left it at that. You can't invalidate theology with logic. But you can validate science with it. Evolution is a fact. If you believe in god then evolution is his work, stop denying Gods work you pagan.
... captain obvious
... He's no scientist.
... Bill Nye the Attention Whore
... Mr. Bill Nye is NOT and has NOTHING to do with science
This out of 31 posts so far.
This on a guy who makes science fun for kids.
Beta might not be Slashdot's biggest problem,
but going the way of kuro5hin is.
I have always enjoyed Bill Nye. Watching him in his early days on his show and on a local Seattle show "Almost Live". He was witty and funny.
From Wiki: "He studied mechanical engineering at Cornell University (where one of his professors was Carl Sagan) and graduated with a Bachelor of Science in 1977. Nye occasionally returns to Cornell as a professor to guest lecture introductory level astronomy and human ecology classes."
I would think that is sufficient education to be "the Science Guy". Why do we need to tear him down?
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
Do you know any telephone sanitisers to send on it?
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
He's a science educator. Some science educators *are* bona fide scientists, like Carl Sagan; but science is not mysticism. String theory might be beyond most people, but there's a lot of basic stuff most people can explore and understand, and if you can do that you can explain it to others.
If you think about it, a background in comedy is a very good preparation for being an educator. First you have to get and hold their attention. Second, you have to make really, really sure they get your point. People don't laugh at jokes they don't understand -- at least not the kind of laughter they paid to come experience. So comedy is all about making sure people get the point and are entertained along the way.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Literal Creationism (or "Intelligent design") is primarily an American thing pushed by fundamentalist protestants.
The vast majority of old school mainstream christian religious people (eg. Catholics Anglicans, etc) hold that evolution is a scientifically established principle (supported by both observation and related scientific theories). As far as how a deity fits into their picture, it is generally understood that the biblical stories are allegorical and not literal tellings of an event.
The concept of 'evolution guided by God' is simply a restatement that scientific evidence guides the description of how the universe works, and the random events that coincided to an eventual outcome may have been influenced or set in motion by some divine force. And even then, that is the simplistic layman's way of interpreting the phrase 'you/people were created by god'. With a deep theological understanding, the physical and spiritual aspects of the human condition are not necessarily connected and therefore unconflicted when it comes to changes in how we understand the workings of the known universe.
In general, religious belief does not hinge on anything that can ever be proven/disproven by observation, and is purely the domain of spiritual fulfilment and ideas that exist outside of the physical universe. For these people, there is no need for debate or argument. Science is science. Religion is religion. Their minds are open.
For the biblical fundamentalists that treat their bible as literal tellings of actual events, the 'debate' will never end. Science is religion. Religion is science. Their minds are closed.
These 'debates' are not attention whoring by the religious right, it is attention whoring by the media. More eyeballs for all involved.
A few years ago there was a team of a Nobel prize winner and a leading Jesuit that toured the US arguing that creationism was bad theology as well as it pretending various rubbish is science. The various creationist lay preacher merchants in the temple tried to pretend that it was invalid by implying that Catholics are not real Christians. That's how ridiculous the situation is.
The only winning move is not to play.
Did you watch the debate? Nye was debating against Young Earth Creationism that Answers in Genesis was putting out; he himself pointed out that millions do reconcile a belief in God and evolution.
Massive cultural assumption or what. What about international science presenters like David Attenborough or Brian Cox
Much of Asia ?? Hallo, I believe most of the Asian population is made up of China and India. Hinduism, for one, has no problem with evolution. In fact, evolution nicely fits in with the theory of reincarnation and the evolution of a soul over many lifetimes into higher and higher life-forms. As for young-earthism, Hindu belief includes astronomical time scales in which the Universe is born and destroyed... this is not the first Universe created by the Creator, not will it be the last. This is not an endorsement of Hinduism, which includes such delightful things like casteism, unequality of women and other social evils. All I'm saying is, there is no conflict between orthodox Hinduism and Evolution and the true age of the Earth. As for China, I believe a signifcant part of their population is Buddhist.. which again, has no problems with evolution because their basic tenets speak of the evolution of a soul over many lifetimes. Perhaps somebody could shed light on what Taoism and Confucianism has to say on this matter.
There is nothing incompatible with Intelligent design and evolution. If there is a God that created the universe then, that God also created evolution and therefor science is simply discovering Gods work.
I've never heard intelligent design described that way before. Intelligent design is the idea that biological organisms required an intelligent entity to create them, that it is unlikely that complex organisms could exist without a designer, which is an idea fundamentally contradicted by evolution. It sounds like you are describing deism, not intelligent design.
That's essentially the approach the modern Catholic church takes. Broadly speaking: Religion (overall) attempts to subjectively answer 'why?' Science attempts to objectively answer 'how?'. Objective and subjective reasoning methods are largely incompatible to begin with, and anyone used to thinking objectively at all times should find subjective reasoning infuriating and off-putting at best - but it's at the heart of the logic within theology.
Personally, I see evolution as part of the creation, a mechanism no more consequential to the question of God's existence than the rainfall. Besides, if we are truly made in God's image, it should only be natural that we should attempt to understand how we were made on all levels of that question.
The problem I think is small minds need a small God. Every time science pushes the boundaries of what we know about the size and complexity of the universe, ignorant rats scuttle about to stick their heads in the sand and deny the truth of what is observable in the universe, so that they may preserve their small God. If God did indeed make the universe, then the universe itself is the ultimate testament to truth (whatever that is) - not a book - for the universe alone was authored by the hand of God. To deny it is to call God a liar.