Bill Nye Aand Evolution

Submitted by: whipplefunk 3 years ago in Entertainment

Bill Nye, a voice a reason in an uneducated world
There are 94 comments:
Male 450
Wow, any lengths to support ones beliefs I guess. You can`t argue Faith v Science. It just won`t work. It`s like oil and water.
0
Reply
Male 2,216
If you have a make-believe friend in the sky, take your medication.
0
Reply
Male 39,908

[quote]"Now it`s Atheists we have to deal with saying their view is the only right one"[/quote]
Not at all. I don`t know any atheists that want to teach atheism in schools. Science yes. I don`t know any atheists that want to ban or outlaw other people or their beliefs so long as they aren`t hurting anyone.

There are nuts in any crowd of course, but for the most part atheists just want the religionists to shut the hell up.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
Deist aren`t the fundies BTW they`re like agnostics kind of.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
[quote]But now, thanks to discussions like this, every year there are fewer and fewer deists to deal with.[/quote]

Now it`s Atheists we have to deal with saying their view is the only right one....... Not all deists go around shoving their ideals down everyones throat either. Same annoying s**t different theory.
0
Reply
Male 39,908

5Cats - old axiom "The right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins."

The right to teach your religious beliefs ends where my kids` ears begin. Do what you want with your own children, but keep it out of public schools.

0
Reply
Male 57
Yes, almost all ancient texts (including the Bible) contain unknown or ambiguous parts. Even parts where the vocabulary is known still need to be understood in terms of their context and genre. Interpretation (as distinct from translation) is another thorny issue altogether. Some Christian groups come up with statements on how to understand the Bible (such as the conservative Protestant "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" or the Catholic "Dei Verbum"). Even such conservative statements still emphasize how good interpretation is not automatic to the "believer", but is subject to reason and discipline. But I think I have already digressed far too much from the original topic. So I bid you good day.
0
Reply
Male 57
@5cats: Apology accepted. Internet forums such as this one make measured, reasonable responses difficult, so some degree of misunderstanding is inevitable

Yes, it is frustrating when people misunderstand the nature of translations. However, not many have access to the original languages and the means to understand them. Cautious readers of an ancient work must be aware that the translation in their hands is not the exact same thing that Paul (or whoever) wrote. I guess that is why my job exists – to try to clarify a confusing subject to those who are interested..
0
Reply
Male 40,751
@Gerry1: Sure! There will always be a "balance" between rights and responsibilities. It`s human nature.

The "right to be stupid" is still a right, yes?
Other groups could be said to "harm society" too: Vegans, pro-choicers, cult members, Democrats; WHERE do we (as a society) draw "the line"? What is "allowed" and what is forbidden? I always chose to "err on the side of freedom".

@hamptoninn: Sorry for snapping at you! I do know the character limit forces a lot of "condensation" when trying to explain stuff!
You`ve gone "up a peg" for your reasonable reply :-)
It`s a pet peeve of mine that people (of all walks) get `hung up` on a single word or sentence in the Bible: in English! It wasn`t written in English!
Existing ancient tracts often contain unknown words or symbols that are INTERPRETED, correct?
Biblical Literalists drive me bonkers! A short trip, I admit...
0
Reply
Male 7,123
Should parents have an absolute right to teach their children according to their beliefs? Some people apparently believe that if faith is truly held then poison will not harm you. Do they have the right to teach their children that?

Other parents might genuinely believe that killing unbelievers is pleasing to their god. Do they have the right to teach their chidren that?

Is the right absolute or are there limits? Creationism does not physically harm anybody directly but it seriously limits the child`s prospects and damages society by perpetuating ignorance and scientific illiteracy.
0
Reply
Male 57
4- I am unclear on your point here. Yes, the extant copies come after 70 AD. Yes, the original versions of some New Testament books come before, during, or after that time. I refer to my comments in point 2 to address this issue. I do agree we do not possess the autographs. I deny that means that they did not exist. I really don’t have the time at present to provide a full discussion on historiography, but some good books on that topic may be helpful to prevent further misunderstandings on the nature of the relationship between autographs, their textual tradition, and their historical reliability.

I hope I answered your questions. I take great care to be an honest and competent teacher in my discipline. I cannot force anyone to agree with me, but I do assure you that my points here are based on sound scholarship and years of study (personal as well as in graduate school), and are not just speculation.
0
Reply
Male 57
3 (continued)- Do I mean Catholics by church councils? Seeing as how prior to 1054 the Church was all Catholic, yes. The church councils were Catholic. The work Catholic means universal, and that was the point of such councils: to gather leadership from the entire church to decide on matters of doctrine and practice and to address various heresies. Why are some "Holy Books" excluded? They were excluded because the consensus of early Christians was that those books, were not, in fact, holy. I encourage you to read up on this subject if it is of interest to you. There is a lot of good scholarship on this topic.
0
Reply
Male 57
3- I was responding to the notion suggested by Baphxiii that the Bible was voted on in 325. That is a common misconception that is easily disprovable, which is a personal pet peeve of mine. Were there church councils that discussed the canonicity of the Bible (particularly the New Testament)? Yes. Did they occur in 325? No. Was a vote ever taken to officially to determine what was in the Bible? Not exactly. The canonization of the Bible is a pretty complicated story, where a general consensus developed fairly early and some debates remained over certain books in certain regions. Even today Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians have different Bibles (in the OT part, specifically). I am not sure what you think I was arguing for. I was just trying to clear up a misconception.
0
Reply
Male 57
2 (continued)- Each historical document takes place in a context. We use that context to make sense of the extant documents that we find. Though the content of a text, grammar, writing style, location of discovery, contemporary accounts, and other means; scholars can determine the most probable time and place of authorship of a document given a broad enough manuscript tradition.

It is unfair to say textual criticism it is pure speculation in the same way it is unfair when certain Christians say evolution is pure speculation. Both are disciplines that examine the existing evidence to come up with the most likely explanation. Neither field (nor any academic discipline that I know of) has enough evidence to convince the skeptic who is absolutely set against their conclusions.
0
Reply
Male 57
2- Yes, the physical documents we have date later than the original documents. The earliest physical text we have today is the John Rylands Papyrus, which dates to around 125 AD. No, that does not mean that anything before them is pure speculation. It is no more “ speculation ” to say that a copy is based on an original (or other copy) than it is to say that because you exist today, you also existed yesterday.
0
Reply
Male 57
To respond to your questions:
1- Yes. Though at no point did I suggest that we possess the autographs of any Bible test. The Bible is just like every other literary work in that regard.
0
Reply
Male 57
The textual criticism of the extant texts is a very different matter than the credibility of the authors. The question of how we know whether the person who composed the work was credible and the question of whether the physical copies that remain are faithful to the autograph are approached through very different processes. Out entire knowledge of ancient history (outside of archeology) comes from copies of manuscripts. Tacitus, Josephus, Herodotus, Thucydides: all of these we only have in copies. Yet, these historians are held as generally reliable sources of what they report, and are still useful to a person wanting to know more about ancient history.
0
Reply
Male 57
@5cats I apologize if I was unclear. However, I believe you may be mistaken about my motivation or what I actually said.

There is a significant difference between an autograph (the first version of a text hand written by an author or the author’s amanuenses) and the manuscript tradition. To the best of my knowledge, we do not possess any autograph of any significant ancient work whatsoever. (The only exception would be some miscellaneous steles, but those have a very different function to a historian than epistles, apocalypses, and gospels, etc.).
0
Reply
Male 39,908

@ McGovern - no it`s not beating a dead horse. 30 years ago this would not have been a public discussion. Most people claimed one faith or another out of superstitious habit. But now, thanks to discussions like this, every year there are fewer and fewer deists to deal with. Each year their political clout shrinks {except in Texas}.

It might be slow progress, but it`s progress.
0
Reply
Male 39,908

5Cats, I agree they can teach their own kids, not others. Bill Nye is commenting that it`s their choice but it`s retarding the kids development. That it`s damaging. They still have the choice to handicap their kid by keeping him ignorant, but it`s still wrong even if they do have the right to do it.
0
Reply
Male 40,751
[quote]That`s when they go too far.[/quote]
@Gerry1: Well, they have the right to ask, same as other `minority groups` do too!
But it`s a different subject, yes? Bill Nye is flat-out saying Christians should not BE ALLOWED TO teach their religious beliefs to THEIR OWN children. That is just as "wrong" as what you`ve brought up, correct?

People on IAB have claimed atheists NEVER TRY to impose their beliefs on others? Well here`s Nye doing just that!

Homosexualists have been trying to put "gay education" into schools since 1975... starting at kindergarten... they`ve succeeded!

[quote]I watch "Christians" spread hate, bigotry and evil.[/quote]
@Patchouly: Undoubtedly true. Does that justify Nye`s position? Is it even `on topic`? I don`t think "banning all religion" is the answer to anything. I doubt the Muslims, Hindus or others would "go quietly" in that "Final Solution" you propose...
0
Reply
Male 14,331
0
Reply
Male 14,331

0
Reply
Male 39,908


0
Reply
Male 296
And now you guys see why my avatar is what it is.



Most religious fanatics use circular reasoning to justify their ignorance of the universe. They keep themselves inside their little bubble and spin in circles repeating the same bullsh*t over and over and over again, thinking that if they repeat it enough they will win the argument.

I think a quote from Christopher Hitchens pretty much sums up what Bill Nye was trying to say.

"If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in quite a different world"
0
Reply
Male 39,908

5Cats, [quote]"don`t those parents have the RIGHT to teach their OWN children according to their beliefs?"[/quote]
Yes I agree they absolutely do. But the religious don`t stop there. They take evolution out of text books and force their creationist view on everyone else` children. That`s when they go too far.

They don`t want my "gay agenda" shoved down their throat and them claim they are being victimized when they can`t cram their agenda down my throat or pass laws to restrict my freedoms.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
Draculya:
"I`m not sure I subscribe to freedom of religion any longer. I prefer freedom from religion."
-----

That`s the point I`m getting to. We are saturated with it, on a daily basis. My kid has to put up with other kids bullying her because of her beliefs (or lack of beliefs). I watch "Christians" spread hate, bigotry and evil. Trying to dictate how the rest of us should live, based on their "Book". I watch them as they brainwash their kids (and they tend to have a lot of them too). The process is sickening as they take a young mind and destroy it by filling it with hate and tell them to ignore the facts in front of them. It is child abuse; plain and simple.

We need to get rid of it, like a cancer, it needs to be cut from society. We need to aggressively oppose it (Not physically, but certainly verbally and in places like this where we can stand up for reason).
0
Reply
Male 15,261
"@madduck and @Gerry1: That all may be true, and probably is! But don`t those parents have the RIGHT to teach their OWN children according to their beliefs?"

I`m not sure I subscribe to freedom of religion any longer. I prefer freedom from religion.
0
Reply
Male 40,751
@madduck and @Gerry1: That all may be true, and probably is! But don`t those parents have the RIGHT to teach their OWN children according to their beliefs?

After they round up the creationists **to protect the children** who`s next?

Think that`s far fetched? In Germany it`s ILLEGAL to homeschool your own children... today I mean, not in 1936.
0
Reply
Female 8,051
Old Ollie- to further what Gerry sensibly said- creationists also refuse to accept ( out of sheer stubbornness) to accept the principle driver for life on this planet- a process which affects all life, medecine, our environment etc... that is down right dangerous. Even the Catholic church gets it... but no- a bunch of half wits scattered over the planet think they know best.
0
Reply
Male 39,908

OldOllie, [quote]"It`s not like these people are causing any damage to society or the economy."[/quote]
Religion does everything it can to keep society from progressing. They work hard to keep me from getting married to another man and it`s because of them being gay was illegal for so very long. Given their way women would still be chattel in a marriage with no real rights.

There is a reason the time the Church ruled governments was called "The Dark Ages".
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Okay, I agree that biblical creationism is pure bull$#!+, but for the life of me, I can`t figure out what difference it makes if they guy changing my tires or painting my house or doing my taxes believes in it or not. It`s not like these people are causing any damage to society or the economy.

People are taught all kinds of bull$#!+ in school. I`d much rather have people growing up to believe in creationism than growing up to believe in central planning and Keynesian economics.
0
Reply
Male 40,751
@baphxiii: Excellent comments! Excellent avatar!

@hamptonnin: you`re either the WORST "Biblical Scholar" I`ve EVER encountered or you have a terrible problem with communication.

1- Bible Books may well have come from "eyewitness stories" but the earliest existing TEXTS come MUCH later. Yes?

2- Again: the physical texts date after 70AD AT BEST correct? So anything BEFORE THEM is pure SPECULATION. Yes?

3- "Church Councils" you mean Catholics? Why are some "Holy Books" excluded? It`s all a "confidence scam" in my books...

3A- See what I did there?

4- The "original manuscripts in their original languges" ALL COME AFTER 70AD!!!! What is your point? Also the same for Torah and Koran: the "original manuscripts" are either LONG GONE or SUPPRESSED. That`s a fact! You`ve not said otherwise, in fact you`ve agreed.

Bullship Sir!
0
Reply
Male 15,261
Religious people are not fit to run for office. As for their childraising, I suppose it`s the equivalent of failing to act on a curable genetic disease passed on through the generations. The government should step in and break the cycle of indoctrination through education, just as it might forcibly inoculate a child from polio.
0
Reply
Male 450
Wow, any lengths to support ones beliefs I guess. You can`t argue Faith v Science. It just won`t work. It`s like oil and water.
0
Reply
Male 57
4- @Baphxiii The number of times the Bible has been translated is irrelevant to the trustworthiness of the manuscript tradition. We have an extraordinary number of ancient manuscripts in the original languages, and sufficient knowledge of those ancient languages to make very accurate translations today. Whether or not any particular translation of a Bible passage is good has no bearing whatsoever on the reliability of the original text.
0
Reply
Male 57
3- @ Baphxiii The Bible canon was most emphatically not “voted on” in 325. I have no idea where that strangely common misunderstanding came from. (I think maybe the Da Vinci Code?) The Council of Nicea which met in 325 was primarily about Arianism. The Canon of Scripture was not addressed at all during that historic council. The canonization of the NT is a complex story, but a consensus on those books was mostly settled long before Nicea, and actually affirmed later by various other church councils.
0
Reply
Male 57
2- @Baphxiii As an actual professor of Bible and Theology, I can categorically refute your claim that “Scholars agree that the first book written in the NT was the Book of Matthew which was written around 70 CE”. While many scholars think Matthew was written around that time, scholars agree on very little, and consensus tends to vary considerably from decade to decade on dating Bible books. However, the current consensus of NT scholars would say that Paul’s letters (such as Galatians or 1 Corinthians) date back to around AD 50, possibly earlier.
0
Reply
Male 57
1- There are so many straw men here, I hope no one lights a match!

I just want to weigh in on the last comment. There were a lot of problems, so it may take me a few posts to clear things up.

@Baphxiii The Bible, while collective in nature, may very well have some books that have been written by eyewitnesses. It is difficult to confirm the authorship of any ancient document beyond a reasonable doubt, which makes a definite claim such as “the bible [was] NOT written by eye witnesses” just has indefensible as the hypothetical claim “all books of the Bible were written by eyewitnesses”. What we actually have is an ancient tradition (recorded by Church Fathers such as Eusebius) that affirms some books were written by witnesses of their events, and a variety of modern scholars who possess varying degrees of skepticism about such claims.
0
Reply
Male 91
@blykins One other thing I would like to point out is the the collective works known as the bible were NOT written by eye witnesses. Scholars agree that the first book written in the NT was the Book of Matthew which was written around 70 CE. Almost 40 years after the fact. The bible was also translated into many languages and mis-translations and errors are abundant. In 325 CE they actually voted on what was to be bible cannon and what was to be left out. Those works were then rewritten, translated, copied, re-copied, re-translated, re rewritten, copied, and so on. It is human nature to make mistakes. For you to claim everything in the bible is true and has never been proven wrong is asinine and ignorant. So your claiming the all too human writers never ever made one mistake?? That`s crap and you know it.
0
Reply
Male 91
@blykins You have posted a few times that there were non-christian historians in the first century who wrote about jesus. The main historian christians like to trot out to try and prove this is Flavius Josephus. In one of his works titled "Antiquities of the Jews" written in 94 CE he speaks about jesus, the trial, pontius pilot and the crucifiction. But, the majority of scholars, historians and even biblical scholars have come to the consensus that the writings of Josephus were tampered with by a christian scribe during the 3rd or 4th century. The passages about jesus do not fit in with the overall narrative. Some of the language used was not in use in the first century. Also, if the parts about jesus are removed then the original writing flows normally. In fact the majority of non-christian historians who were writing in the first century never wrote about jesus. Your claim about the bible never being proven wrong is completely false.
0
Reply
Male 39,908

@ PARSBAYLUK thanks for the link. My problem with Penn & Teller is the same as with Bill Maher, they may be right but the delivery, the way they sell it, is just flat rude. It`s possible to be factual without being a snot-nose or insulting. "Religulous" was like that, it lost credibility because Maher was so obviously just making fun of faith.

0
Reply
Male 39,908

@ randomxnp - that co2 experiment wasn`t faked. It was dumbed down so that even Fox News viewers could understand it. Then it got attacked for not being elaborate or scientific enough.

In other words, haters gonna hate. Talk over their heads they don`t believe you and if you talk at their level their just a brick wall.
0
Reply
Male 40,751
[quote]I have proof that Jesus lived. Historical writings by non-Christian writers prove it.[/quote]
@blykins: Link it! I call bullship on that one. There is NO MENTION of Jesus outside of writings which came DECADES after his death! Pontius Pilot & other contemporary Romans left writings behind, NON mention Jesus...

@randomxnp: Right! And Nye used to be a good person, but later became an uber-creep (imho). I lost all respect for him years ago.

@aroc91: Correct too! Egyptians knew it, the Ancient Chinese knew it (Earth`s shadow on the moon, eh?) as well as many others.
On the open ocean? The sea`s horizon is curved! Sailors have known the Earth isn`t `flat` for millennia now...
0
Reply
Male 182
@blykins

"Up until the 1400`s, people though the Earth was flat"

Wrong. The Greeks knew the Earth was round and even calculated its dimensions with a fair degree of accuracy.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
Blykins

"A contemporary historical writer from the 1st century will write that there was a man named Jesus ... He saw it first-hand. "

None did. You are simply making that up.

That is despite the known fact that several of the recorders of the matters of that age passed through the region at the time. There were many religious cults, it was like California in the 1970s, but none of that name or who matches the Jesus of the remaining four gospels (not that they match each other or the other gospels that Constantine did not include in the New Testament).

As for the Big Bang, there is considerable evidence for it. However it is far from universally accepted, and might nor have occurred. However in science that uncertainty is considered a strength, ideas are tested until we can be confident of them. Religion`s greatest weakness is not to admit it might be wrong, and test its ideas.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
Would that be the same Bill Nye that faked an experiment to try to prove other people wrong on science? Funnily enough, the experiment would not even have proved them wrong had he not faked it, because he was trying to disprove a straw man.
0
Reply
Male 1,454
I have a lot of respect for Bill Nye, he taught a lot of kids so much! Still, while i totally respect him with all his refined understanding of science, his opinions on faith on the other hand, are not so refined. To put it in perspective, it would be like all the kids teaching HIM about science instead of the other way around! Faith isn`t going anywhere soon, besides...


0
Reply
Male 4,745
@Doiknowyou,
The evidence just keeps on piling on, doesn`t it? I don`t know how much more evidence they need to show just how fake the whole thing is.
0
Reply
Male 1,365
Male 4,745
Along with PARSBAYLUK`s link, I`d add you should watch this. It will give you a tiny peek into the house of cards that is Christianity.
Religulous
0
Reply
Male 4,745
In fact, because the Bible is "The Word Of God", you would expect it to be perfect in every way. However, there are so many things wrong in it, it has to be assumed it just isn`t real. How could a small percent of it be real when the rest is so terribly wrong and inaccurate?

As for the "Jesus" thing...there may or may not have been a Jesus. Well, I`m sure there were some people with that name. But you show me proof of this man being the son of God and not just another scam artist and then we`ll talk.
0
Reply
Male 39,908

blykins, [quote]"the Bible has proven science and public opinion wrong multiple times."[/quote]
I`ll agree public opinion is often wrong...but it`s not a `fact` it`s opinions. Please give some examples of when the bible proved science wrong. I`d like to see that.

0
Reply
Male 39,908

Isaiah 34:7
Deuteronomy 33:17
Psalms 22:21

I`m surprised any bible believer doesn`t know this stuff. Don`t you read that book?
0
Reply
Male 39,908

blykins, [quote]"I`d like to see the passage in the Bible that says there are unicorns."[/quote]
Numbers 22:23 "God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn"

Numbers 24:8 "God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows."

Job 39:9 "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?"

Job 39:10 "Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?"

Psalms 29:6 "He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn."

Psalms 92:10 "But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil."

There are 3 more passages that mention Unicorns but there`s a text limit at
0
Reply
Male 4,745
@blykins, there is zero proof of God. None what so ever. You can choose to laugh at science if you like. It only goes toward showing your ignorance of the proof that is before your eyes. But in the end, it`s not up to me to come up with a substitute for your fake "God" theory. If you want people to believe it, you better have more proof than a book that has been proven wrong on 90% of everything it says. Knowing that, I ask again, just what are you basing your beliefs on?
0
Reply
Male 3,908

0
Reply
Male 32
Here`s what I find interesting:

Someone comes up with an idea and says, "Hey, I think the universe and everything as we know it came from a speck that exploded." Large numbers of people will say, "Yeah! That makes perfect sense!"

A contemporary historical writer from the 1st century will write that there was a man named Jesus. He had teachings. He was crucified by a man named Pilate. The earth shook, the sky turned black. This historical writer was a witness to all of this. He saw it first-hand.

However, someone would rather believe someone else`s far-fetched idea that the universe came from a speck, rather than hear someone`s eye-witness account.

Logic. ROFL....
0
Reply
Male 32
"First off, there is a good chance that the "period" was actually a rupture. That matter came from another dimension that ruptured and all of the matter we have came from that point spreading out to fill the void of this dimension. A lot of this information can be backed up by scientific hypothesis, based on math and an understanding of physics."

Really? All this is backed up by *HYPOTHESIS*.....ROFL

I have proof that Jesus lived. Historical writings by non-Christian writers prove it. I have proof that King David lived. Archaeologists have found artifacts with his seal, name, etc. on them.

Even those two things that I mentioned are more than all of your "HYPOTHESES" combined. I have real, tangible evidence. You have theory.

Again, insults are childish and show that you have no proof, just pride and an ego.

Bill Nye is wrong. Sorry.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
...just what are you basing your beliefs on?).
0
Reply
Male 3,908
"I have never seen a passage in the Bible that states the solar system is geocentric. Passage?"

So I guess you didn`t the link I posted. It cites several passages referring to geocentric cosmology.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
blykins:
"Someone explain to me how the billions and billions of galaxies that we have today that are billions of light years from each other came from a small period exploding.

It takes more faith to believe in something that foolish.
-----
LOL! Your ignorance is showing.
First off, there is a good chance that the "period" was actually a rupture. That matter came from another dimension that ruptured and all of the matter we have came from that point spreading out to fill the void of this dimension. A lot of this information can be backed up by scientific hypothesis, based on math and an understanding of physics. The Bible is one (of many, many,many, many, many, many books on fake religions that work for a while then get abandoned for a new one when the old one fails to work. Luckily, there are so many holes in the current Bible that folks are realizing there is no truth to it at all (if 90% is silly crap that doesn`t work, just what are you
0
Reply
Female 8,051
Blykins- shut up- you are talking crap. We all know it- and so would you if you put your brain into gear.
0
Reply
Male 32
BTW, a more accurate translation of "unicorn" would be "rhinoceros".
0
Reply
Male 32
BTW, even if the Bible did literally say that there were unicorns. So what? We accept the fact that the earth was inhabited by dinosaurs at one point. What`s the difference?

Up until a few years ago, no one had ever found proof of King David. Athiests like to laugh and point that the Bible talks about this character but there was no historical proof.

Guess what they found? ;)

I`m willing to discuss factual topics. But for someone to back up their argument with insult is rather childish.

Scientists do say that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Schools readily teach that everything that we know today came from something the size of a period. Someone explain to me how the billions and billions of galaxies that we have today that are billions of light years from each other came from a small period exploding.

It takes more faith to believe in something that foolish.
0
Reply
Male 6,077
@Gerry1of1,
"a vindictive deity that kills whole cities at a time"
Just whole cities? That`s nothing! You forgot "The Flood" that (supposedly) wiped out all humans and land animals on the Earth.
0
Reply
Male 32
Awesome. Someone finally posted a passage about the unicorn. Unfortunately, the Hebrew word that this was translated from translates to a wild ox....not a mythical animal that some of you would grasp as an argument against the Bible.

Next.
0
Reply
Male 32
Explorers of the 14th and 15th centuries were afraid of sailing off the edge of the earth. Doesn`t sound like they thought the earth was round to me...

I have never seen a passage in the Bible that states the solar system is geocentric. Passage?

I accept evolution. Things evolve. They always have. However, to say that everything we know today came from one period is not logical, nor is it scientific. Again, it goes against the very laws of physics that these scientists practice.

I`m interested to hear proof of the various quips from some of you. I`m still waiting to hear the passage about the unicorn and the geocentric solar system.

Undoubtedly Bill Nye is an intelligent man, but God made him that way.
0
Reply
Male 312
@blykins: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v2/n1/unicorns-in-bible

also half way through paragraph 3: http://www.atheismresource.com/2010/the-bible-has-never-been-proven-wrong

A staff that could turn into a snake would be an awesome party trick, can I have one?
0
Reply
Male 4,745
blykins:
"It takes a further stretch of the imagination to believe that everything came from nothing, rather than to believe that God created everything.
----------
This is actually VERY easy to explain and really shouldn`t me much of a stretch for someone who believes in sky wizards. The Universe is infinite. If it`s conceivable that things will always be, in what ever form they happen to take, it`s also safe to assume that things always were. Matter wasn`t created; It just always was. There you go...problem solved.
0
Reply
Male 3,908
"Sorry, but the Bible has never been proven wrong."

According to the buy-bull our solar system is geocentric, so that`s one thing proven wrong.
0
Reply
Female 8,051
It is not Christian- most Christians accept evolution- sadly it is religious fanatics of all stripes. No point engaging them- they do not understand reason...
0
Reply
Male 415
@blykins, it was pretty much known that the earth was round before Christ was born, what`s your point exactly? If anything, that was added to the bible because it was already known.
0
Reply
Male 92
@blykins
nobody THOUGH the earth was flat...

Learn to learn.
0
Reply
Male 159
"ut I`m not likely to demand others raise their kids according to MY PERSONAL beliefs... which is what Nye is doing here. "

Typical christian bullpoo, always trying to equate the discoveries of the rational with your juju fairy stories. It`s NOT his beliefs, you have `belief` that`s ALL you have. Bill Nye however has knowledge. The difference between proof and faith, proof is obtained through study and observation, faith is obtained by blindness.
0
Reply
Female 8,051
Oh for Gods- sake, there is no bloody argument except in the heads of a few deluded crackpots who have trouble walking and talking at the same time. Evolution is accepted by everyone who has a half decent education- and no one cares what the stupid ignoramuses who can`t quite get their ikkle heads round it think. Ignore them.
0
Reply
Male 32
It`s true. The Bible has never been proven wrong. On the contrary, the Bible has proven science and public opinion wrong multiple times. No quip or attached GIF will distort that fact.

I`d like to see the passage in the Bible that says there are unicorns. Remember, just because you make it up doesn`t mean that it`s true. ;)

Up until the 1400`s, people though the Earth was flat. Old Testament scriptures, written many centuries before Jesus` birth talked about the roundness of the Earth.

Up until a few years ago, people laughed at how there was no archaelogical evidence for people/cities mentioned in the Bible. Then they were found.

Sorry, but the Bible has never been proven wrong. Even non-Christian sources will back up the evidence that Jesus lived, he was crucified, and there were even earthquakes and complete darkness, as the Bible said. This was people who DID NOT believe in the Bible, but couldn`t refute the data in front of their
0
Reply
Male 39,908

blykins [quote]"The Bible has never been proven wrong."[/quote]
eh-hem... There are no unicorns. The bible says there are, but there never have been. But if you want to live in a fantasy land of unicorns, talking snakes and a vindictive deity that kills whole cities at a time, go right ahead. Don`t teach that crap to my kids though.
0
Reply
Male 39,908

He`s not telling anyone how to raise their kids. He - a professional educator - is talking about how to educate children. That teaching religious doctrine in science classes is doing all children a disservice. He`s talking about places like Texas where the textbooks only teach Intelligent Design and not evolution. Those kids will be one ignorant generation.

You can teach your own kids about your religion, but stop forcing it on everyone elses kids in the schools.
0
Reply
Male 3,908
"The Bible has never been proven wrong."




0
Reply
Male 2,578
Please just stop arguing people, please.
0
Reply
Male 40,751
@Musuko42: You`ve entirely missed the point about: who`s most qualified to raise their own children.

Hint: THEIR OWN children, not ME telling others ANYTHING! That`s OFF-TOPIC ok?
I`m completely qualified to have -an opinion- on both child raising and Bill Nye`s position. But I`m not likely to demand others raise their kids according to MY PERSONAL beliefs... which is what Nye is doing here.
0
Reply
Male 40,751
Sorry @blykins: The Bible has tons of errors and mistakes in it. What we read is NOT the same as what was originally written: it`s been copied and translated from one language to another several times over the centuries. Like @drworm2002 said!

Science doesn`t claim to be infallible, it`s often "wrong" but will change itself until it`s "right", eh? In theory... (see what I did there?)

@bliznik: Some of the Big Bang theories say that YES Indeed all matter came from nothing. Others differ, there`s more than one theory, eh?
Energy cannot be destroyed, as far as we know. As far as I know I mean!
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@5Cats

"Bill Nye knows BETTER THAN YOU DO how to raise YOUR children? Is that the message here?"

The man has spent a large part of his career educating and entertaining children. As far as I`m aware (forgive me if I`m wrong), you have not, nor have you any children of your own.

So, on a personal level...yeah, I`d say that he knows more about raising children than you personally do. I recknon he knows way more than I do too.
0
Reply
Male 179
do you think Bill Nye watched Breaking Bad?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@blykins

"It takes a further stretch of the imagination to believe that everything came from nothing, rather than to believe that God created everything."

Science is about explaining what we observe in the world. Not about "imagining" things.

"The Bible has never been proven wrong. Science has."

Science is a method, a process, of finding answers. It`s not the answers themselves. As a process, science is most definitely proven to succeed. You typed that message on a machine that the scientific method provided for you.

Above all: just because you struggle to understand or believe it, doesn`t mean it`s not still true. Your failure of imagination is not science`s failure.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"The Bible has never been proven wrong. Science has."

Just because you don`t admit factual inaccuracies doesn`t mean they don`t exist. Science admits its mistakes and corrects them.
0
Reply
Male 40,751
0:30 So... Bill Nye knows BETTER THAN YOU DO how to raise YOUR children? Is that the message here?

Yup, seems that way! Although he`s well spoken about it. It`s still "Big Brother Knows Best" though; demanding parents not teach their own children something the Government doesn`t approve of...

0
Reply
Male 14,331
Another Eternal question debate here. Niether religion or science will ever be able to answer.
0
Reply
Male 1,741
blykins, wrong wrong and double wrong.

No scientists say that "everything came from nothing." Evolution shows that we can trace our lineage back a certain number of years through specific genus` and species that we have discovered and analyzed.

Scientists also don`t say that energy cannot be created or destroyed. They say that there is nothing that WE can do to create or destroy energy.
0
Reply
Male 1,380
@blykins, "The Bible has never been proven wrong. Science has."

Good for you! Don`t let facts get in the way of a good opinion!

"It takes a further stretch of the imagination to believe that everything came from nothing, rather than to believe that God created everything."

Of course, you still have to deal with the question, "but what created God?" However that would be using "logic" and "reasoning" and it might interfere with our opinion so lets just bury our heads in the sand until this all goes away.
0
Reply
Male 662
Blykins. You are ignorant of the bible. First, it was written by man and edited by man. There are things in the bible that have ben proven wrong again and again. Science changes. As we learn more we understand more.
0
Reply
Male 32
It takes a further stretch of the imagination to believe that everything came from nothing, rather than to believe that God created everything. The very stance that almost every scientist takes, that energy is neither created nor destroyed, seems to be the very stance that they ignore in order to prove that life, the universe, and everything that we know came from one little spec the size of this period. The Bible has never been proven wrong. Science has.
0
Reply
Male 1,150
Link: Bill Nye Aand Evolution [Rate Link] - Bill Nye, a voice a reason in an uneducated world
0
Reply