-41 votes

Are You Anti-Science?

Are you a Creationist? Do you want your kids to grow up with Creationist beliefs?

Bill Nye, "The Science Guy" lays it on the line for parents.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Theory is more than hypothesis

You are confusing the two. A hypothesis is a guess with little to no testing to back it up. A theory is a hypothesis which has gained considerable peer review and has lots of factual support, yet still stands unproven because not every step in the process has been proven out. Theories usually stand alone because two competing theories generate intense competition to provide 'the scientific community' with enough evidence to convince them to mostly agree on just one. A law is fully proven, but still breakable should some game-changing breakthrough occur.

Anyone can have a hypothesis. Theories require lots of research which all is peer reviewed (i.e. publicly debated to final conclusion) and ongoing.

In your non-science world, you dismiss hypotheses every day and you rely on theories every day. You have very few natural laws you recognize. Why do you hold others to higher standards?

Not an expert on puffer fish.

But I can deduct that its predators were just evolving as well and thus it could manage without it. It might have also had an ancient type of defense mechanism that was lost when the new superior one developed.

It is an enormous simplification to speak of the American mind. Every American has his own mind.

~Ludwig von Mises

I don't know anything about puffer fish

but the usual track is that as prepuff fish's environment changed or as the regular preditors it has to deal with changes or as its food supply changes, some of the prepuff fish (the ones that can puff up) begin to have a competitive edge over the prepuffs. They begin to use this skill (previously known as an abnormality though) to outcompete their ancestors and non-abnormal cousins in the fight for food. Eventually all the non-abnormal siblings went extinct while the puffy ones survived because of puffing.

Where to start?

I guess I'll start by saying that I am a Christian and I believe that the Bible is God's Word. Before anybody assumes, based on that, what my position is, please let me continue. First off, the Bible is not a science book, and was written to people who couldn't possibly understand the processes involved in creation. For that matter, I don't think we can either. Allow me to demonstrate:


Follow that link and then start zooming out until your brain explodes.

Next, mix in the fact that there are theories trying to explain gravitation, among other things, that postulate up to 26 spatial dimensions (don't ask me to explain, I can't really wrap my mind around that, either) and things become very complicated.

So where does that leave me? I look at the universe, at the complexity of life, and see design, which implies a designer, whom I will call God. On the flip side, I believe that science can give us insights into how things work, a little bit about how creation was accomplished, if you will.

Really, the reason I decided to jump into this discussion is that we really shouldn't be arguing over this issue. No one will be convinced of the other side's arguments, and we have much bigger problems right now than how we came to be. As I stated above, I don't think any of us really understands the answer to that question, anyway.

This really doesn't have much to with anything anyway.

We all agree that free market alternatives are better than public schools. They will teach different mixes of creationism and/or evolution, and thus the people will have a plethora of options when it comes to what their children are taught. This is the beauty of the free market.

It is an enormous simplification to speak of the American mind. Every American has his own mind.

~Ludwig von Mises

As a ChemE, I'm certainly not anti-science

However, the media pounds pounds pounds the evolution thing into our heads...and we know how they push fake stories all the time.

After looking somewhat deeper into the topic, I am even starting to doubt the whole "dinosaur" thing too. Yes, the media pushes pushes pushes the dinosaur story on us....

Bones from Satan?

While I don't think "bones were put in the ground by Satan in order to deceive us, I do think his buddies here in 3-D have a hand in it all...

"Dinosaur is a new word which didn't exist before the 1800s. A speech was given describing them 10-12 years before any bones were "discovered", including drawings and descriptions that are pretty close to the same ones you see today.....so WHERE did the idea come from if no bones were found before then and there is no record??

Then they found some bones that they called dinosaurs some years later...so it seems like the bones (likely from ordinary animals) were put together and labeled as dinosaurs....seems they just decided what these things are solely based on the earlier descriptions. That's ass-backwards.

Note, no regular people ever find these bones, it's always professionals (and members of secret societies like the Masons, yep those guys again)...and they're always in the spot they look...

What's REALLY bizarre is that there were two teams looking for dinosaurs back in the day and they were "intercepting" shipments of bones that were supposed to go to the other team...wtf??...WHY were people, who are digging for bones, having bones shipped to them???....the strange stuff goes on and on...like, they way some of these dinosaurs are drawn, they could have never existed...T-Rex wouldn't even be able to stand as its tail wouldn't have enough mass to counter-balance its upper body - it would fall right over...then there's the issue of the Brontosaurus.....with mass like that, it would break its own bones if it moved any faster than very very very slow...ok, so assume it moved really slow...HOW could it ever eat enough to grow that big...nope, the way these things are drawn, they would defy the laws of physics....now, they find one tooth, and they invent a new dinosaur...oh, the list goes on and on...I can add more....

How many complete skeletons have been found? What you see in museums are made of mostly plaster...the plaster thing alone gets kind of weird when you look into it... I just stumbled upon this topic by accident....not saying for certain they did not exist, it's just I've read enough to make me seriously doubt what were being told.

We know how many industries out there are totally based on fraud...I have a feeling this is another one...much money is in the dinosaur industry....there's much to doubt. Not to mention the MSM pushes the dinosaur thing up and down and backwards...and we know who owns the media, and what they do.....

This appears to be yet another deception brought to you by Satan's minions to create doubt in our minds about the existence of God. THAT is the whole purpose behind pushing the dinosaur craze.

Wow, Really... wow

You really need to go to school or at least read a science book. Do you get all your knowledge from crackpot thumpers? This is why Bill Nye made the video and it's why people get so heated about creationists who think they can just listen to some layman's sermon and pass that along as education.

I would lay big money that you can't cite a single credible quote for anything you just stated other than that the word dinosaur is a 19th century word. Do you think maybe that was because no one investigated them until then?

The class "Dinosauria"

Was originally defined by Sir Richard Owen in 1842, in a two hour speech that reportedly held the audience captivated. The original dinosaurs of this new group were Megalosaurus, Iguanodon and Hylaeosaurus. However, each of these animals was known only from fragmentary specimens.

It is generally accepted that the first discovery of dinosaur remains in North America was made in 1854 by Ferdinand Vandiveer Hayden during his exploration of the upper Missouri River.

So, dinosaurs were described in 1842 before the discoveries in 1854 that were required to give a clear picture of what dinosaurs looked like. Were discoveries made or constructed to fit the descriptions?

Shall I give you an address to send the check to?

Never took a science class, did you?

That comment doesn't qualify as debate material. You failed to cite any proof or even offer a single link. You make statements that disagree with the first 5 google finds on the subject. You mix terms like "generally", "accepted" and "remains" all in the same sentence when they're all subjective terms and then got the quote wrong to boot. The first concrete skeleton was created in 1854 but "remains" have been found for thousands of years. "The discoveries" didn't suddenly begin on a single summer day by a single person. Even the Romans found them but were ignorant enough to just call them dragons.

A more humorous level site showing most of the above.

And you want money?

There are a lot of Jesus

There are a lot of Jesus haters on this thread.

Never met him, so how could

Never met him, so how could anyone hate him?

Because Jesus was the only

Because Jesus was the only son of God...sent to us for us to follow. Seems a lot of people have lost their way.

I used to think as you do,

I used to think as you do, but as I saw more of the world and was exposed to more belief systems, I realized they couldn't ALL be right. I abandoned such baggage in an attempt to understand reality minus a belief system that was created due to a specific set of circumstances in a specific time period due to a limited understanding of the world. The scientific method blew the old religious beliefs apart. It is only our own ignorance that prevents an individual's mental "evolution" from ignorant person to person willing to question unsupportable beliefs and learn new things.

SteveMT's picture

Our beliefs derive mostly from 'accidents of birth.'

Agree with you. Individuals actually taking a step outside of the box and scrutinizing their beliefs by putting them to the test will either confirm or deny what they believe, but either way they will be a stronger person for going through this very life-changing, heart-wrenching exercise.

"You believe in the Bible from the accident of birth, and the Turks believe in the Koran from the same accident, and each calls the other infidel. But leaving the prejudice of education out of the case, the unprejudiced truth is, that all are infidels who believe falsely of God, whether they draw their creed from the Bible, or from the Koran, from the Old Testament, or from the New." - Thomas Paine

To call others ignorant for

To call others ignorant for believing something you don't is in itself ignorant.

I used to be like you. I once believed that science was the answer and God was a tale and we are all here by accident. I also called others ignorant. I thought I had it figured out.

Then I discovered God. I have never felt so free.

Freedom from

Freedom from self-responsibility is liberating yet it is also a trap. One cannot explore the world or see people for who they really are if everything is viewed through the foggy lens of religious bias.

You are lost my friend. And

You are lost my friend. And just because you disagree with me or others does not mean you are right. Why must you down vote someone who has different veiws then your own? And then upvote your own. Quite arrogant.

Love Bill Nye!

I grew up with Bill Nye the Science Guy! He did a great job of making science fun for kids.

I would say though that his plea really doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Why would a parent teach their kids the entirety of their world-view, except for their belief in creationism? I'd say thats quite an unrealistic expectation.

To address the rest of the content. I would say that Nye is mostly right. Your world-view needs to be consistent with observable or reasonable observations and deductions. I would also say that there are plenty of unreasonable or unobserved deductions on both sides of the issue.

The real tragedy in the overall discussion is the idea that faith and science are incompatible, or at odds with each other. I think thats the biggest unreasonable deduction of them all. People of faith are equally responsible for both holding back scientific process, as well as making great scientific advances.

Ron Paul - Intellectual hero

If you believe in evolution

then look at my comment below and please explain!


Surviving the killing fields of Minnesota

Todays brainwashing: GMO's are safe

So maybe God created the

So maybe God created the bumble bee and evolution accounts for the rest of nature… If scientists were to say “God must have done it” every time they encountered a problem that couldn’t be immediately explained, there would be no advances in our scientific understanding. The beauty of scientific investigation is that, through time, we are able to find answers to extremely complex problems. It’s such a copout to just give up and say “well, God must have done it… let’s go grab a beer.” Answers are not always obvious, and they often counter what seems logical. For example, how is it possible for all of the components of the giraffe neck: bones, muscles, nerves, blood vessels, etc… to have synchronously evolved to a greater length? For the longest time scientists were stumped by this question… So god must have done it right? Wrong! We now have a complete understanding of pleiotropic genes, and how one gene can influence multiple traits. Another classic example is the geocentric model of the solar system… When you look into the sky at night, you will observe that all the planets and stars appear to be moving. But it doesn’t feel like we are moving. So the logical assumption was that God must have placed the earth at a stationary position at the center of the universe. No need to investigate right? Just imagine how detrimental the “god must have done it” attitude would be towards science.

ANSWER THIS: Do you really want all scientists to just give up and go home?

an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government

Yes, scientists should just go home when fooling around with

genetics like Monsanto. They are like a fascist Frankenstein company of the worst kind! When it come to replicating live animals with gene manipulation, just go home no good can come of it! BTW scientist still have to manipulate a zygote that already started the miracle of life cycle. They can not do it without the natural life cycle set up by God.

I am living everyday in the crap that comes from the lab of Monsanto. With Gene manipulation they are killing all the insects, bats, birds, and soon the human population!

Do you know how Monsanto can tell if a organic farmer has their grain mixed in? It's from Antibiotic markers, why in the hell are they putting more Antibiotics in the food chain. This in itself is very problematic! People are coming down with bacterial infections that can not be cured with regular antibiotics.

Yes, I say go home stop screwing with genetics let us live normal lives!

Surviving the killing fields of Minnesota

Todays brainwashing: GMO's are safe

Well, we agree on something

I don't like the idea of genetic modified foods. However, just because I don't like all of the applications of science, doesn't make it false. In fact, I would much rather there be an intelligent designer. I would much rather know that there is a predetermined purpose for my life. I would much rather know that there is an after life where I get to spend eternity with loved ones. However, I am only interested in truth... and the evidence points in one direction. You are choosing to follow a second class explanation for our origins because it is more pleasant then the alternative, and because you have been manipulated into thinking there is a place called hell. You are not logical, you are delusional.

an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government

So...you think we evolved from

So...you think we evolved from pond scum?

Biogenesis is a term used to

Biogenesis is a term used to describe the principle that all living organisms arise from other living organisms.
I am a biologist, and I therefore study biogenesis.

Abiogenesis is the term used to describe the phenomenon of a living organism coming into being from inorganic matter... Abiogenesis represents one of the greatest challenges in biochemistry (not my field).

In regards to abiogenesis, and your statement about "pond scum," if I were ever to claim that there was a god... This is where I would make that claim. Thus far, any attemp to replicate the initial stages of life has failed. There are just too many unknown's. I personally feel like there is a scientific answer to this question, but this is one of the few areas where I haven't completely ruled out supernatural events :)

I'm no "God of the gaps" person, but the inflationary period of the big bang also represents an area where I haven't ruled out supernatural events.

an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government

Denise B's picture

A Tale of Two Hourglasses...

an essay challenging the hypothesis that the earth is billions of years old and in fact is actually closer to 6,000 years old, just as the Bible indicates...


God does not keep the same time table as humans

When the book of Genius says the earth was void. What is he referring too? Maybe the earth had very intelligent life that ended in total destruction. God could have been referring the earth being void of human life.

I believe the earth could very well be millions of years old. But there is mention of dinosaurs in the bible. If mentioned they most likely existed then, probably in a diminished population though.

God also says man is like a blade of grass growing for a short time then withering. If 70-80 years can be lumped into 1 growing season then 300 years could be like 1 year to him. Another quote from the bible is that a year is like a day to him. That is 365 years is like is 1 year to him.

I used to think science was totally wrong but I am starting to think science explains creation.

Surviving the killing fields of Minnesota

Todays brainwashing: GMO's are safe

Another attempt

to change the rules of the game to suit a specific result. Many problems here.

You can't measure the rate of something happening in a closed system when it can be influenced by an externalty.

You can't make grand statements about the externalties being predictable unless you include them in your closed system.

You really can't change the rates of decay of anything by any statistically significant amount. If you could, the sun would collapse within minutes. It's very existence relies on a balance of decay rate vs the gravity due to its size. Throw that out of balance and they become red dwarfs or super novas withing mere minutes.

I'm sorry, but there is just no possible way the earth is only 6,000 years old. The ramifications of such a change go counter to literally millions and millions of pieces of proven data. Even today, we have light reaching us from vast distances that has been traveling longer than that amount of time. Is this guy saying those stars ALL magically appeared 6,000 years ago too or were they created 13 billion years ago in conflict with genesis?