Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Just another "intellectual" who thinks he knows better than parents what is best for their kids.

Most wear a beard, this fellow took the bow-tie look.

 

Some quotes:

"When you have a portion of the population that doesn't believe in that (evolution), it holds everybody back, really."

"And 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."

And then there's THIS gem:

" You know, in another couple of centuries that world view, I'm sure, will be, it just won't exist. There's no evidence for it."

My commentary: If the Lord tarries that long, the time will come when more people believe in creation than believe in Bill Nye.

 

As long as you don't want your kids to have high tech jobs, feel free to teach your kids "Bible" science and leave the good jobs for my grand kids.

 

I know many Christians who have "high tech jobs" and they believe in a Biblical creation also. Bill Nye is (and apparently you also are) full of twaddle on this one.

Many of the great scientists of the past were believers who never heard of Darwin or "evolution" and seems they did pretty well-

Roger Bacon
Johannes Kepler
Johannes Baptista van Helmont
Blaise Pascal
Robert Boyle
Anton van Leeuwenhoek
Carolus Linnaeus
Leonhard Euler
John Dalton
Michael Faraday
John Frederick William Herschel
Matthew Fontaine Maury
James Prescott Joule
Gregor Mendel
William Thomson, Lord Kelvin
James Clerk Maxwell
George Washington Carver
Arthur Stanley Eddington

 

Remarkable arrogance, even for a scientist. Actually, he may be more of an educator. He looks so tired in this video. Creationists are so wearying to him. lol

This is the belief and attitude that is being taught to our children while they are a captive audience being taught scientific theories, or, in the case of evolution, supposed science fact.

 

Nominated for "dumbest post of the decade" award.:thumbsup:

 

He does try to attempt to make a distinction between religion and science. What he may not understand is that for many, there is no distinction. Where he is asking an observation/science question, he doesn't understand that because there is no distinction for some, it is transformed into a question of faith. And that is when all the fighting and fussing begins.

I for one have no problem with believing in a Creator and in the process of evolution since Genesis is not a "how manual" rather a "who manual". Over simplification but I think you'll get the gist.

A literal 6 day creation is not an issue that impacts ones salvation but the fear of the slippery slope of not believing creation literally will lead to not believing other things literally and then where will we be has driven many in evangelical circles since the days of Francis Schaeffer ?!?!

Unfounded fear in my opinion. I've seen more people walk away from faith because they couldn't jump the intellectual hurdles they were being asked to leap in order to considered a "faithful" Christian. Literalism and legalism drove them away not education.

 

>He does try to attempt to make a distinction between religion and science. What he may not understand is that for many, there is no distinction.

EXACTLY! In the old days many alchemists like Newton thought they were discovering inviolate "laws" of God. Their "God Laws" were only approximations but were within the limits of accuracy of their measuring instruments so there was no way for them to detect observational errors.

Newtonian physics was good enough until improvements in technology increased the accuracy of measuring devices and machine tools. Most if the "science" of the 19th century was improved technology using 18th century physics.

Most of the technology before WW1 was based on 18th century physics. The invention of radio and even TV picture tubes was based on 18th century physics. It was the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the 19th century that changed everything.

The technology of transistors is NOT explainable with Newtonian physics. Ernst Mach, one of the greatest scientists of the last century, missed out on quantum physics because he refused to "believe in" anything he could not see with his own eyes (using the available observational technology of those years. Einstein hated the philosophical and technological implications of his own discoveries.

Bill Nye teaches that "science" can only deal in ideas that can be falsified and has no interest in the "God" question.

 

That's funny--I don't recall any engineering classes at Georgia Tech depending on or requiring a belief in Darwinism. I'm quite certain engineers don't invoke Darwinism in solving their engineering problems. To the contrary, I know of many engineering minded people who have serious questions about the ability of the proposed neo-Darwinian mechanisms in accounting for novel body plans and the origin of biological information.

And when I practice medicine, I don't feel like my disbelief in neo-Darwinism is preventing me from providing quality medical care to my patients.

So I guess Bill Nye can live in his pretend world where he and others (like minded) think that science is somehow going to fall apart if folks stop teaching Darwinism, but I and others will continue to live in the real world where engineering and medicine seem to work just fine without it.

 

While that is a concern it is not the only concern. If you do not have a literal creation account, you do not have a literal fall of man account. That does affect the salvation issue.

 

With bill, it's all about lucre.

 

Dear Doubting - as our techie/science expert, please give a definition of "Darwinism" which we can all use when discussing this topic - an "official" BB definition.

Do you differentiate between Darwinism, Social Darwinism, and evolution??? If so, we need three definitions.

 

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

You nailed it. Believers expect unbelievers to act like believers then rail on them when they don't.

The lost are doing their thing as Ephesians 4 describes.

 

Several years back Nye married a Southern Baptist lady. Rick Warren did the wedding:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9n3fLpJz1_g