digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!

Bill Nye Angers Some Creationists During Lecture

wacotrib.com — Bill Nye (The Science Guy) made some statements about Genesis during a lecture, causing some creationists in the audience to get up and leave, exclaiming "I believe in God!".

show profanity settings
expand all
  • harmlessinc, on 10/12/2007, -13/+160Bill Nye, the Science Guy
    Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill

    Oh come on, I know I wasn't the only one that started singing that when I saw this.
    Alright, so this isn't a complete waste of a post here is Bill's wiki entry for those that don't know who he is.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Nye_the_Science_Guy
    • stylerm, on 10/12/2007, -176/+20I dislike the new comment system when people just reply to the first comment so they are displayed up top. Especially when their response has nothing to do with the original comment they are replying to (as in this case).
    • klaymen, on 10/12/2007, -116/+10if it is obvious that someone is just trying to get to the top, then their post gets dugg down. as is the case with our posts :)
    • nanos, on 10/12/2007, -55/+62I hate to play devil's advocate here, but I think Bill Nye's comment could indeed be seen as a little bit disrespectful.

      I mean, the audience knew he was going to talk about science. He's *the* science guy, so even the strongly religious people in the audience knew what they were getting themselves into

      But there goes Nye and starts discussing how scientifically wrong a statement from the bible is. I think it's pretty clear to most people that the bible isn't exactly the source of accurate scientific knowledge. So what was the point? Why was he trying to discredit the bible? Even religious people realize that the value in the bible isn't literal and scientific.

      I mean, considering this was a scientific talk, you're pretty much preaching to the choir if you want to disprove creationism, but on the other hand you're just going to frustrate and offend people if you start dissing their religious texts. I'm not religious and I think Bill is the coolest, but I'm just pointing out how maybe what he did wasn't necessary.
    • loup, on 10/12/2007, -16/+64I don't think he was trying to discredit the bible, just trying to explain why it shouldn't be taught in a public school science class.
    • headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11I dunno, unless there is a more in depth article floating around that explains the whole thing better, there is no way of knowing in what context he made the statements. He may have even known he was speaking to people of religion, and thought he would explain a scientific point by using a verse from the bible, in the same way you might explain math to a basketball player by using basketball analogies.

      I guess we'll never know. Maybe someone can point me to more information on his whole speech. BTW, I love his show on the Discovery Channel,100 Greatest Discoveries, I watch it all the time.
    • ThePhilomath, on 10/12/2007, -13/+27intertia is a property of matter ..... science rules ... BILL BILL BILL BILL
    • crass, on 10/12/2007, -16/+56@nanos
      "Even religious people realize that the value in the bible isn't literal and scientific."

      Easy on the generalizations... there ARE religious people who DO take the bible both literally and scientifically. Its hard to wrap your mind around, I know, but believe it or not many such people (for whatever reason) have the right to vote, and put scientifically illiterate people into the President of the United State's office. Therefore, you should not neglect the presence of such people.
    • J4c0b, on 10/12/2007, -74/+11Dude...

      JESUS was the other light...

      I take the Bible literal and if you do research you will find it makes sense.

      look up what the hebrew word means next time Bill.
    • WMcMath, on 10/12/2007, -33/+8@stylerm
      Don't worry some of us sort the page by most diggs so you are at the bottom.
    • J4c0b, on 10/12/2007, -47/+3ok... how come you push it down?

      because you dont like what I said? I doubt that. I bet it was because it goes against your beliefs...
    • klaymen, on 10/12/2007, -20/+12i thought you were joking...
    • Refrag, on 10/12/2007, -21/+8"JESUS was the other light..."

      Jesus is a vampire? Hmmm, maybe there is something to Christianity after-all.
    • aaaaabbbbb, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5"JESUS was the other light...
      I take the Bible literal and if you do research you will find it makes sense.
      look up what the hebrew word means next time Bill."

      d3wd, the bible was not written in hebrew, it wasn't even written in greek and aramaic like many believe, it was written in pig latin and all it said was, "ixnay exsay"

      and to paraphrase hd thoreau: religion is a maggot in your head
    • blahblah, on 10/12/2007, -10/+9"JESUS was the other light...

      I take the Bible literal"

      Jesus was the other light... that sounds exactly like a metaphor to me.
      Unless you actually believe Jesus glowed wherever he went..
      But then I don't think anyone would have thought about crucifying him for blaspheming.
    • scotticus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4uhhh... Jesus was New Testament. Genesis is the first book of the Old Testament.

      I don't really believe any of the stuff... just sayin' though. If you're going to believe something, you might as well try to understand exactly what it is that you believe.
    • muikano, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@Bill Nye is disrepectful

      Dude, this is Bill Nye. And what kind of academic setting is it if you shut someone out that disagrees with you?
      And Dude, this is Bill Nye. His business is to be disarming, charming, non-volatile, animated, info-mer.

      If you can make OCD/Hyperactive kids sit down to watch a show about science, you are only one step away from turning wine into ammonia. Only assholes walk out on Bill Nye.
    • starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8>I hate to play devil's advocate here, but I think Bill Nye's comment could indeed be seen as a
      >little bit disrespectful.

      i think disrespect is what creationist have earned. i have no respect for them any more. i used to. i didn't laugh at them or ridicule them... and i tried not pigeon hole them as stupid and weak. right now... im for regulating religion for the same reason im for regulating guns. they are both dangerous in the hands of humans. its uncivilized. they both give people with lessor credentials the power to control people with god like power.

    • moohamadiscrazy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1DIGG = the place that everyone can PROVE evolution without any proof

      hey at least its entertaining to read, keep it up!
    • Moxxon, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0@starmanjones

      >i think disrespect is what creationist have earned. i have no respect for them any more. i used to. i didn't laugh at them or ridicule them... and i tried not pigeon hole them as stupid and weak. right now... im for regulating religion for the same reason im for regulating guns. they are both dangerous in the hands of humans. its uncivilized. they both give people with lessor credentials the power to control people with god like power.

      That is the biggest pile of bull ***** I have ever heard. This is a complete prejeduce statement it's like saying muslims are evil because some extremists kill innocent people. And comparing guns and creatonists idiotic, guns kill people plain and simple. There have been certain creatonists who have killed people but it is a very small percentage. And I do not understand how "Creationists" are people with less credentials many parts of the Bible have been proven and I'm not going to argue wether it is the right religion or not but keep your prejedice load to yourself. Thanks
    • zombie-m, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@Moxxon

      Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If you're going to get after someone for making prejudice statements, don't back it up with another one of your own.
    • starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5>@starmanjones
      >
      >>i think disrespect is what creationist have earned. i have no respect for them any more.
      >>i used to. i didn't laugh at them or ridicule them... and i tried not pigeon hole them as
      >>stupid and weak. right now... im for regulating religion for the same reason im for
      >>regulating guns. they are both dangerous in the hands of humans. its uncivilized. they
      >>both give people with lessor credentials the power to control people with god like power.

      >That is the biggest pile of bull ***** I have ever heard. This is a complete prejeduce
      >statement it's like saying muslims are evil because some extremists kill innocent people.
      >And comparing guns and creatonists idiotic, guns kill people plain and simple. There have
      >been certain creatonists who have killed people but it is a very small percentage. And I
      >do not understand how "Creationists" are people with less credentials many parts of the
      >Bible have been proven and I'm not going to argue wether it is the right religion or not
      >but keep your prejedice load to yourself. Thanks

      like is said... every bit of my prejudice has been placed there by religious people. they
      do it with their actions. they do it by trying to teach my kid religion in class. they do it
      by pressing religious beleifs on the governance of this country. they have done it with the
      prejudice they have. youve created me. i am your worst nighmare- or rather i beleive in
      truth and that is your worst nightmare.

      >>been certain creatonists who have killed people but it is a very small percentage.

      look around the world dumb *****. its falling apart from all the religion. or rather everywhere there is an intractable problem you find religion at the roots. guns and religion. a bad mix.
    • ronaldb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Regarding Bill Nye' statement about Genesis and the greater and lesser light:

      It's a simple statement about taking everything that is taught to you as absolute truths with a grain of salt, and being open to different interpretations of the same evidence. Sound science if you ask me...

      But it's interesting to see the reaction of the people who say they believe in God. Apparently they're very uncertain in their belief, to be so shaken by something that's not even attacking the existance of God. Oh well.
  • invictae, on 10/12/2007, -28/+93Fantastic. Good for him!
    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -39/+166Agreed.

      I remember in college in my Bio 101 class when we started talking about evolution, and what creationists say about evolution, and problems in creationism, and some girl stood up and started yelling at the professor for being insensitive to religious people.

      I wanted to tell her to either sit down or go back to home schooling. Thank you Bill Nye, you're a true hero to anyone who's not mentally retarded.
    • kosmicki, on 10/12/2007, -60/+55@ dclowd9901
      Not all homeschoolers are insane Christian whackjobs. Don't lump everyone together.
    • longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -23/+61he didn't say that at all, he just said that most "insane Christian whackjobs" come from homeschools
    • nigeltufnel, on 10/12/2007, -9/+55What's funny is that Nye didn't even say anything so earth-shattering -- only things that have been proven by science much more solidly than, say, evolution. (I mean, the moon IS a reflector, for heavens' sake!)

      Did you know there are fundamentalist Christians out there (e.g., baseball player Carl Everett) who don't believe that man walked on the moon?
    • otte316, on 10/12/2007, -20/+87It's Bill Nye the SCIENCE Guy, not Bill Nye the Blind Belief Guy
    • bdeisgn, on 10/12/2007, -25/+25Actually there are whole lot of people that don't believe man walked on the moon, Christian and otherwise. It's one of the biggest conspiracy theories out there.
    • GuineaPig, on 10/12/2007, -17/+27I know I'll get flamed, but religion and philosophy at the Bio 101 level is mostly a function of how one was conditioned during childhood. For many, college is the genesis of open debate allowing everyone to break free from this and find out what we think is true by our own lights, not what we've been indoctrinated to believe.

      Telling someone to shut up and sit down is a sign of a narrowminded individual not someone who's been exposed to the light of reason. I'm sure you'll widen your mind in time just as she will.
    • J4c0b, on 10/12/2007, -54/+7DUDE CHRISTIANITY IS NOT BLIND FAITH!!!

      There is more proof Jesus Resurrected than Bush is a President.

      Why would the JEWS who wanted CHRISTIANITY to DIE say that the disciples took his body if he didn't disappear? (if Jesus didn't walk away from his grave the Jews wouldn't say they took him)

    • dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -16/+34@guineapig:
      Widen my mind? Are you ***** insane? I have no problem with the fact that she's religious, or those people who took offense to Bill Nye's wholly offensive "FACTS." I just think they're mentally retarded for believing in such hooey.

      This whole organized religion thing is akin to me starting a big ol' club that is convinced that monsters live under our beds. It's stupid and ridiculous, and I'm tired of people standing up for religion on the platform of "open-mindedness." It is ignorant for them to believe what conspired in the Bible is actually true. There are countless scientific facts that have wittled their little belief structure down to toothpicks. Brittle little toothpicks.

      Truthfully, I just feel sorry for them.
    • LeviticusMky, on 10/12/2007, -5/+30There's a big difference between telling someone to sit down and shut up during a discussion panel, and telling them to sit down and shut up during a lecture. Directly insulting a lecturer in this way is plenty of reason to get looked down upon, regardless of the context.

      The fact that it was religious in nature just goes to show how high and mighty religious types can get, feeling perfectly okay with interrupting a world-renowned scientist and teacher to blather about their beliefs.
    • urbinsissy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9@ dclowd9901
      Didn't Bill Nye teach science for kids? FYI, many mentally retarded people have a high enough IQ to understand elementary school science. So he could be their hero as well.
    • Pureeviljester, on 10/12/2007, -31/+4If i believe that God made evertything, including science, then you couldn't widdle anything down that I believe. Your using science(something that no one can claim to be an expert at) to fight it's creator. Evolution isn't science. I could disprove evolution faster than you could try and disprove one point in the Bible
    • michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15@ Pureeviljester:

      Do it. Now. Put your money where your mouth is.

      P.S. Science is man-made. People made the rules of what science is. These people have determined you're wrong when you say, "Evolution isn't science."
    • Pureeviljester, on 10/12/2007, -25/+5Man didn't make science they just discovered what was already there. So if you think that man made science and they didn't then who did?

      What science teachers don't tell you is that all these bones they find that are some half evolved animals have been proved not to be.(I would have to find that) I have a question, why don't we see humans walking out of water? Name one starting animal and the ending animal product.. You can't. Scientist say all this crap but can't prove it, mainly because there is no proof. You can't pick anything up and say "I know this evolved". Evolution is a theory based on intangible conjectures that things happened.

      I can't see why you wouldn't believe that you were so loved that you were made carefully and beautifully for an ultimate goal. Instead you want to be some result of chance with no purpose in life but to live and die.
    • triforcer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14@Pureeviljester

      why do we need god to have a purpose in life. isn't living a life purpose enough? i can understand why you believe in god, because you need to know there's something more after you die because you fear death.
    • michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12I take offense to you claiming that my only purpose is to live and die just because I don't believe in God. Just because I'm not religious, does that mean I can't think, can't feel, can't love, and can't impact the world?

      Also, you're impossible to argue against. Don't take that as a compliment. By taking everything I say and saying "God did that," I can't argue against you without disproving a matter of faith, which is impossible.

      "What science teachers don't tell you is that all these bones they find that are some half evolved animals have been proved not to be."
      That's an outright fabrication. A lie, if you will. Probably not cooked up by you, but by some other right-wing religious conspiracy theorist.
    • naisanza, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2@ bdesign

      yea i heard of that. there was also, i think, a discovery episode on that. like how the flag was moving, but there's no wind in space.
    • erkokite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12@pureeviljester
      You obviously don't understand evolution. First of all it is a VERY slow process. A human observing evolution would be like a single fruit fly observing the history of the United States. I would guess that eels and mudskippers could be taken into account as modern transitionary creatures. You can't disprove something you don't understand "faster than so and so can disprove such anything in the bible." THE BIBLE IS NOT A SCIENCE BOOK! WHY DO YOU PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTAND THIS? Evolution deals with facts, evidence, and experiments, and other concretes. Evolution is science, the bible is not. As Galileo once said, "I doubt that the god who gave us intelligent mids would want us to forego their use"(or something like that). The bible is a book on how to live meant for people who had no understanding of modern science. Do you think an all understanding God would fill the bible full of modern science that no one before the 19th century could understand? It was written when people to whom the bible's explanations of nature made sense. But now we have modern science, which states the moon is a reflector, and that life arose from evolution. These things are so obviously evident, that I think God would think anyone who thought otherwise, then spent their time squabbling over how their literal interpretation of the bible was correct was completely missing the point. The bible is mainly a book on morality and how to live. It is not a science book, nor does it contain a terribly scientifically accurate account of nature. Any sane person who reads it can understand this. Likewise, science cannot tell you how to live, or what morals to follow. IMHO, you really should leave them in their proper places.
    • rspeed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14"You can't pick anything up and say 'I know this evolved'."

      Incorrect. There is a small and extremely remote spring-fed pond in an arid portion of (I believe) the western US. A few decades ago it had been accidentally seeded with a species of small fish, and before that there was absolutely no animal life in the pond. In the time since then the fish have had no enemies and were completely cut off from the outside world and have evolved to adapt to the conditions in that pond. These differences can be seen easily just by comparing them to the same species from other areas. A comparison of the DNA showed that it had, in fact, changed and could be attributed to their physical differences.

      So no, you're wrong. You can pick something up and say "I know this evolved".
    • DNABeast, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6In fact a fifteen year project studying Fruit flies has a proven instance of specification.
    • starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3>I know I'll get flamed, but religion and philosophy at the Bio 101 level is

      what on earth does religion or philosophy have to do with Bio 101? never mind don't answer.
    • starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4>Telling someone to shut up and sit down is a sign of a narrowminded individual not someone who's been
      >exposed to the light of reason. I'm sure you'll widen your mind in time just as she will.

      if some one got up in my class and started yelling at me about violating their religious sensitivities id throw them out and have a restraining order placed on them. period. religious people can turn violent when you cross them.
  • ViperDaimao, on 10/12/2007, -39/+21I dont really see what the deal was. Of course they didnt include the quote so maybe he said something more rude or challenging. Some quotes or a transcript would be nice, otherwise this just seems like a "Hey we pissed off some Christians, yay us!" mocking kinda story.
    • harmlessinc, on 10/12/2007, -8/+74"The Emmy-winning scientist angered a few audience members when he criticized literal interpretation of the biblical verse Genesis 1:16, which reads: “God made two great lights — the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.”

      He pointed out that the sun, the “greater light,” is but one of countless stars and that the “lesser light” is the moon, which really is not a light at all, rather a reflector of light. "
    • ComputerGuru, on 10/12/2007, -46/+28In Islam God points out that the moon is only a reflector of the sun....
      LONG before Science discoverd that.

      I beleive in God.
    • ryan_merket, on 10/12/2007, -18/+66I believe in God, and I also believe that Genesis is nothing more than a poetic story used to explain (in simple terms) the scientific origins of the earth to early Jews (most likely written by Moses).

      I like to call myself a theistic evolutionist (how original eh?).
    • cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -6/+40 @ComputerGuru

      You mean that Islamic scientists figured out that the moon was only a reflector
      of light from another source. The discovery itself is still a part of science.
    • longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -21/+7stange that all harmless did was quote part of the article and he got 23+digs as of this post. Seems the point of having the article is so that we can read it ourselves.
    • longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -21/+3he probably shouldn't have gone out of his way to criticize the Bible for saying something, which I'm not sure if he did. He was there to talk about science, not refute the Bible. If all he said was the moon is not a light but a reflector, without mentioning the Bible, and people got pissed off, then that is just pure stupidity.
    • rekrapt, on 10/12/2007, -15/+52Good thing Bill wasn't talking about the Koran... someone would behead him.
    • FullMetalMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29What he said wassomething like this "Now reading that passage, it seems to me that the percon woh wrote this didn't fully understand Nuclear fusion or the fact that the Moon is reflected light" or something like that.

      I was in awe of what he was talking about and amazed that he had the guts to come to TEXAS to talk about this stuff!

      Bill Nye is my HERO!
  • gronne, on 10/12/2007, -22/+105This isn't the first time in history Christians have been afraid of the truth. Ask Galileo.
    • smatzko, on 10/12/2007, -16/+58Galileo believed the Bible. So I don't think he would tell you that all Christians are afraid of the truth.
      "Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts." http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html

      The thing to remember is the people don't like to think: religious or otherwise. It's easier to just believe what you are told. Many strong Christians don't know why they believe the Bible and many strong evolutionists don't know why they believe that the Big Bang happened. Don't blame blind ignorance on Christians; people from all sides fall into it.
    • longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -28/+13Galileo, like many people nowadays, presented a theory as scientific fact. All the church did was ask him to not take a position and look at it from both sides, read about it on wikipedia. Being closed minded doesn't help bring about the truth (especially when you think you're right).
    • andrewmin, on 11/12/2008, -27/+21What about Newton? He's was a Christian. Einstein didn't believe in Evolution.
    • 4bit, on 10/12/2007, -11/+38 smatzko.....Yeah, no.

      People who 'believe' in science, simply believe this is the best explanation we have to date, and that it will be replaced when we know more. They know they're wrong, just not as wrong as the guy before them. They're open to thinking about it, or atleast that other people are thinking about it.

      People who 'believe' in religion, believe they're right, and will deny facts that drop on their heads like a ton of bricks. They're open to thinking 'of' it, and want everyone to think 'of' it, but not about it.

      Part of a scientists job, IMHO, is to present evidence, and teach people about erroneous assumptions. There is a current Christian movement (not all Christians, but some), directly attacking science by use of the Bible. A scientist who isn't allowed to quote the text being used to attack him because of insensitivity is paramount to a crime victim not being allowed to describe the crime.

      Yay Bill.
    • smatzko, on 10/12/2007, -32/+84bit:

      You are seriously generalizing that all scientists are open minded. If scientists are so open minded, why do text books start with "Millions of years ago" rather than, "scientists currently believe that millions of years ago . . ."?

      Anyway, science is about currently observable facts, not philosophy on historical events. I may be able to show you a valid way the pyramids could have been built, but that doesn't prove that's how it happened. Similarly, evolution may be a possible way the earth was formed, but it is a past event that cannot be repeated and tested. Separate out the philosophy from the science.
    • Bogtha, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25It's also pretty ignorant to conflate evolution with the big bang. Evolution is a biological theory that describes the cumulative effect of lifeforms changing from one generation to the next. The big bang cosmological theory explains how time and space started. Not only are they totally different theories, they aren't even in the same scientific field of study.

      The only people who mix them up are people who disagree with both (i.e. followers of particular religions). Incidentally, there also seems to be a very strong correlation between these people and people who use the term "evolutionist".
    • klaymen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12"Galileo believed the Bible. So I don't think he would tell you that all Christians are afraid of the truth"

      he never said or even implied that all christians are afraid of the truth. that would be the second time in one story's comment section that someone took something wrong

      (the first one being, "Not all homeschoolers are insane Christian whackjobs. Don't lump everyone together.")

      please, read and comprehend what someone has written before you just assume what they mean.
    • AnimalMachine, on 10/12/2007, -3/+31"All the church did was ask him to not take a position and look at it from both sides, read about it on wikipedia."

      No. The church asked him to give up his position, and take theirs. Ultimately, he was essentially sentenced to life imprisonment.

      One of the greatest scientific minds of the time silenced because of religious zealotry. The church most certainly didn't just "ask him to not take a position."
    • Bogtha, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20> If scientists are so open minded, why do text books start with "Millions of years ago" rather than, "scientists currently believe that millions of years ago . . ."?

      Because every sentence in a textbook would have to start with that. It's a fundamental part of science that applies to every topic everywhere. Textbooks are written assuming you know this basic concept, in the same way advanced university mathematics courses don't start out by explaining addition at the beginning of each lecture.
    • gronne, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I meant the Christian establishment. Exceptions to a rule but that do not override an overwhelming majority.
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -40/+64bit: So your telling me that because I'm a Christian, I can't believe in science? That is just dumb.

      No, I don't believe we evolved. There are just to may things the must happen for that to be true. First, the universe had to be formed, then it had to have a planet that could support live. Said planet just happen to have the basics to form life. The basic life just happen to form complex life. The genes of that complex life just happen to become deformed so it could walk on land. That deformed complex life just happen to live through the walking on land and reproduce. That reproduction just happen to have the same defect.

      That's alot of just happens to be accounted for without intervention. It also had to happen over and over with every animals ancestor you see today. If you really believe that, you are running on faith my friend. I find it more plausible that God made every living thing than to think that some how the earth had a lucky streak and ended up populated. You would think we would have friends on Mars, seeing as how it could of supported life, but we don't. If things happen the way science wants us to believe, there should of been life there too. THERE IS NOT! Don't give me that, "Mars is older!" whine. We don't know that, and it would seem plausible that the Earth and Mars are about the same age. On a side note, Venus could of also been another Earth. Why isn't anyone talking about it?

      Just face it. Everyone wants evolution to be true so they can stop worrying about there own souls. With that kind of proof, you wouldn't have to worry about where you go when you die. You wouldn't have to feel bad when you did something wrong. Everything would just be PERFECT! At least by the comments of some diggers here. I believe in some things science says. Alot of the stuff makes sense! The bible hasn't told us everything, I'm sure for a reason. It would be a very boring life if the bible had the answers to everything.
    • BSpolice, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13@smatzko "You are seriously generalizing that all scientists are open minded. If scientists are so open minded, why do text books start with "Millions of years ago" rather than, "scientists currently believe that millions of years ago . . ."?"

      You meant to say "scientists currently believe, because of mountains of evidence and repeatedly verified experimentation,..." Slight difference there. Also, keep in mind that "theory" in a scientific context means: backed up by mountains of evidence...etc; and not "wild-ass guess" like it often does in everyday speech. HUGE difference there.
    • scaaven2, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7"Galileo, like many people nowadays, presented a theory as scientific fact. All the church did was ask him to not take a position and look at it from both sides, read about it on wikipedia. Being closed minded doesn't help bring about the truth (especially when you think you're right)."

      You sound pretty close-minded yourself.

    • anonymousguy, on 10/12/2007, -21/+3I agree wholeheartedly with lameduck. I have to agree, because evolution goes aganst all that is common sense. I look at evolution and can only see an illogical string of an astronomical number of happenstances.

      If anything, please read this next statement and weigh for yourself its truth. Houses require people to design them, to plan them, to construct them, and so on. Space shuttles likewise require a colossal amount of planning, study, and construction. I can't say I've ever seen either randomly build themselves throughout the course of history. How then, can the human body, infinitely more complex than either of the two previously mentioned objects, design itself?

      In my mind, evolution is the epitome of sheer arrogance.
    • shaun944, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10wow lame_duck, so I guess everyone who doesn't believe as you do, is amoral or immoral because its simply impossible to do good if you don't believe in god?

      Way to knock down those stereotypes about intolerant religious zealots. There are so many places to go with your post, but I'm only point to one thing. You first say its dumb to say Christians don't believe in science (which noone said, but you religious extremists have a way of generalizing comments about Christian fanaticism to apply to all of Christianity as if your fundamentalist interpretation IS Christianity), but then go on to say that you don't believe in science. If you did, you would understand that evolution has real world, actual examples that have been recorded throughout history. So despite observable phenomena, you think its more likely that everything just popped into existence via the power of a completely unobservable being/phenomena? Thats brillant. Next time you open the fridge and find a moldy piece of bread I guess God just made that mold pop into existence too huh?
    • michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9How is it even possible to think that it's more likely there's some bug guy up in the sky that created people? I've always thought a series of accidents and gradual genetic changes seem way more possible.

      There is evolution in action all around us! Bacteria have become resistant to certain antibiotics. In all seriousness, how does God explain this?
    • vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1"What about Newton? He's was a Christian. Einstein didn't believe in Evolution."

      Errrm... Newton was a sadistic son of a bitch and had a counterfeiter drawn and quartered and he also dabbled in alchemey.

      And Einstein was a jew. (And I like Neils Bohr rebuttle to him... "God can very well play dice if he feels like it!")
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -16/+3"wow lame_duck, so I guess everyone who doesn't believe as you do, is amoral or immoral because its simply impossible to do good if you don't believe in god?"

      And 4bit spoke: People who 'believe' in religion, believe they're right, and will deny facts that drop on their heads like a ton of bricks. They're open to thinking 'of' it, and want everyone to think 'of' it, but not about it.

      Call me what you want, but to me it seems he is saying that if your a Christian, your not open to excepting science. I could take it wrong, as text isn't the best media um to express such a hot topic, but that's the way it reads to me.

      Also, I never said it was imposable to do good if you didn't know God. It something called /sarcasm. Some diggers want you to believe that, some diggers prove that, and some are just as anyone else.

      "Way to knock down those stereotypes about intolerant religious zealots."

      Way to knock down those stereotypes about intolerant science zealots.

      "There are so many places to go with your post, but I'm only point to one thing. You first say its dumb to say Christians don't believe in science (which noone said, but you religious extremists have a way of generalizing comments about Christian fanaticism to apply to all of Christianity as if your fundamentalist interpretation IS Christianity), but then go on to say that you don't believe in science."

      Refer above for answer to "You say it's dumb...", as for the rest, I don't have to except science as a whole. If you do that, what are you going to question? If you excepted everything science said, we would still be teaching about a flat Earth. And yes, flat Earth was a theory. It doesn't seem scientific today, but it was then.

      "If you did, you would understand that evolution has real world, actual examples that have been recorded throughout history."

      Let me guess, your talking about the waking fish that was on earlier? Then mud-sipper looking guy that the artist tuned 1 inch fins into 5 inch arms? Or are you talking about things like how animals can adapt to there environment. Just because a sea snake can hunt underwater and his cousin the cobra hunts on land, does not make one evolved and the other not. It makes them adaptive to different lands.

      "So despite observable phenomena, you think its more likely that everything just popped into existence via the power of a completely unobservable being/phenomena? Thats brillant. Next time you open the fridge and find a moldy piece of bread I guess God just made that mold pop into existence too huh?"

      If you didn't know, mold is a organism. Now, if I open my fridge and some unknown animal was living in it *unknown as in NEVER EVER SEEN BEFORE*, I might be inclined to ask God where the heck this thing came from that is in my fridge.

      I'm dieing to ask this, what "observable phenomena" do you have? Was you there 1895723 Billion years ago when the great ape-fish walked out of the ocean? No? Oh! So you mean you've seen to different finches that are adapted to there lands, right? That, my friend, is not evolution. Some like to call it by a cute name, micro-evolution, but it's not. Just because bird a uses a stick to eat worms, and bird b uses his bill to crack a nut, doesn't make them evolved. If it had evolved, it would be a completely new animal, not animal a with service pack b installed.
    • el_jefe, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13@lame duck

      So you would rather believe that some unseen being wave a "magic wand" and life just poofed into existance, then believe that we came int being through a series of changes in the material already here? Perhaps those changes we call "evolution" happened because god started the changes?

      And as far as your Mars comment. There are 4 bodies in the galaxy that almost all of the elements we believe are required to sustain life just as earth does and did. The key, is almost. Maybe they never did, maybe they did at one time and don't anymore. Thats what we are trying to figure out. Mars is one, Saturn's moon Titan is another.

      Yes, the Theory of Evolution is still a theory, although in science we consider it fact since it is the only scientific theory at the time that explains the changes we see in lifeforms on the planet earth. However, it could change. Nothing in Evolution totally discounts that a supreme being started the process, but of course nothing proves it either. We still are working to "prove" or "disprove" the theory of evolution.

      And science goes on "faith" all the time. We call extrapolation. And we use extrapoloation to fill in the gaps of our research by using known values. So I consider it a little more reliable then just faith. I don't understand how you can criticize science for going on "faith", but you believe the world around you happens by "magic".

      For the record, I am a scientist. I believe in God, but not religion. I believe religion and the tools of religion (the bible) were made to keep people in line. There are too many religions. There are too many times in history when religions rules were changed not to please God, but so that religion fit better in the followers lives. I believe in evolution bcause I can see it with my own eyes, yet I believe in God. I can tell you life forms evolve, we continue to do so to this day. What did we evolve from? No one knows...yet. But we can find simularities in us and other life forms alive today on earth, which leads us to believe we came from simular places. Does that discount the presence of God? No. And lets even go further and say, some day we find we evolved from a one cell compound. Would that discount God? No, it would only discount the story of Gensis in the Bible.

      So what are creationist so afraid of? If Evolution turnes to out to be True, then all that has been disproved is the Bible. God can still exist, God doesn't simply exist because of one book.
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2michaelstone, if someone shot you and you lived though it, wouldn't you know not the get shot next time?

      Instead of point out things and going, "IT'S TEH EVOLUTIONGS!" think about it. A antibiotic has to work some way, right? Say it worked by drying up the bacteria. Well, the bacteria that doesn't die straightens it's weakness, namely the ability to be dried out. Next time you introduce the same antibiotic, the bacteria isn't so easily killed. It' keeps going like this until it build an immunity. We humans can become immune to the chicken pox, that doesn't mean it makes us evolve.
    • michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Lame Duck:

      Seriously, do you see me saying anything close to "IT'S TEH EVOLUTIONGS!" in my comment? I merely pointed out a piece of evidence that scientists use very frequently that shows evolution in action.

      You give way too much credit to the bacteria. Bacteria: Single cell, hence it cannot make intelligent decisions like the ones required for the process you described.

      Let me explain it to you the scientific way. Bacteria are living somewhere, say, your ear. You get an ear infection. You start taking penicillin. Congrats, you killed off most of these bacteria! Except there are a few, but not enough to cause an ear infection, that had a mutation that caused them to be immune to that antibiotic (penicillin). These bacteria, the ones that survived, then reproduce. By reproducing, they pass on the gene for "penicillin immunity." Eventually, these bacteria will be the only type that is left. Bada bing, bada boom, that's evolution in action. And if changes like this were to continue to happen for thousands of years, those bacteria could become a very intelligent multi-celled organism.
    • shaun944, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@lame_duck
      I'm not trying to be insulting but are you twelve years old? Because clearly you don't understand any of the concepts you're trying to discuss. Adaptations aren't evolution? What the heck do you think millions of years of adaptations are? Sea snakes are evolved to work in their environment, the same way predators evolved to favor eyes in front and prey evolved to have eyes on the sides - creatures with eyes closer to the front were more adept and catching prey and therefore more likely to survive and thus propogate and pass those genes on to their offspring, this my friend, is EXACTLY what evolution is.

    • BSpolice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@anonymousguy
      "In my mind, evolution is the epitome of sheer arrogance."

      How is it arrogant? People don't get CREDIT for evolving, any more than the Grand Canyon gets CREDIT for eroding. IT. JUST. HAPPENED.

      You say evolution is arrogant; what then, is creationism?

      "To illustrate the vain conceit that the universe must be somehow pre-ordained for us, because we are so well-suited to live in it, he [Douglas Adams] mimed a wonderfully funny imitation of a puddle of water, fitting itself snugly into a depression in the ground, the depression uncannily being **exactly the same shape as the puddle**."
      -- Richard Dawkins, in "Lament for Douglas [Adams]" (14 May 2001)
    • minime283, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1I applaud lame duck for representing us christians intelligently in this primarily aethiest debate *clap*

      Bill Nye probably shouldn't have referenced the bible, as I could see why that statement would offend people, although it doesn't offend me personally. He should have known it would be risky.
    • andreo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@anonymousguy

      So if evolution isn't possible. Then this is it? No more species will come about? This is the best that mankind will ever be? Do you really believe that. Or is god and his team working on upgrades right now? Earth revision 2 maybe...

      Is there a release schedule in that story book you trust in so much? Will this be a free and seamless upgrade?

      I think the religious nuts are just that. And they should do us a favor. Next time they need medical attention they should instead try to pray away the illness instead of seeking medical attention that has come so far because of this mean old nasty science that you guys hate so much.
    • triforcer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0lameduck: "michaelstone, if someone shot you and you lived though it, wouldn't you know not the get shot next time?

      Instead of point out things and going, "IT'S TEH EVOLUTIONGS!" think about it. A antibiotic has to work some way, right? Say it worked by drying up the bacteria. Well, the bacteria that doesn't die straightens it's weakness, namely the ability to be dried out. Next time you introduce the same antibiotic, the bacteria isn't so easily killed. It' keeps going like this until it build an immunity. We humans can become immune to the chicken pox, that doesn't mean it makes us evolve."

      first of all, michaelstone knowing not to get shot isn't a product of evolution because there is no biological factor. if instead his skin were bullet resistant or had some sort of natural camouflage his chance of survival would increase. his descendants would have a better chance of surviving and thriving.

      second, the bacteria that survived the initial treatment of antibiotics are not the same ones that died off. they have a biological difference that allowed them to survive, they didn't consciously decide to adapt to better survive the drying out, they were already resistant to that treatment and since they survived the bacteria grew from the survivors, which made the treatment ineffective.
    • 4bit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1 smatzko

      Not ignoring you, just had to go do things tonight.

      Whether all scientists are open minded or not, its more about the foundation of the philosophy between these two ideologies. But if we're going to talk generalities:

      When a scientist is close minded, they're doing it wrong.

      When a religious follower is close minded they're doing it right.

      Scientists find things to observe, then build a world view supported by those things.

      Religion has a world view, then tries to find things that agree.

      To your main point, Scientists that are close minded are quickly left behind due to this little thing called peer review. Evolution, and the big bang, (different things BTW), while originally presented by one person we're not accepted theories on their say so. A predominance of respectable scientists agreed after they too looked at the observations, repeated them, and found other new evidence.

      Quantum Mechanics is quickly redefining physics. Friction doesn't really behave like it should, and the only way we can explain an accelerating universal expansion is by presuming dark matter exists. Science doesn't say "We belive" it should be infered. All sience is a guess based on what we observed. If sience has one failing it's that it doesn't explain that, and it's implications clearly enough. But if you want to change the belief, you need to find evidence that suggests something else. I've yet to hear a theory better than what we have, and when I do, I'm sure there will be some debate, observation, and then science will adopt a new and improved theory. Because Science is a means, not an end.

      There are people who NEED religion, and for them, I'm glad it's there. I, however, fear my final generalization:

      Questioning science is expected, and only makes both the questioner and the questioned stronger.

      Questioning religion is forbidden, and is met with anger, disdain or, in some cases, death.

      I'll take science, thanks.
    • 4bit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2 anonymousguy and lame duck...

      Uh, thanks for making my point for me. Stating that our reasons for why we believe things aren't good enough for you, but you don't deny they are facts (not truth, truth is for philosophy and Stephen Colbert), because you either a) were told so in church, and they said it because they we're told in church, etc, or b) it doesn't feel right, is EXACTLY why I say you can't truly believe in both. At least, not as they exist to day, more in a moment...

      I'm truly not trying to be rude. I know it's going to sound that way, because this is a very personal topic. But you took the time to say your side, so here's mine.

      1) Evolution is not an explanation for how life got on the planet. It simply says that things that are less suited to the environment fade away, while things more suited take over. Over the Milena creatures, and people are different than they are now. Period. Right now there really isn't any theory on what the first movement was that sounds any better than a guy in robes baked some clay. We've observed ways it 'could' (from comet dust, RNA re-sequencing int DNA, etc) have happened but nothing that points one way or another.

      2) Intervention Required... Um. Not really. We've have evidence of animals changing into two distance species due to environmental changes. The example I'm thinking of is a species of chipmunk that grew into two different species when a river widened to the point that the two groups couldn't intermingle any more. There is no reason to believe that we have 10 fingers instead of 12 or anything like that is because of anything other than evolution. It may feel unlikely, but the observations we've made suggest that is how things happened.

      On the other hand there is nothing other than it feels like someone should have had to design something this complex to go against what we've observed.

      There are lots of things in science that don't FEEL right. With gravity the universe should be collapsing, or at least slowing. It isn't. That doesn't mean science is wrong, it just doesn't understand what it's observing. It makes it's best guess to explain, and keeps looking.

      3) Life on other planets. Might not want to jump on no life on Mars just yet there fellas. While scientists 20 years ago would have agreed, they're not so quick to say so today. Right now it's that we haven't found it yet, but they're starting to lean towards expecting we will. In fact, most scientists are moving from aliens being impossible to, very likely, and even within our solar system either on another planet, or moon. Intelligent aliens, well, that moves down the list a ways. But then, we haven't really defined intelligence yet. It goes back to science itself evolves. It changes, and grows.

      Many scientists have a spiritual faith. At some point in time the "and what happened before that?" just has to be taken as faith. But faith is not religion. Religion is A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship (thank you dictionary.com :) ). Faith is belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

      Believing in evolution doesn't mean we don't have to worry about our souls. Regardless of your view on an afterlife, society descending into a state of hedonism and decadence isn't good for us NOW, let alone then. Worrying about who we are, and how we treat our fellow man in many cases is more important WITHOUT an afterlife, because this is the only shot we get. People can be good people because it's the right thing to do, without fear of divine punishment.

      Feel free to believe what ever you want, but don't try to tell someone you're right because it feels like you should be right. Because you can't believe what sciences best guess is doesn't mean magic and stories already riddles with holes should be the alternative.
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Ea... You say evolution, I say adaption. No I'm not 12. I'm 24 and old enough to make my own descisions. I don't think evolution is right *look for my post about there being to many things that HAVE to be right* and just because I don't believe evolution doesn't mean I disagree with science as a whole. That was my peeve. I think there are too many people screaming, "L00K @T T3H EVODINCE! ITS R3@L!!1!1!!1one" and not saying, "Ok, we have been told this is real, yet all they can give us is the bones of a fish with a 1 inch fin that a artist made to look like arms." I'll tell you, I questioned faith before I was a Christian. I've always believed in God, but I still questioned. After thinking about it, there is nothing to me that makes evolution plusable. It has too many ifs in it! Your wanting use to believe that life came from a ocean on a planet that by all common sence should of just been a planet with a huge, frozen ocean. Not only that, there had to be enought diversity in living things to come about to make all we see today.

      Your asking me to swallow a pill the size of our known univerity and I'm not gonna do it.

      P.S. God isn't some "old man in the sky." If you basher would just happen to read the Bible you would know he is a fatherly spirit, not some old dude sitting on a cloud. That just a picture Bible bashers paint. Also, I would of replyed sooner but I had company. Sorry about that.
    • 4bit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@lameduck

      There are to many if's in evolution, but less in mysticism and religion?

      There are too many ifs in "these things look like this is the way it went" as opposed to "proof denies faith, so take our word for it"?

      Quote: "Ea... You say evolution, I say adaption."

      Aren't you just saying po-tay-to, po-ta-to? If there's no disagreement with the underlying mechanics why is there this big push to keep it out of schools?

      The reality is there are people that believe 6000 years ago God created man, burried some bones to test the unbelievers and nothing has changed since then excpet technology.

      I get woozy just trying to consider that people can say that inspite of all we do know.

      One of religions misnomers is that they're expecting you to believe what they say. NO, they're not. There offering an explination that's the best guess of people who do nothign but look at the evidence all the time. But if you're going to say they're wrong, be ready with another suggestion that includes evidence. And that evidence needs to come from more than one source, and those sources need to not already be riddled with falacies like the moon being a light source.

      I'm a little lost on the earth being a total iceball and unable to evolve life. The moon Europa is presumed to be a frozen surface, but that heat vents inside keep the seas liquid. It's actually one of the most likely candidates for extra terrestrial life, for that very reason.

      But my understanding was an early earth was hot and fiery, slowly cooling to let the water settle, then the sparks of life began. The fosile record shows for many years there was underwater life, then costal life, then inland life.

      A 3" fin bone needs more than to be drawn as a leg to make real scientist put thier name on it. It has to be stronger than regular fins, Enough to support weight, it needs to have been formed during the transition period from water to land, etc. It's not just we found a bone so we're right. Scientific evidence takes so much more work than that. Teams of people around the world think about it, challenge it, and try to prove it wrong. Only after that is it really accepted.

      There's bad science, just like there's bad religion. But it's time to come to the 21st century (... digital boy... sorry...5 points for all who get that), we can explain things, we don't need divine intervention, and what we can't is only because we haven't put enough pieces together yet.

      It doesn't preclude a soul, or spirituality, there are plenty of things about those things that are very interesting and worth study, but holding to old books and traditions while dismissing where the evidence points without doing any research yourself, is exactly why I say you don't believe in science.
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1There are some things that they have proven, yes. About that earth being 6000 years old... I'm a Christian and even I don't get that. I just... dont. I've never seen and age givin in the bible and such. Now dinosars, I'm guess thats what you ment by bones in the ground, I think is cover in the bible. There is a passage, I can not remember it word for word at the moment, but it says something about giant animals called... Ug.... What was the word? Poop.... was it galieths? Or was it... Humm... There was a movie witht the same name. lol I'm a bad quoter. Anyway, that I think is covered and I do think alot of animals have died off. Just because God made them doesn't mean there going to live forever so there would be bones in the gound.

      I don't personally believe that evolution could happen, unless God willed it which I don't the he did, but if it did, oh well. Doesn't shake my faith. I'm just tired of people pushing it was the honest truth when you'll have about as much proof about that as we do about creation. I can show you the internal workings of the eye and say, "God is great! How did he come up with that?!" and you will respond, "God my arse, that, my friend, is millions of years of evolution!" It will just keep going backwards and forwards like that. "What on earth could make a sea animal grow eyes? Was it bumping into rocks or some junk? That has to be God's work!" "It was a genetic misshap that happend over thoses millions of years of evolution." At that point I call you a quack, you call me a close-minded fool, we go out for coffee and to flirt with woman and forget all about our fight. lol Face it, we're never going to prove to eachother our facts, lets just get along.
    • h0dg3s, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"If anything, please read this next statement and weigh for yourself itstruth. Houses require people to design them, to plan them, to constructthem, and so on. Space shuttles likewise require a colossal amount ofplanning, study, and construction. I can't say I've ever seen eitherrandomly build themselves throughout the course of history. How then,can the human body, infinitely more complex than either of the twopreviously mentioned objects, design itself? "

      Houses are not alive, neither are space shuttles. If you put a scratch on a car, you have to get it painted. If you scratch someone's arm, it will most likely heal on its own. Living organisms are capable of much more than objects.
      Did your parents design you and build you? Your metaphors make no sense.
      You have proven your ignorance and unwillingness to accept truth.


      In my mind, creationism is the epitome of sheer ignorance.
  • kriox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+84Surreal. I'm from Brazil, a developing country, and an essentially christian one. I'm always shocked when I see this kind of thing happen, and in the US, of all places.

    Are people really THAT sensitive? Do they really storm out of lectures because someone suggests they dont read a particular passage (or book, or the whole bible for that matter) literally?

    I mean... I really doubt there was the vocabulary in ancient greek (or latin, or aramaic, or whatever) to describe modern science. Can't the scriptures be imprecise out of the sheer incapacity of the language at the time of writing?

    Im bored
    • ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -9/+33Yes kroix, there really are people like this who believe Adam and Eve kicked it with dinosaurs just like in the Flintstones. Read freerepublic.com for as much of this kind of stuff as you can stomach. It is unfathomable how far people take literal meaning of a book that has been translated over and over by people with definite agendas.
    • Machine, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29In a word... yes. Some people in the US are really that sensitive about any perceived slights towards their god.

      I used to work in a used bookstore and one of our most frequent customers was woman who who home-schooled her children.

      The mom was VERY religious and would carefully look through the books that her kids bought to make sure that there were no references to dinosaurs... and geology books were out of the question. A pretty grim and humorless woman...

      I could easily imagine her walking out on that lecture.
    • Ahnteis, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22Are there really people who riot over SOCCER (Futbol) games?

      The answer is that some people will be upset over ANYTHING.
    • scaaven2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13"Yes kroix, there really are people like this who believe Adam and Eve kicked it with dinosaurs just like in the Flintstones. "

      -inaccurate. The hardcores don't beleive dinosaurs existed and think of them as a conspiracy by scientists. Seriously.
    • Reddog_x2000, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@ Are people really THAT sensitive?

      Some are. Others are just looking for brownie points at church. I saw this type of behavior when I was dating someone who turned out to be way too into her religion, for my tastes anyway. They'll go someplace where they know someone will probably say something counter to their beliefs. Then, they'll go to church and talk about how terrible it was and how they walked out. Others will gather round them and tell them how couragous they were to do that etc. This is not the case in all churches. But, there are defintely churches that love to tell Christians that they are a persecuted minority.

      We also have a HUGE problem in this country. A lot of people LOVE being the victim. It gets them a lot of sympathy. And, if they do something wrong, they find a way to link their behavior to whatever supposedly happened to them. Then, if you try to call them on their behavior they can accuse you of blaming the victim.
    • Bogtha, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7> The hardcores don't beleive dinosaurs existed and think of them as a conspiracy by scientists.

      Not *all* fundies don't believe dinosaurs existed.

      Some of them believe Tyrannosaurs were vegetarian until Adam's sin made them eat meat:

      http://answersingenesis.org/museum/docs2005/0523dinosaurs.asp

      Some of them believe dinosaurs attacked Noah's Ark and were beaten back by angels:

      http://theferrett.livejournal.com/519211.html

      Some of them believe dinosaurs were animals welcomed onto Noah's Ark:

      http://www.moeh.org/main/discover.htm

      Some of this stuff is hilarious.
  • Punkymonkey, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29I used to watch that show everyday after school. Bill Nye's got balls no? Go Nye.
    • VaporBro, on 10/26/2007, -1/+9Bill Nye is great. My wife sold him some baloons one day. he walked into her costume place and wanted to get baloons for an experiment he was doing. She said he had a hat on and a coat with Nyw like shifty eyes...Trying to not stand out. Blending in you know...with 28 Emmys you gotta. I thought it was cool that he went and bought his own balloons and didn't have someone else do it. That takes some balls...imagine the lady that yelled "We beleive in God" meeting him on the street...
  • thenativeraver, on 10/12/2007, -10/+28This happened in Waco, Texas.
    Go figure...
  • suqur, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15The quote:
    "The Emmy-winning scientist angered a few audience members when he criticized literal interpretation of the biblical verse Genesis 1:16, which reads: “God made two great lights — the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.”

    He pointed out that the sun, the “greater light,” is but one of countless stars and that the “lesser light” is the moon, which really is not a light at all, rather a reflector of light."

    I fail to see how he criticized the scripture here. Seems like the author's interpretation of the event. Anyway, more accurate translations of the Bible read this way: "And God proceeded to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars." Whatever argument the author or Nye were trying to make don't make much sense in this context.
    • Nobi-Wan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I still don't see how this contradicted christian thought in these people's minds. Did he say something else about this? I'm a Christian and I wouldn't have been offended at all if a scientist told me this information. This is all stuff I've learned in 3rd grade science and it's never "contradicted" my faith.
    • scaaven2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2nobi if you beleive in the bible how doesn't this conflict?
    • Remmy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's amazing the controversy something like this causes. Take in to account that during the time that the Bible was written, writing was not journalistic in nature. It was about telling a story. Many things in the Bible are not to be taken literally, and that was basically what he was saying here. He was disputing "people" that believe in the literal translation.
  • diggme1, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4I loved his show.
    ________
    http://aljitech.com Gamers
  • SniperGX1, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16This is amazing, Bill Nye the bad ass.
  • antihexe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15This show is what my childhood is and was all about. :P
    • navster15, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7I was more of a Beakman's World fan, but Bill Nye kicked 31 flavors of ass. Good to see that he's still fighting the good fight.
  • helix400, on 10/12/2007, -47/+10Digg stores that should be voted as lame:

    Exaggerated or sensationalized stories.
    Political flamebait.
    Religious bashing.
    • dmetzcher, on 10/12/2007, -2/+39This isn't religious bashing. I think people in this country have forgotten that the division between Church and State does not entitle those who are religious to not be offended by the comments of others. Stating that something is one way or another is not offensive. If it is to others, frankly, that's just too bad for them. Choose to be religious or not, but the world need not bend in order to avoid offending you.

      Also, this is not political.

      And, I don't think that the person who posted the story on Digg sensationalized it. Perhaps you feel that way because the story itself offends you. There is a simple solution to that. Mark the story however you like (lame or whatever), and move on to something else. Then, those who want to discuss this type of thing, and get into a real discussion, need not worry about offending your sensitive feelings. If we were to dumb Digg down to the lowest common denominator, then it would truly be a real news site.
    • gleepskip, on 10/12/2007, -16/+7There is no such thing as the "separation of church and state" in our constitution. It's an urban legend.
    • helix400, on 10/12/2007, -11/+11The story feeds a Digg pasttime of bashing Creationists. You have to admit, when it comes to religious tolerance, Digg users can be severely lacking. Seriously, what does this incident it have to do with technology or science? The incident is about one fundamentalist who stormed out...that's it. I would prefer to see Digg stick to talking technology or science, because that's supposedly what this site is about. I'd rather not see this site mucking around in the obnoxious world of bashing others for their beliefs, no matter how stupid they may appear to us. There are hundreds of other websites out there for that. I don't want to see Digg become another one.

      "Perhaps you feel that way because the story itself offends you"

      You are misjudging me. There is nothing about the story that offends me. I'm not a creationist, and I'm not offended by what happened.

      "Also, this is not political. And, I don't think that the person who posted the story on Digg sensationalized it."

      I never said it was. Again, you are reading things that aren't there.

      "There is a simple solution to that. Mark the story however you like (lame or whatever), and move on to something else."

      I have every right to express when I feel something is wrong, just as you do. However, you have essentially said "It's wrong for you to come here to complain about others. You should just stay quiet. Only our side can complain."
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6There is a separation of church and state.

      I know you hippies want all Church's baned from speaking or having ideals about what happens within a state, but that isn't what separation of church and state is. It's not about removing "Under God" from our pledge *Which I scream at the TOP of my lungs because the high school here won't say it in the pledge at football games* or taking "In God we trust" off money. *Who do we trust then? I know I don't trust Bush or the government of West Virginia. The Governor MAYBE.*

      What it is, the church can't tell the state what to do, and the state can't tell the church what to do. Granted, we have some states the a certain group of Church's run, but that is the peoples fault for letting that happen. These people get themselves into a mess then whine, "I can't say under God, because I'm an Atheist!" Then move the new country of Califoriantion and leave the rest of the US alone.
    • michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@Gleepskip:
      "There is no such thing as the "separation of church and state" in our constitution. It's an urban legend."

      Yeah, that first amendment. The founders really just meant it as a joke. Seriously, constitutional scholars always just skip over that one. And it doesn't really say, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." That was just those stupid Founding Fathers meaning to write "an establishment of addition," because they didn't want to get involved in math (George Washington couldn't add.).
    • scaaven2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14"Seriously, what does this incident it have to do with technology or science?"

      Um... science is the issue here.
  • ThrasherC, on 10/12/2007, -17/+9Bill Nye is the man, and apparently he had some moronic Texans at his lecture. That's pretty much the whole article. No Digg.
  • ZekeSulastin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+39I'm Catholic, and I think it's sad that people get offended by this stuff. People choose to be that extreme and intolerant, and they are an embarrassment to the rest of us.

    (aah, Bill Nye - fond memories :P )
  • the_mole1314, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Mod Bill Up +5 Religious Points
  • ramsinks.com, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21He pointed out that the sun, the “greater light,” is but one of countless stars and that the “lesser light” is the moon, which really is not a light at all, rather a reflector of light.

    How does that make any Christian upset? I'm fine with that - the "reflection" is still a lesser light....

    big w00p.
    • meekar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I think he was trying trying to show that creationism shouldn't be taken too literally because that sun/moon statement obviously isn't literal, so why should creationism be?
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Or maybe your projecting your ideals onto his statement?

      Sounds to me like he was calling the sun a star and the moon a reflector, which it is! A star can still shin as well as a reflector. Calling a horse by a different name still makes it a horse, right?
  • dbrodbeck, on 10/12/2007, -9/+23Good for him. I am pretty sick of these fundamentalist bozos mixing their religion with science.
  • deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -19/+25Religious people are hilarious. Why did they goto a lecture about science in the first place? Why do religious people seem to think they have the right for the rest of the world to play along in their little fairy tale? I'm tolerant of religion in the privacy of people's home and temple but outside in public you're going to have to deal with the reality that some people just don't believe in your book. (whatever book you subscribe to, doesn't really matter because they're all the same closed minded BS)
    • fried, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10You know some people say the same things about homosexuality, its ok in there homes. But keep it out of the public.

      Like what you said, is that considered toleration, Most people say the homosexual version is intolerance.
      But as soon as I move the words around to religon, they are okay with it.
    • colebarnes, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3sigh

      They're not all that way
    • fried, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5I would just like to point out that both sides have their own closed mined wackjobs.
      There exsits hypocrisy on both sides of the field.




    • MadDogTannen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12The homosexual version is intolerance. Gays aren't going around telling everyone else that they should be gay too. They just want to be treated equally. The intolerance that people complain about with Christians is that they expect everyone else to believe the same way that they do. No one thinks that this woman shouldn't be entitled to her beliefs. They just want to be entitled to disagree with her incredibly rediculous opinions.
    • lame_duck, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2I had a gay guy hit on me. More than one actually. That seems like there trying to get me to do something I don't want to do. I mean really, I have love for you people, so don't go making me regret it by doing something stupid like this. I can't stand gay people that try to push there ways on straight people.

      Same thing with salesman type Christians. I'm a Christian, and I speak about God and Jesus. Never do I push it on people. There is a time and place for everything. Mormon witnessing is a good example of what NOT to do. Every first of the month I hide in my house so I won't have to entertain a group of people that believe Jesus had to die for the Indians too. My girlfriend had them over one time, and ever since they keep coming back, even after I told them, "No. I don't believe that Jesus had to witness to my ancestors. The stories I've heard, about creation, coincide with what the bible says, tho they are a bit more flashy. Anyway, Jesus died for everyone, not just the white man."
    • michaelstone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Toleration? Hmmmm... I think you should go consult a book other than the Bible: Webster's Dictionary.
    • Kissitfatty, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4"Gays aren't going around telling everyone else that they should be gay too."

      Gays are worse than christians.... for one thing if you dissagree with it they call you homophobe... and treat you bad.....its ok to dissagree with them.. but in their eyes its horrible... i think that eventually gays will take away free speech, think about it, you CANT dissagree with homosexuality these days, if you do you are called insensitive and such...and the whole its not a choice crap... oh my gosh, its ridiculus, how can you live with yourself wanting hairy legs and a big ol' sausage. its out of control.
    • Orange007, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Religious freedom stipulates that no religion shall have primacy over any others. Interpret that as you will.
      ---
      "The homosexual version is intolerance. Gays aren't going around telling everyone else that they should be gay too. They just want to be treated equally."

      Equality for the win! Until heterosexual public displays of affection are illegal, no one has any right to say two consenting adults of any gender are immoral or disrespectful. "Keep it in the home" my booty.
      ---
      "I had a gay guy hit on me. More than one actually. That seems like there trying to get me to do something I don't want to do. I mean really, I have love for you people, so don't go making me regret it by doing something stupid like this. I can't stand gay people that try to push there ways on straight people."

      Ever encountered a flirtatious straight woman? Were you upset that she had the temerity to impose her heterosexuality on you?
      ---
      "Gays are worse than christians.... for one thing if you dissagree with it they call you homophobe... and treat you bad.....its ok to dissagree with them.. but in their eyes its horrible... i think that eventually gays will take away free speech, think about it, you CANT dissagree with homosexuality these days, if you do you are called insensitive and such...and the whole its not a choice crap... oh my gosh, its ridiculus, how can you live with yourself wanting hairy legs and a big ol' sausage. its out of control."

      You're obfuscating the meaning of the word "disagree" for disingenuous ends. Disagreeing with - that is, disapproving of - the practice of homosexuality is an ideological, philosophical, or religious choice that is one's own to conclude, ill-informed though it may be. Taking that assessment and attempting to legalize it is another position entirely; it is actions such as *these* that are the muzzle on free speech and civil liberties you seem to fear so much. Lemme put it this way: You're free to think homosexuality is wrong (in much the same way I'm free to say the religious dogma that may have influenced your decision is wrong), but in no way are you permitted to discriminate against homosexuals based on these beliefs you may or may not espouse - unless, that is, you'd like me to silence fundamentalist Christians for harboring ideas *I* believe to be incorrect.

      We're all free to be as wrong as we so desire, provided no one is harmed in the process.
    • Refrag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Homosexuals and heterosexuals are both supposed to keep their practices out of public! There's no intolerance there.
  • ContactRose, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9All in all, it is an interesting article... however one thing that frustrates me about Digg is the irrelevance of the headline to the actual story. One minor part of the article was was about how a mom forced her kids to leave the lecture, which was stupid in it's own right, but still a minor part of the article.

    From the headline, I was expecting an exodus (no pun intended) from the lecture hall. If I could -digg an article simply because of misleading headlines, this would be a candidate.
    • suqur, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9You can. Report the story as "Ok this is lame", or "Inaccurate", as you see fit. If you've already dugg it, and wish to undigg it, visit your profile, and you will see an undigg link next to the story.
    • dmetzcher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5To take a part of a story, and write about it elsewhere (like on Digg), does not take away from the original story. It might be a small part of the story, but that doesn't mean that it gets no press simply because there is more about this or that in the story that doesn't relate to what was quoted or written about. Simply put, a brief mention of an event in a larger article is still news, and can still be cited on its own.
    • macindianpro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0thats why you read, then digg
  • Gatesophile, on 10/12/2007, -10/+6Bill Nye rocks my socks.
  • badbox, on 10/12/2007, -8/+26"I believe in God!"

    Well, I believe in potato. So what's your point? Sit down and shut up.

    I feel sorry for her kids.. growing up ignorant just because he pointed out the moon merely reflects the light. I'm sure she told them, "No no, god made that light" on the way home.
  • n00854180t, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14It's quite class when creationists get PMS when someone points out that they think their mythology is complete fact.
  • teamparadox, on 10/12/2007, -13/+9F them, who cares if they leave and believe in god, not me.
  • levyjl1988, on 10/12/2007, -14/+9People are seriously too religious, and can't really apply science, they only believe god made the stars and other fictious *****. BTW I really enjoyed Bill Nye the science guy tv shows during the 1998 year, ah memories.
  • AzzardX, on 10/12/2007, -14/+41That retarded woman had nothing to do in there.

    If she doesn't want to risk getting shocked by scientific facts, she should have stayed in church with her bunch of crazy people that believe that Earth is 6,000 years old.

    You know of atheists that go church to yell "Big Bang!" or "Dinosaurs!" ?

    Anyway... digg for denouncing again those stupid creationists.
    • dmetzcher, on 10/12/2007, -6/+22Brilliant point. LOL. I love the part about going into a church and yelling "Big Bang!" Not sure whey you were negatively dugg for that though. Perhaps you offended someone's fragile feelings.

      Hey people, what ever happened to being secure in your religions? If someone disagrees with you, whatever happened to walking away and saying, "That's fine, it's my 'cross' to bear, and I'll bear it"? Now, it seems that everyone wants to run to Congress, or the courts, or the friggin media to get special protections for their religions or religious holidays.
    • jgclark123, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Of course atheists don't go into church to harass the creationists, their skin would melt upon entering the door.
    • justin22290, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11YEAH!! i just tryed to walk in and yell "Big Bang"............... it burns....and the holy water ...didnt help at all
  • kennyboy019, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24Heck, allot of biblical scholars don't even take genesis literally now days.

    My wife, who went to a bible college, said that the professors told her that the creation story was most likely a verbal story that was eventually written down. Its just trying to explain something that they had no explanation for.
    • tratten, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8"the professors told her that the creation story was most likely a verbal story that was eventually written down. Its just trying to explain something that they had no explanation for"
      Isn't that what all religions were all about?
  • Mneitzel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Ok , how did this offend someone. As a Christian I fail to see the insult. And dude I am all for the Big Bang....
    • spectre_25gt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Well, being one that's all for the Big Bang, you're apparantly a fairly open-minded christian. There are those that aren't.
    • EtaoinShrdlu, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3The Big Bang™ happenned the day after god had an overdose of Mexican food.
  • colebarnes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8semantics and translations...

    using the bible to disprove creation (or the bible itself) to christians is like christians using the bible to try and prove creationism to anybody else...

    it is futile...

    on a slightly different topic... i loved his show too!
  • tarzan99, on 10/12/2007, -25/+2There are no emmys for science bill nye is a (bad) comedian that got a pbs show
  • chris86wm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12I love how people can be so simple minded. Just because you dont believe in what the man is saying doesnt mean you should yell at him and leave the room.

    What if atheists did the same everytime the christian viewpoint was shoved in their face?
    • Kev585, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3They often do, or at least try to. I've seen just as many atheists pull bitch fits over religion as any believers out there. Personally I feel believe what you want and STFU about it unless asked.
    • jakefloyd, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1"What if atheists did the same everytime the christian viewpoint was shoved in their face? "

      *See comment by deadbaby*
    • ThePhilomath, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1ignore
  • Inkling, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Christian fundamentalists just like to be drama queens. They find Bill Nye offensive? What's next on their hit-list? Mr. Rogers and the Cookie Monster?
    • dmetzcher, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12And the Teletubbies, and Barney, and everything else that appears to be anything other than wholesome in their own narrow minds.
    • jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Fred Rogers (Mr. Rogers) was an ordained Presybterian minister, btw.
    • FuManchu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3And Fred Rogers is dead. [sniff]

      I hope nobody insults a man who can't talk back.
  • agpc, on 10/12/2007, -12/+13This reminds me of those ***** who try and justify whatever idiotic anti-science crap comes out of their mouth with "Well I'm Christiun"

    So, you don't subscribe to the notion that science has provided nearly every creature comfort you enjoy on a daily basis. Because. You. Are. "Christiun."

    From immunizations that prevented your snot nosed brats from - you know - not dying and stuff, to the fried chicken you eat on a daily basis, to the anti lock brakes that saved you from killing yourself while you were putting on your makeup while talking on your cell phone.

    Yes, science is responsible for all that.

    But don't believe the science because ur a christiun!

    Idiots.
  • Spartan970, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18I'm a Christian. Heck, I'm a conservative, evangelical Christian.

    I also think Bill Nye is awesome. I read the story and fail to see how anyone could be offended by his comment. It's not offensive or irreverent in the least. America is supposed to be all about the peaceful and open exchange of ideas and at some point my fellow Bible-thumpers forgot that.

    It's sad.
  • bringonts2, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2Bill Nye? I thought he went out with the 80's or 90's...?
  • DFchoke, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12He's Bill Nye the freaking SCIENCE Guy speaking at a COLLEGE. Did people expect him to speak about something other than science?
    On the other hand... From the article it sounds like he brought up the bible quote to make a point about religion, not science.
    But judging from how good his show was, he probably tied it into his speech better than the article leads to believe.

    edit:I guess making a point about the unchanging written word of the bible IS making a point about advantages of the scientific method and theory.
    • Kolar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Nah they probably just want him to do some tricks, play like a monkey ect.. NO WAIT!, he's not a monkey!..
      crap.. you can't even make a joke without offending some idiot.

      He wasn't saying to the woman there is no god or you shouldn't believe in whatever you want but that the evangelical literal interpretation of the fairy tale book has massive errors thus wasn't meant to be taken literally. There's something seriously wrong not only when people are not willing to live with or understand other ideas, cultures, logic, facts... and just storm out or get violent but when they place themselves in situations to get angry, upset.. if you didn't want to hear about it don't goto a college, listen to a speach from a scientist..
  • Seumas, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20The truth hurts.

    Fairy tales make some people feel better.
  • inotocracy, on 10/12/2007, -9/+9Women, they lack logic by nature. They cant help but be ignorant sometimes, he wasn't mocking the scripture just that the Moon isn't actually a "light", just a reflector.
  • mandarin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I remember something like that happened when i was a kid.
    Sooner or later , people eventually learn to sit down and understand. The rude ones who just run off are pretty much dicks
  • diggerphelps, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Bill Nye angered no one.
    They chose to be angry at Bill Nye due to their own ignorance and bull-headedness.
    • starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2>Bill Nye angered no one.
      >They chose to be angry at Bill Nye due to their own ignorance and bull-headedness.

      well said.
  • justin22290, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4 I hate when this happens...pff but im an atheist...so, as long as people think there is something to live for they will keep the world running and progressing and submit there life waiting to be repayed in the afterlife... Religon is good... just not to the extreme, like anything else in this world.

    How did Bill Nye anger anyone with that tho haha he really didnt say that god dosen't exist or even indirectly
  • Xopl, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I love Bill Nye. His show was great. I remember this one time where he's standing in front of a lake literally full of aligators and he's doing his monologue, and dubbed over the background quietly you hear several voices going "Come for a swim, Bill." "The water's fine." "Why don't you come take a dip."
    • FuManchu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm not a believer in the Bible.
      But the last time I was out at night and saw the moon, yeah, it was definitely a lesser light than the sun usually is. It's hard to read the newspaper out on the porch at that time of day, as a matter of fact.

      EDIT: this is supposed to go AFTER the next comment.
  • kotatsu, on 10/12/2007, -14/+11The bible really calls the moon a 'lesser light'?!

    Oh that is just the funniest thing I've heard in ages.

    Religious people = stupid.
  • FullMetalMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33I WAS THERE IN THE FRONT ROW!!!!!!!!!!!!

    He talked about Global Warming, Evolution, Why the Bible shouldn't be taught in Science classes, and pretty much everything that Creationists hate to hear!

    The Lady that left with her kids had a Shirt on that said "I am a Friend of God"
    • justin22290, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4That must of been awesome. Living in Waco, Texas that is XP
    • Spartan970, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10It's funny how we all hate to be lumped into generalizations and stereotypes, yet readily lump others into the same. Not all Christians have problems with the issues you mentioned. Global Warming seems to be a pretty observable trend at this point, and as a Christian I feel that we (mankind) are doing a pretty terrible job at dealing with what God gave us to live on. I don't want the Bible taught in science class, or the Kuran taught in math! Separation of Church and State protects my beliefs as much as anyone else's. In terms of evolution, I have no problems with it. It's a theory with considerable evidence to support it, and I don't necessarily believe that it can't be reconciled with the biblical view that creationists take.

      I say that only to ask you to lump a group of people together as if we think with a single mind, be that based on religion, race, sex or anything else. It's simply un-American.
    • FullMetalMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@justin22290 Actually i don't live in Waco. I live 50 Miles away!

      @Spartan970 You can believe What ever you want to believe just as long i can to.

    • FullMetalMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I was able to track down a picture of Bill Nye from the lecture!
      http://fullmetalmonkey.googlepages.com/BillNye.JPG
      Sorry it isn't that good.
    • Spartan970, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@fullmetalmonkey - I could not agree more. All people have a right to believe as they wish.
    • moohamadiscrazy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0poor bill nye, I mean his career has been over for some time now, so what is he going to do? go back to stand up comedy?
  • SuperHeroMan, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Ok i don't understand why they got mad uh i'm a Christian and yeah what he said is true oh man i really love the crazy "christians" who get mad when someone says evolution and screams bloody murder you know i believe in creationism but at the same time evolution is true in a sense
    • Philoushka, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Wow. Left is Right and Blue is Green. Either we evolved from the goop, or the "Good" book is the shining light and we all came from a rib, and a guy lived in a whale, and you should be stoned for working on Sunday.

      Sheesh.
  • FuzzyLumpkins76, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Nye gave the same speech at my school (Central Michigan University) and definitely created the same reaction. Mothers with young children left after they realized there would be a lack of demonstrations and religious zealots left after he began his section on evolution. It was neat to see Nye do something other than what he's been known for on his TV show.
  • ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Creationists... I bet God himself would show up to one of those guys and say.. "hey dude.. i really didnt have nothing to do with all the creation stuff... it just did itself".. and they still would not believe it.
  • GotGoose, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4Hi, not all Creationists are like this. Unfortunately, some people do not try to reason the facts out before making conclusions. Here is one website I think some people here would like to see http://answersingenesis.org That website uses scientific evidence to prove Creation. I encourage everyone to read some articles. (use their search feature to look for topics)
    • rengeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5My God! I have never seen such a site full of bad science like this. Talk about reactionary right-wing religious nuts... Reminds me of South Park. "Grab your snorkel and bury your head in the sand!"
    • dorkafork, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3That's hilarious. I'm sure you'll find unbiased and correct info on science from a website called "Answers in GENESIS".

      If you want information on science, here's a crazy thought: go to a website run by actual *scientists*. http://talkorigins.org for example.
    • starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3>Hi, not all Creationists are like this. Unfortunately, some people do not try to reason
      >the facts out before making conclusions. Here is one website I think some people here
      >would like to see http://answersingenesis.org That website uses scientific evidence to
      >prove Creation. I encourage everyone to read some articles. (use their search feature to
      >look for topics)

      weve all been by those places. weve read the stuff. its not worth anyones time. its
      low brow stupid. people “reason the facts” and creationism is so low on the bar as to
      not be worth any time. if you guys want to walk around free admitting to be religious
      then you better reel in the crazy religious people... because as far as i... we... can tell
      you all are hell bent on destruction. i dont want to go with you. we don't want to go with you anywhere.
    • ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The problem with all you fken retards is that you dont consider other facts. You just close your eyes and just believe in the bible. Period. On the other hand the evolution theory.. well its a theory with alot of proof that supports it, from diffrent sources. Its still a scientific process in witch it can be changed and modified. HOW?.. in base of other hypothesis and proof! If you guys want to proove something... proove it with some other thing other that " its written in the bible!.. so its true!.. there! in your face!".
  • elambi, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Some people liked Bill Nye, some people did not like Bill Nye. I really don't see what the story is here.
  • himynameiznate, on 10/12/2007, -17/+0Anyone remember when it was a scientists goal to observe the world, and learn about it, and not attack religion?

    Ah well, cant disuade fanatics of any flavor...

  • Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -16/+4BILL NYE THE OFFENSIVE GUY BILL BILL BILL BILL
    • FullMetalMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9I went to the lecture and he wasn't offensive at all!

      Learn to Shut up when you don't know the facts!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 147 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.