Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science, in all of biology. According to Bill Nye, aka "the science guy," if grownups want to "deny evolution and live in your world that's completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that's fine, but don't make your kids do it because we need them." Don't miss new Big Think videos! Subscribe by clicking here: http://goo.gl/CPTsV5 -- Transcript: Denial of evolution is unique to the United States. I mean, we're the world's most advanced technological—I mean, you could say Japan—but generally, the United States is where most of the innovations still happens. People still move to the United States. And that's largely because of the intellectual capital we have, the general understanding of science. When you have a portion of the population that doesn't believe in that, it holds everybody back, really. Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science, in all of biology. It's like, it's very much analogous to trying to do geology without believing in tectonic plates. You're just not going to get the right answer. Your whole world is just going to be a mystery instead of an exciting place. As my old professor, Carl Sagan, said, "When you're in love you want to tell the world." So, once in a while I get people that really—or that claim—they don't believe in evolution. And my response generally is "Well, why not? Really, why not?" Your world just becomes fantastically complicated when you don't believe in evolution. I mean, here are these ancient dinosaur bones or fossils, here is radioactivity, here are distant stars that are just like our star but they're at a different point in their lifecycle. The idea of deep time, of this billions of years, explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your world view just becomes crazy, just untenable, itself inconsistent. And I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, in your world that's completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that's fine, but don't make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need people that can—we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems. It's just really hard a thing, it's really a hard thing. You know, in another couple of centuries that world view, I'm sure, will be, it just won't exist. There's no evidence for it. Directed / Produced by Jonathan Fowler and Elizabeth Rodd

Comments

jebstuart: “If you don't understand how something works, never mind: just give up and say God did it. You don't know how the nerve impulse works? Good! You don't understand how memories are laid down in the brain? Excellent! Is photosynthesis a bafflingly complex process? Wonderful! Please don't go to work on the problem, just give up, and appeal to God.” - Richard Dawkins

jebstuart: "I can watch '_The Last Jedi'_ in a theater..." The ant loses... ...the ant loses...the ant loses......the ant loses......the ant loses......the ant loses......the ant loses......the ant loses..." Giggles defines how 'special' she is, compared to ants.

jebstuart: +supernaturalists: "The psychic business is built on lies. There is no supernatural power.
You can't see the future. We're in the golden age of the con
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Weekend/psychic-reveals-tricks-trade/story?id=10590096
... H O W E V E R ...
+superaturalists: ""Sure, and the 'ignorance' that is build (sic) into this Trojan horse is that we agree to maintain an ignorance of God and the supernatural. It's weak-minded. And I can see right through it" (Hint: double standard/hypocrisy)

jebstuart: "“Even those who do not, or cannot, avail themselves of a scientific education, choose to benefit from the technology that is made possible by the scientific education of others.” - Richard Dawkins

jebstuart: “Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper, distinctly heard the voice of Jesus telling him to kill women, and he was locked up for life. George W. Bush says that God told him to invade Iraq..." - Richard Dawkins

Nuclear Fallout: +materialists: "The idea that the universe is a simulation sounds more like the plot of “The Matrix,” but it is also a legitimate scientific hypothesis." https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation/
... H O W E V E R ...
+materialists: "Intelligent Design is not a legitimate scientific hypothesis." (Hint: double standard/hypocrisy)

jebstuart: "“It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that).” - Richard Dawkins

jebstuart: “Evolution could so easily be disproved if just a single fossil turned up in the wrong date order. Evolution has passed this test with flying colours.” - Richard Dawkins

Nuclear Fallout: Richard Dawkins insists that: 1) Genes are coded information; 2) A chromosome is a great, long computer tape; 3) DNA is quaternary digital CODE; 4) It's just the same as computer tape; 5) It's copied and pasted from one part of the organism to another in JUST THE SAME WAY as a computer programmer would copy and paste; 6) Biology has turned into computer science. Richard Dawkins - DNA : The Greatest Discovery in Modern Science
Kenneth Miller insists that: "If the DNA of a human being or any other organism resembled a carefully constructed computer program, with neatly arranged and logically structured modules, each written to fulfill a specific function, the evidence for intelligent design would be overwhelming."
Looks like the evidence for Intelligent Design is ✔️ 💪 OVERWHELMING. ✔️ 💪

Nuclear Fallout: "You contain a trillion copies of a large, textual document written in a highly accurate, digital code, each copy as voluminous as a substantial book. I'm talking, of course, of the DNA in your cells."
Richard Dawkins, The Richard Dimbleby Lecture: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder (1996)

Nuclear Fallout: +Atharkas: "Are that that (sic) ignorant of biology that you now claim life start at the eukaryote level?"
Nonsense! 1) Biology deals with the function, diversity, and ecology of already living systems,
and NOT the origin of life presumably from simple prebiotic chemistry;
2) No claim is being made that the first living, metabolizing, dividing cell on Earth was a eukaryote - that's your assertion. Having said that, there was a time on Earth when there were no eukaryotes, and there was a reason for them - a cause - for them appearing for the first time. You would not appear to have any evidence for that. And that cause is NOT the "symbiosis of Mixotricha paradoxa, Atharkas. These organisms are ALREADY eukaryotes. To assert that would reveal you to be rather ignorant of scientific facts.
...oh, and where are you getting these 'levels' from? What's your evidence?

jebstuart: "Natural Selection is anything but random" - Richard Dawkins

jebstuart: Miss Giggles cries tearfully that "DNA mutations don't explain the appearance of the fossil record" When asked to support this bizarre claim, she simply sniffs - "By definition, fossils don't contain DNA" So we can never figure out the purpose of a disposed candy wrapper because there is no candy in it?

The Terminator: “If you want to understand life, don't think about vibrant, throbbing gels and oozes, think about _information technology.”
- Richard Dawkins

The Terminator: "Genes are coded information."
- Richard Dawkins
”A chromosome is a great, long computer tape.”
- Richard Dawkins
"DNA is quaternary digital code."
- Richard Dawkins
”DNA is just the same as computer tape.”
-Richard Dawkins
”DNA is copied and pasted from one part of the organism to another in just the same way as a computer programmer would copy and paste.”
- Richard Dawkins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF1UzhPA5N8

The Terminator: So, here we are in 2018, and what have 60+ years of lab experiments in origin of life simulations yielded?
'Building blocks.' 'Precursors.' 'RNA world started life.' 'Proteins first started life.' 'Metabolism first started life.'
What a CIRCUS!!! The 'RNA world' never interfaces with the 'proteins first' model, which never interfaces with the 'metabolism first' model.
NOTHING EVER CONNECTS!
There is no cohesive, unifying model, only multiple incompatible ideas!! They've yielded virtually NOTHING that plots an inexorable path to a living, viable cell!
And to make matters worse, all these experiments have been intelligently designed and intelligently manipulated with the target molecules (the outcome) ALREADY IN THE MIND OF THE INVESTIGATORS!
4.1 billion years ago, nature did not HAVE an outcome in mind, and COULDN'T finesse the physicochemical conditions to favour any given chemical reaction over another as would scientists working in a lab!

Nuclear Fallout: +Atharkas: "Are that that (sic) ignorant of biology that you now claim life start at the eukaryote level?"
Nonsense! 1) Biology deals with the function, diversity, and ecology of already living systems,
and NOT the origin of life presumably from simple prebiotic chemistry;
2) No claim is being made that the first living, metabolizing, dividing cell on Earth was a eukaryote - that's your assertion. Having said that, there was a time on Earth when there were no eukaryotes, and there was a reason for them - a cause - for them appearing for the first time. You would not appear to have any evidence for that. And that cause is NOT the "symbiosis of Mixotricha paradoxa, silly Atharkas. These organisms are ALREADY eukaryotes. To assert that would reveal you to be rather ignorant of scientific facts.
...oh, and where are you getting these 'levels' from? What's your evidence?

Nuclear Fallout: +Atharkas: "Is it me, or is claiming that life start when eukaryote formed (sic) rather ridiculous?"
It's YOU, Atharkas, since you have this belief in wholly material causes for anything and everything at any point in the history of the universe, and you need to show a gradual synthetic chemical pathway from simple H2O, O2, CO2, CH3, CO, PO4, N, NH3 HCN, etc. to the eventual supposed "chemical evolution" of the first living, metabolizing, dividing cell, onto the very first eukaryote. But since you have no synthetic chemical pathway as just discussed, you're forced into taking it on faith that blind, unguided, wholly material causes were responsible.

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE: +Atharkas: "Look at you running away from an example of symbiosis which explains the formation of eukaryote!"
You will now explain how it came to be that the first eukaryote on Earth formed from the symbiosis of Mixotricha paradoxa, which are, themselves, already EUKARYOTES TO BEGIN WITH!!!*

jebstuart: Any fundie who wants people to take her word that all of science is wrong should NEVER say things like ..."the exact, synthetic chemical, step-by-step process by which simple prebiotic molecules become a eukaryotic cell."
OR
"...you can’t even GRASP that the OP is dealing with the origin of life, the origin of the first eukaryotic cell..."

Press CTRL+D to add the page to the bookmarks.
Нажмите CTRL+D, чтобы добавить страницу в закладки.

Your name:

Your comment:

Video on this topic

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children HQ Audio Edit

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children HQ Audio Edit

This is an edit to enhance the original statement. The video effects are simply for background and in no way are meant as derogatory. When you have a portion of the population that doesn't...

Bill Nye: The Earth is Really, Really Not 6,000 Years Old

Bill Nye:  The Earth is Really, Really Not 6,000 Years Old

Bill Nye (The Science Guy) comments on a previous Big Think video in which he denounces the teaching of creationism to America's students. Bill Nye is the author of Undeniable: Evolution and...

Bill Nye Ken Ham Debate Summed Up In Two Very Telling Answers

Bill Nye Ken Ham Debate Summed Up In Two Very Telling Answers

"On Tuesday evening more than 3 million people tuned in to watch "Science Guy" Bill Nye debate Ken Ham, founder of the biblically literalist Creation Museum on the topic "Is creation a viable...

Creationists failing at attacking Bill Nye

Creationists failing at attacking Bill Nye

Bill Nye is featured in a video recently where he indicates creationism should not be taught to children. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU ) From the context it is more accurate...

Dr. Jeff Zweerink responds: Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Dr. Jeff Zweerink responds: Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Dr. Jeff Zweerink responds to: Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children video. For more, visit http://reasons.org.

Bill Nye's "Science of Evolutionism" Is Not Appropriate For Children

Bill Nye's "Science of Evolutionism" Is Not Appropriate For Children

Please visit www.drdino.com to view our site and to help support us!

Lawrence Krauss: Teaching Creationism is Child Abuse

Lawrence Krauss: Teaching Creationism is Child Abuse

In this video, Theoretical Physicist Lawrence Krauss tackles the idea that allowing the teaching of “creationism” alongside that of evolution in schools is tantamount to child abuse. Read...

Responding to Bill Nye's Video "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children”

Responding to Bill Nye's Video "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children”

Bill Nye attempts to capture your children's minds for evolution. His video “Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children” has revealed his strong evolutionary bias and his own blind spot....

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science, in all of biology. According to Bill Nye, aka "the science guy," if grownups want to "deny evolution and live in your world that's...