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're thinking evolution, think of the most powerful and relentless selection pressure you can, operating on the most enormous and ever-changing wealth of variation you could imagine.
On the other hand, if you're thinking design, think of ANY fictional supernatural character you like and ascribe any fantasy qualities to it you want. Nobody could ever falsify your dream.

Necromonger Nation: “There is no excuse for the scientific community to continue confusing “order” with “organization.” Organization is always formal and choice-contingent. Self-ordering is not the same as formal organization; disorder and disorganization are not synonymous. Any formal organization already instantiated into physical medium always progresses secondarily toward disorganization as that physical medium approaches equilibrium. As dichotomy and categorization are lost, uncertainty and complexity increase.”

Cerebral Independence: "Just imagine if just one materialist could actually demonstrate that natural processes created nature 'in the beginning.'"
- Necromonger Nation

Nuclear Fallout: If you're thinking evolution, think DNA mutations. ✔️
If you're thinking DNA mutations, think accidental, chance, haphazard,random, and unpredictable molecular events. ✔️
If you're thinking accidental, chance, haphazard, random, and unpredictable molecular events, think CAN'T MODEL, FORMULATE, TEST FOR, PREDICT, OR FALSIFY. ✔️

Nuclear Fallout: The 'theory' of evolution will never be able to conceptually extricate itself from its abiogenesis antecedents. 🙁

Necromonger Nation: “What so few understand is that only formalism, not physicodynamic determinism, is capable of generating true organization and sophisticated function. All formalisms are choice-contingent. Chance and necessity cannot organize, program or instruct. Chance and necessity cannot pursue non-trivial functionality. Chance and necessity, therefore, cannot possibly decrease entropy. The Second Law governs chance and necessity under all circumstances, barring the intervention of formal Choice Determinism (CD). Abel, David L.. Primordial Prescription: The Most Plaguing Problem of Life Origin Science (p. 113). LongView Press. Kindle Edition

Nuclear Fallout: The most rational, parsimonious, and accurate representative - or remnant, if you will - of the origin of life on earth is to be found among primitive extant prokaryotic cells. These living organisms are considered as being alive largely due to their ability to process their digital genetic information via several different SYSTEMS, including storage, copying, transcribing, transmission, and decoding.

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE: So let's say you're one of these 'RNA world' aficionados. Not only do you appear to be getting copious amounts of
RNA monomers synthesized au gratis, but your copious amounts of RNA monomers are supposedly homochiral.
And if your prebiotic RNA was involved in making proteins, then you're going to have to explain how your constituent
amino acids are all left handed, and you'll be forced to confess that they can only really assemble polypeptides which still have to fold correctly to result in a catalytic enzyme - more blind chance at work.

ergonomover: The truth is that humans are apes, no matter how much religious creationists hate this fact: Anyone can visit the prestigious Smithsonian Institute website for proto-human fossil (and genetic) evidence: "From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. With the rapid pace of new discoveries every year, this impressive sample means that even though some early human species are only represented by one or a few fossils, others are represented by thousands of fossils."

Hydrogen Peroxide: In our everyday experience with technology, integrated systems which process digital information can ONLY originate from intelligence. That axiomatic truth forms the basis of the inference that intelligence is the best - and most likely origin - of
integrated networks of digital information processing in other systems we might
encounter that either pre-date humanity on this planet or on other worlds. ✔️

Necromonger Nation: It borders on the absurd as to how prebiotic Nature could have progressed toward complex, functional systems - repeatedly - from basic molecular structures, where no basis for their collective function had pre-existed. And yes, this would have had to occur correctly over and over again, as failed attempts are not forgiven: they deplete precious starting materials and those starting materials are NOT easily re-synthesized, as the conditions for those previous attempts are now expunged by this point.

ergonomover: More from dr Eugenie Scott: I said (and have said repeatedly) that the message of ID is “evolution is bad science”, without providing an alternative view of the history of the universe. Unless ID proponents can come up with an actual model of “what happened”, all they have is a sterile anti-evolutionism that adds little to YEC beyond the specific ideas of irreducible complexity and the design filter.

ergonomover: "In my talk, I was not deploring the untestability of ID per se but the fact that its proponents do not present testable models. I was referring to the fact that ID proponents do not present a model at all in the sense of saying what happened when. At least YEC presents a view of “what happens”: the universe appeared a few thousands of years ago, at one time, in its present form; living things are descended from specially created “kinds” from which they have not varied except in trivial ways; there was a universal flood that produced the modern geological features; and humans are specially created apart from all other forms. So what happened in the ID model?" --Dr Eugenie Scott on National Center for Science Education

Hydrogen Peroxide: Since natural processes have NEVER been observed in the natural world to spontaneously arrange integrated systems
of information processing from non-living organic and/or inorganic compounds, then YES scientists are making faulty assumptions in their entire approach to the origin of life.

Hydrogen Peroxide: Abiogenesis supporters need to be reminded that if you dismiss all other explanations but your own, yet have no evidence to back it up, and are left to imagine how your explanation nevertheless accounts for the phenomenon, you're making an
ARGUMENT FROM INCREDULITY!

ergonomover: Dioxide Ribonucleic Information Vector Encephalographic Laminator (DRIVEL)
Choice Reductive Autopoietic Contingency Knowledge of Prebiotic Operational Terminology (CRACKPOT) and
Free-floating Redundant Autopoietic Unsynergized Deontology (FRAUD) are all about pseudoscience, just like D. Abel. His credentials? lives near NASA (17,350 employees), fine, but I live near CNRS (national scientific research center, 32,000 employees) haha Mine's bigger.

The Terminator: Of the numerous challenges facing origin of life scientists, one is the origin of the genetic code itself, specifically, that of the utter lack of chemical bonding affinity between RNA triplets and their cognate amino acids. Each RNA triplet would have exactly the same bonding sites, and yet specific groups of triplets are uniquely associated with one of some 20 different amino acids.

Necromonger Nation: “Life represents the ultimate in increased organization from an otherwise self-ordered or random equilibrium state. What keeps life alive is its formal organization and ability to pursue and accomplish functional, computational, integrated-circuit metabolism far from equilibrium. Take away formal programming and any cell will promptly die.”
Abel, David L.. Primordial Prescription: The Most Plaguing Problem of Life Origin Science (pp. 112-113). LongView Press. Kindle Edition.

Nuclear Fallout: +jebstuart: "enormous and ever-changing wealth of variation you could imagine"
LOL! Sadly for you, Stuart, this weak sauce "wealth of variation" is nothing more than a EUPHEMISM
for accidental, chance, haphazard, random, and UNPREDICTABLE molecular events.
You have no clue if and when such a molecular event might happen or whether it is guided or NOT.

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE: Sadly for you, evolutionists, the very first thing that happens in the supposed evolution of biological novelty is the occurrence of one or more accidental, chance, haphazard, random, and UNPREDICTABLE
molecular events - mutations.
Ergo, evolution itself is JUST AS accidental, 🍀 chance, haphazard, random, and UNPREDICTABLE! 🎲🎲🎲🎲

Your name:

Your comment:

Video on this topic

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

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

Evolutionism is NOT the fundamental idea in any of the sciences. According to Kent Hovind, aka the real science guy, if Disney scientists want to deny Creation ...

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children (Rebuttal)

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children (Rebuttal)

Lawrence Krauss: Teaching Creationism is Child Abuse

Lawrence Krauss: Teaching Creationism is Child Abuse

The last thing we want to do is water down the teaching of biology because some people don't recognize that evolution happened. Transcript -- It amazes me ...

RESPONSE: Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

RESPONSE: Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

This is a Response to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU Creation is the fundamental idea in nearly all religions. According to Dr. Tim Jennings, ...

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: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children ...

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

Response 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 ...

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 ...

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 ...