Bill Nye on Ignorance and Evolution
Top Comments
All Comments (247)
-
@TheSeventhCamera um, it cant be observed... its obvious you dont have a true understanding of what evolution (something that takes MILLIONS of years to happen) is.
And no, no true scientist nobel prize winners who have really studied evolution have said its impossible. Sorry "FRIEND".
And DNA, fossils, and MODERN types of upgraded carbon dating showing the age of the earth, is pretty good evidence for evolution.
Whats your explanation? let me guess. a diety?
-
@VesusSheist I used to want to be a microbiologist. I've taken classes but decided criminal justice was more my thing, So i decided on that. There's a little bit of my background and why i gave you the answer I did. (BTW growing bacteria smells horrific).
I've never heard of the angel thing before. It's interesting. It's almost the same as an invisible non-material force holds us to the ground to make sure we don't float away, right? Lol.
-
@Melexonitrate Here is some ad hoc nonsense: invisible, non-material angels hold us to the ground and make sure we don't float away when we jump. Other theories about gravity are simply coming from scientists who hate my god...any information that may disprove my theory was simply put there by the devil, who also hates my god.
Now I demand you teach my "theory" to children in science class and give it equal weight to Einstein's theory of general relativity.
-
@Melexonitrate Did you actually do any research on the topic before making this response? Sounds to me like you just read my comment, formulated an opinion, and responded. If that's true, you would make a lousy scientist. You can't disregard the work of scientists who study this stuff just because you think you have a better answer.
-
@TheSeventhCamera Also, if macroevolution has never been observed, what is your explanation for the phenomenon called "ring species"? I eagerly await your explanation.
-
@TheSeventhCamera Gravity is a theory because that is the label science applies to phenomenon that have been tested rigorously and found to be reliable and valid as predictors of future phenomena. Which is why evolution has reached the level of scientific theory. Even some creationists recognize this distinction.
-
@TheSeventhCamera I answered your question, so now you move the goalposts. Typical creationist response. Macroevolution is simply microevolution over a longer period of time....only creationists add some arbitrary divider between the two. We have also observed what you call "macroevolution" in insects that have very short lifespans. Or how about the speciation of dogs from wolves? All of this is documented proof of the "macroevolution" you find so impossible.
-
@TheSeventhCamera I've heard this "losing genes" argument before and its pretty scientifically unfounded. The whole creative kinds argument is pretty weak.
-
@Sorflakne How is gravity a theory? I suppose you could make another claim about it, but the fact remains that we get closer to things that are bigger than we are. As I've said before, evolution is only partially true. Our genes evolve, we know that. But we don't gain genes (the main premise for evolution), we actually lose them. And where does the Bible refer to bats as birds? I would like to know.
-
@tarheelbub Well what is one thing the Bible says that you can prove is 100% wrong (and you better not go directly to evolution)? What I meant by it checking out, is that the world makes sense through the Bible. And you have to understand every corner of the Bible to know who the world looks through it. So most evolutionists and atheists make their own assumptions about what the Bible is. You should hear what the Bible really is, from the Bible. Go figure.
Let's stick a top hat on him and make him run for president.
norevelation 1 week ago 14
He looks like Abe Lincoln... just noticed this...
Oblic008 3 days ago 10