Upload

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

by Big Think • 6,926,665 views

Don't miss new Big Think videos! Subscribe by clicking here: http://goo.gl/CPTsV5 Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science, in all of biology. According to Bill Nye, aka "the...

Creationists used to sneer "Well, show us the speciation" as if that were relevant.  Now even many creationists admit to evolution up to about the species level, because it's observable.  That's why they focus on "kinds" which is not a scientific taxon, but creationists use “kind” to mean "any level of evolution that no human has personally witnessed."  It's gibber and relies on a common misconception of the observability requirement, about equivalent to telling a 1st grader that the baby is "in mommy's stomach."
Report spam or abuse
Creationists, including ID creationists, pathologically misrepresent the facts, laws, logic, theories, history, philosophy, methods and BASIC TERMINOLOGY of science because they are science illiterates whose religious convictions make them fearful of scientific inquiry. Example: They HABITUALLY misrepresent the scientific terms theory, law, transitional, evolution, vestigial, &c. Science illiterates should not define science policy or science curricula or misinform children about basic science.
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu You can read an actual science book or you can keep puking stupid, you cowardly, fat mouth, lying ignoramus.
Report spam or abuse
It turns out that tits is in complete agreement with us all that evolutionary explanations are the only theses with rationality and evidential support.
Report spam or abuse
+ergonomover I hope she doesn't argue with us. Because obviously there is nothing more ...ahem ... annoying to us than devastating rhetoric from an angry uneducated fundamentalist. If she's trying to annoy us into submission, then it won't be long before the laughter kills us. LOL.
Report spam or abuse
(fake) Chocolate Coated Reason 7 hours ago "How or why would "nature" ever have brought these two together, much less somehow equipped both fruit and insect with the exact features needed for their mutual dependence?" This is why sane, rational people LOL at creationists.  Comedy gold.
Report spam or abuse
Common Pissant knows that if she can't get it right in her head, then brighter people can't either, and therefore it must be magical. Aww aint she so cute? Dumb as a horse, but cute.
Report spam or abuse
+Common Dissent Why don't you tell me what evidence you think is lacking for evolutionary mechanisms such as natural selection? Tell me why an atheist such as you would defend Christian creationism.
Report spam or abuse
I wonder how many creationists had their flu shots or took antibiotic medications while claiming evolution is false. It's like riding a train while denying gravity exists.
Report spam or abuse
+ergonomover : He said, and I quote: "The information needed to make functional proteins is called "gene expression"." That's sloppy, and you know it, econobooger.
Report spam or abuse
Creationists, including ID creationists, pathologically misrepresent the facts, laws, logic, theories, history, philosophy, methods and BASIC TERMINOLOGY of science because they are science illiterates whose religious convictions make them fearful of scientific inquiry. Example: They HABITUALLY misrepresent the scientific terms theory, law, transitional, evolution, vestigial, &c. Science illiterates should not define science policy or science curricula or misinform children about basic science.
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu Anyone who studies the science will say exactly the same thing. You're not disagreeing with me, you cowardly, lying, fat mouth ignoramus - you're disagreeing with the actual scientists whose books and articles you refuse to read, because you are a lying ignoramus.
Report spam or abuse
Does this sound familiar  Miss OCD?     Scrupulosity is a psychological disorder characterized by pathological guilt about moral or religious issues.  It is personally distressing, objectively dysfunctional, and often accompanied by significant impairment in social functioning.  It's a religious form of obsessive compulsive disorder.  Treating religion as a mental disorder has had successful outcomes for the religious victims, modern drugs can help cure them of this dastardly affliction.   (See Neurologist Kathleen Taylor)
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
I see giggles has completely melted down over her little sock puppet game. LOL She's spoken of nothing else for 10 hours since I left. SInce nobody has contacted me, and her Breast Reduction puppet has the hallmark of her few puppets left that can be seen, it can be confirmed it's hers.
Report spam or abuse
+Chocolate Coated Reason You are Breastie. Guilty. Done and dusted. Your own proud multi-sock history gives you away. And now you don't approve of socks? What a genius IQ you have, old hag.
Report spam or abuse
All science is falsifiable, if it isn't falsifiable then it isn't science. To reach the status of a scientific theory it also has to be observable, repeatable and testable.  The Theory of Evolution satisfies these requirements thousands of times over. Testable - With the predictions of where fossils should be found. Falsifiable - A fossil out of place would show it to be false. Observable - Speciation in the lab and in nature. Repeatable - Fruit fly experiments and animal husbandry.
Report spam or abuse
+Alfalfa Henry Remember when you're e-feelings were so hurt you had to invent new lies in order to try and cover your old lies? I'll be laughing at that for a long, long time.
Report spam or abuse
"the old outdated notion of ‘junk’ DNA that may at one time have coded for a protein in an evolutionary ancestor is utterly overturned."    Really? I'm still waiting to get a report on the use for our broken GULO gene (or the other vitamin C specific genes which end up doing nothing because the GULO step is broken. Got milk?
Report spam or abuse
+mikecucuk I should have put a <sarcasm>  </sarcasm> ^^;;;
Report spam or abuse
+Atharkas Well, it's fine now. I just didn't know you were being sarcastic. I was being subversive.
Report spam or abuse
Granville Sewell has gone from mangling the 2nd LoT to straight Argument from Incredulity. I hope he's a competent mathematician because he sucks at Thermodynamics and Logic. LMFAO
Report spam or abuse
+werriboy55 "It sure is waki. Take your lack of knowledge of Logic for instance. Real stupidity there LMAO" YOUR "logic" has resulted in you NOT BEING SURE WHETHER YOU EXIST OR NOT, has it not? WHAT could possible be MORE STUPID than that? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu Pretending you know you exist without logic or evidence - How's that for REAL STOOPID.
Report spam or abuse
If you love death and hate life, then Bill Nye is your guy.  You see in real science we use evidence.    All the evidence shows only one thing as far as evolution. When seeking the truth in the phenomenon all the evidence we can test and study always shows the same conclusion, or it is not science.  The truth is revealed when you remove your emotions from the study.  The Truth  always evokes strong emotions of denial in people, simply because most are guilty of supporting the cause of diseases.  The reason why the theroy of evolution cannot be proved is because they misinterpret all the data to say what the government wants to say.  There is no government controlled by the rich plutocrats going to allow the truth about how horribly they have managed life on earth.  The same people who sell you "save the planet", "save the whales", "save the children" and "save the chimpanzees" are the ones who are destroying all life on earth, human greed. They are not concerned about you, your children, nor your grandchildren.  The nature of greed is total selfishness and concern for one thing.  So they make up magical reasons why humans are so sickly and die so young.   The medical industry is evidence of human failures.   The medical industry in the USA spends over $9,200,000 per citizen per year in all the medical related revenues being transferred.  Disease is a "good" business.   nearly $3,000,000,000,000 per year in just the USA.   Every genetic disease rising by 10 times per capita (per 100,000 people) in less than 100 years. Some are more like 15 times (diabetes).  And we have accumulated some 17,000 genetic diseases,  The cause is infected reproduction.   You cannot share any sexual contact outside of a monogamous uninfected (clean of viral, fungal, amoebic, bacterial STD's)  marriage and have healthy babies.  And once you have any of the standard viral STD's, they never go away.  It becomes part of your reproductive cells.  There is no cure for viruses.   Cancer was 1 in 42 in 1847 as a cause of death.  Cancer was 1 in 20 at the start of the 20th century (1900).   Now it is 1 in 3 dying of this disease.   Congenital heart disease is up 200% in 29 years. We now have so many diseases that are brand new, never were seen before in all the historical records of humanity. We now have huge cancer hospitals strictly for the treatment of children.  If we did not have so many sick children they would never exist.  These are all new in the last 15 to 20 years, because of the phenomenal rise of childhood cancers.    The CDC has issued Biblical instructions for stopping STD's.  This is because STD's have risen by 20,000,000 cases each year for the past 11 years.  Most of the infected are young girls ages 13 to 24.  Second is males 13 to 24. (All at peak reproductive years) These "kids" are just  following the sexual misconduct as being good ideas of society.   Movies with sex, violence and killing as the constant and well received theme by stupid people.  Promoting sexual misconduct as being good in the classroom.  It is pure irony that most of the movie "stars" all support gun control and taking guns away from citizens, and they use guns in nearly every movie they make, brainwashing young people into a violent mindset.  They also have sex for no reason with random sexual partners as if that was a good thing to do.   The CDC clearly states that there is no safe sex outside of a marriage to an uninfected person.  (You cannot find an uninfected person according to STD statistics)This is because this massive sales job on condom use was a lie.  Kissing, touching, oral contact with any sexual area infected is not  affected by condom use.  Skin to skin contact around the "condom" will give you several diseases.   You cannot deep kiss and not get infected with HSV-1, HSV-2, HPV, HBV. HIV (HIV; if there is any  blood contact, and this is more common than you think).   Humans are totally infected today and will never allow any idea of saving the lives of the offspring to enter into the compulsive sexual immorality.  This is why we are doomed as a species to suffering, diseases, continual rise of retardation, and mothers taking their children to the hospital over and over trying to keep them alive from some horrible disease.  I have studied many hundreds of cases to the point of reading mothers "blogs" on the torture of taking their babies to the hospital as many as 50 times to keep them alive, only to have them die after the 10th surgery.  These new diseases are extremely horrible.  This is what the evidence shows.
Report spam or abuse
+GoodScienceForYou All the more reason to consider using genetic engineering to provide your children with only the best genes.
Report spam or abuse
+ExtantFrodo2 There are 17,000 genetic diseases. The chances are 100% for you to produce a diseased child, no matter what you do.
Report spam or abuse
"POTENTIAL" and "INTELLIGENCE" are just yet more of Edd's metonymic reifications for deity (A formal fallacy of logic). Not only are words like "intelligence" and "potential" simply nominalizations but woo merchants like Edd try to give them the power of agency. "completed LAST" Tautology much? "manifests visibly" Tautology much? Breath 1: "INTELLIGENCE is NOT the FINAL PRODUCT"   Breath 2: "It manifests visibly LAST" You've said in the past that all products are manifestations, so something that "manifests last" by your own assertion is also a "final product" "MATERIALISM" A key strategy in fundie apologetics is to frame crtics under antagonistic "-isms" and "-ists" and project fundie adherence onto these generalizations of their critics simply so they can poison the well and use them as ad hominem fodder.
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu "A likely story, Turkey Buzzard! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" I didn't expect you to agree !  "Well, LET THE RECORD SPEAK FOR ITSELF ON THAT, eh? " Fine by me! "You had the two mixed up before, hadn't you, Turkey Buzzard? Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" I couldn't have used a more obvious piece of rope threaded through the ring in your nose to lead you exactly where I wanted you if I'd had to expend even the slightest extra effort! (But your poor grasp of linguistics and volatile temper are a matter of record so it's no surprise you fell headlong for it)   My opening post specifically mentions the reification fallacy you were guilty of. I just needed to apply some Socratic methods so you'd spell it out! What a puppet! Looks like Numbernuts is indeed the organ grinder and you are the performing monkey after all. Priceless! "Hahahahahahahahahahaha! You don't like to be corrected, do you, Turkey Buzzard? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" You don't like it when you walk into obvious linguistic traps, do you? "Turkey Buzzard, IT IS YOU ATHEISTS WHO DECLARED WAR AGAINST GOD! So, WHY do you think you can be friends with those who follow Him?Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" "Like the prodigal son, you - FREELY - left; and, if you wish for reconciliation, then, like the prodigal son, you MUST REPENT and - FREELY - return! Either that, or you MUST remain in your SELF-IMPOSED EXILE until you are UTTERLY LOST AND PERISH FROM IT - as was nearly the fate of the prodigal son! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" ...quoth Jihadi Eddie. Spoken like a true religious fundie! ISIS espouse similar rationalisations!" 
Report spam or abuse
+Chocolate Covered Reason "...."A likely story, Turkey Buzzard! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" I didn't expect you to agree !..." For once you got something right, Turkey Buzzard! Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! "...."Well, LET THE RECORD SPEAK FOR ITSELF ON THAT, eh?" Fine by me!..." Great! "...."You had the two mixed up before, hadn't you, Turkey Buzzard? Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" I couldn't have used a more obvious piece of rope threaded through the ring in your nose to lead you exactly where I wanted you if I'd had to expend even the slightest extra effort! (But your poor grasp of linguistics and volatile temper are a matter of record so it's no surprise you fell headlong for it)..." Ugh! This is just DRIVEL! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! "....My opening post specifically mentions the reification fallacy you were guilty of. I just needed to apply some Socratic methods so you'd spell it out! What a puppet! Looks like Numbernuts is indeed the organ grinder and you are the performing monkey after all. Priceless!..." Ugh! This is just NONSENSICAL WAFFLING! Hahahahahahahahahaha! "....."Hahahahahahahahahahaha! You don't like to be corrected, do you, Turkey Buzzard? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" You don't like it when you walk into obvious linguistic traps, do you?..." Hahahahahahahahaha! All you've caught is your ding--a-linga in your zip fly, Turkey Buzzard! Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! "...."Turkey Buzzard, IT IS YOU ATHEISTS WHO DECLARED WAR AGAINST GOD! So, WHY do you think you can be friends with those who follow Him? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" "...."Like the prodigal son, you - FREELY - left; and, if you wish for reconciliation, then, like the prodigal son, you MUST REPENT and - FREELY - return! Either that, or you MUST remain in your SELF-IMPOSED EXILE until you are UTTERLY LOST AND PERISH FROM IT - as was nearly the fate of the prodigal son! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" ...quoth Jihadi Eddie. Spoken like a true religious fundie! ISIS espouse similar rationalisations!"  Do stop WHINING, Turkey Buzzard! If you want to be forgiven, you know what you MUST do - REPENT! NOTHING ELSE WILL HELP! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
Dr. Behe (father of intelligent design) in an effort to demonstrate how unlikely it was that evolution could produce anything, proceeded to write an computer program to test how many generations it would take a population to produce a specific peptide bond. He testified at the Kitzmiller vs Dover Pa trial that by his calculation from the trial runs of his program it would take a population of 10^9, 10^8 generations to evolve a new disulfide bond using only point mutations (an unnecessary restriction used only to simply his calculations). Since this is not evolution via NS but only random chance we can eliminate the generations by folding it into the population size to obtain 10^17 to get such a mutation in one generation. You will find that many bacteria in just 10 tons of soil.
Report spam or abuse
Apparently, our cluless copy-paste monkey can't spot the assertion that a population of 10^9 size multiplied by 10^8 generations, leads to a total of 10^17 members. The other assertion that this quantity of members of a bacterial population can be found in 10 tons of soil allowing for such a population to evolve a mutation of equivalent complexity to a disulfide bond is equally lost on her. Does she care to dispute the calculations of Rev. Dr. Behe?
Report spam or abuse
+ExtantFrodo2 Looks like Tits has a Behe in her bonnet !
Report spam or abuse
If, as per discovery [sic] .org, Intelligent Design is Based on Science, Not Religion how much of the bible are cdesign proponentsists prepared to admit is false, including stuff we know for certain isn't true, such as a 6,000 year old Earth, space water, global flood, etc. Anyone? Even the lone sock puppeteer with (what is it now?) 12 accounts? Or is IDiocy so bound up with Christianity that they can't bring themselves to admit that an ancient book written by ignorant desert-dwellers more than 2,000 years ago could possibly contain less knowledge than what mankind has aggregated since?
Report spam or abuse
+The Celestial Coffeepot  This clown atheist Dawkins seems to have a high regard for natural selection, she is omnipresent throughout his lectures. Sometimes it's difficult to see whether he's arguing in favour or against natural selection... He severely criticized natural selection forgiving him flawed eyeballs but he seems to be satisfied with his atheist brain, which he also owes to natural selection.
Report spam or abuse
+Michael Brown You:  ...natural selection, she is omnipresent throughout his lectures Me: Your attempt at personification of a natural phenomenon does not actually make that phenomenon into a being. You: He severely criticized natural selection forgiving him flawed eyeballs Me: Even when they are not flawed, mankind's eyesight is poorer than that of birds. Why did your sky wizard choose to endow birds with better eyesight than that of his favorite creature? Why did your sky wizard choose to endow whales with a blowhole at the top of their heads while his favorite creature has a tendency to die by choking on its food due to the sharing of a common pipe for breathing and eating? You're a fucking idiot.
Report spam or abuse
Deadhead Edd plays the unevidenced "plucked feather" card again despite being pressed for specific evidence which is unforthcoming. Hey Ho ! "YOU in fact, are the one who has been PLUCKED CLEAN OF FEATHERS, aren't you, Turkey Buzzard?" Erm...nope. (Edd's latest bout of shits and giggles can be found here): plus.google.com/u/0/b/105357787002235900971/115574859536387471187/posts/N1PBBssDSRx "Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! HOW do you determine what is HUMAN - WITHOUT REFERENCE TO SHAPE? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" Are you channelling your chimps again Edd?
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu "Hahahahahahahahahahaha! This is just DRIVEL! A non sequitur is a conclusion that is NOT LOGICALLY DERIVED from the premise of an argument! HOW can such a CONCLUSION be a QUESTION, Turkey Buzzard? Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" When it is included as a vocalized presupposition in the linguistics of a response posed as a question. You didn't read the M-W definition in its entirety did you? "That's just a LIE! An INVENTION! Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!" No it's a non-sequitur question. Screaming about it doesn't change that. Try harder "A non sequitur is an ERROR OF LOGIC - NOT NECESSARILY A DELIBERATE FALSEHOOD, Turkey Buzzard! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" "Not necessarily"? You mean it can be sometimes? Or could it simply be an example of definition #2 of "non sequitur" in Merriam-Webster which your cataracts obviously obscured during your cursory glance? "This is just DRIVEL! "Non sequitur" roughly means, "does not follow"! " "non sequitur" means exactly "it does not follow" - there's no "roughly" about it! A negation of the third person present passive of the verb "sequi". Are you seriously trying to give me a Latin lesson now? I didn't think the laughs could get any better. This should be good..... "A LIE, such as the one above regarding wife-beating does not follow ANYTHING" So you haven't stopped beating your wife then? "so what is it non sequitur to? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" It could be non-sequitur to us talking about the weather or anything not involving the subject of you beating your wife. A totally random question out of the blue that bears no relation to, or implies in its wording a conclusion that does not logically follow from what has been said previously, is a non-sequitur by definition. I love it when you start arguing with Merriam-Webster. Maybe the second clear definition has become obscured through extended periods of storage up your arse! In any case you've just clearly admitted it "does not follow ANYTHING" (In bold italicised capitals too!)  [Foot-bullet] "Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! You're trying to distract attention from your HUMILIATION after being PLUCKED CLEAN OF FEATHERS AGAIN, eh Turkey Buzzard? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" How would I be "humiliated" by you trying unsuccessfully to redefine non-sequitur? "Full Definition of NON SEQUITUR" No it isn't. Not as you've quoted it here. "1:  an inference that does not follow from the premises...etc." and what about definition #2? I notice you omitted that one (which I spelled out for you in the original thread) [I quote from my post of 27 Jul 2015 - plus.google.com/u/0/b/105357787002235900971/115574859536387471187/posts/N1PBBssDSRx] _"What's a non-requiter? If you mean "non-sequitur" then I direct you to Merriam Webster's dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/non%20sequitur)"_ ******************************************* non sequitur       noun non se·qui·tur \ˈnän-ˈse-kwə-tər also -ˌtu̇r\ : a statement that is not connected in a logical or clear way to anything said before it Full Definition of NON SEQUITUR 1:  an inference that does not follow from the premises; specifically :  a fallacy resulting from a simple conversion of a universal affirmative proposition or from the transposition of a condition and its consequent 2:  a statement (as a response) that does not follow logically from or is not clearly related to anything previously said ******************************************* Hope that helps. Note the clear definition #2 relating to a non-sequitur response to something said previously by someone else. Come on, Edd you can do better than this..... "Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! Is that what you call your publishing of EDITED versions of conversations we've had, Turkey Buzzard? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" I said you'd appeal to edited records! I quote from 26th July "Again", Edd? This is the point where, when pressed for even a single example, you start flapping and diverting and appealing to "edited" records. I direct people to the following youtube link to the same original Google+ conversation which indicates which posts have been edited in the thread www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU&lc=z13pzzlp2zvxwfmvx23tx1sy3xy4c3nup Isn't it strange how the word "(Edited)" only appears next to several of your posts and none of mine in that thread, eh? The Google+ link (plus.google.com/u/0/b/105357787002235900971/115574859536387471187/posts/N1PBBssDSRx) is a direct link to the original Google+ thread which you started! I cannot edit your posts Edd! What a clown! The YouTube link to the same conversation which shows "(Edited)" tags shows you're the only one who has edited posts in that thread!
Report spam or abuse
Recently, my account's impostor vomited, while bravely disabling replies: If evolution is truly a science, then it must follow that its core principles are plausible....Can we honestly say that a competent review of the evolution literature demonstrates a forthright scientific effort to evaluate the mathematical probabilities of these copying errors actually leading to plausible conclusions?   I dare say the answer is NO! proving again, that personal incredulity is the only argument IDiots have to "counter" evolution.
Report spam or abuse
Ahh - must be the myth of Brahma, or maybe Cronos. Or do you care to tell us which sky wizard you pray to daily?
Report spam or abuse
Do many scientists really reject evolution? The following post was left on a list (by DonExodus2) of dissenters from Darwinism:  Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science Shared on Google+ · 6 months ago "We have all seen the Discovery Institutes list of scientists rejecting evolution. I analyzed the list, and emailed its signees. The truth of the matter is, DI lied repeatedly when constructing the list, and, by their own admission, even IF the numbers are skewed hugely in favor or the creationists, this still leaves .0027% of scientists in the US rejecting evolution ." (such a whopping number!)
Report spam or abuse
+Common Dissent (the echo of empty repetition...) It matters not what you believe and/or care... your actions speak for you: You defend Jesus by way of Christian pseudoscience. 
Report spam or abuse
+ergonomover he's yet another fat mouth, lying creationist punk
Report spam or abuse
I used to believe in God 100% but now as I'm older and are learning more and more things I'm beginning to doubt everything in the bible
Report spam or abuse
+Fallible Fiend Don't be melodramatic! I'm just a PEST-KILLER! And DAMNED GOOD AT MY JOB! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
Did you hear the one about the creatard who thought that observational science and historical science were legitimate distinctions? That's the standard definition of creatard isn't it? LMAO
Report spam or abuse
+mikecucuk  Psychologists could write volumes on her mental problems. 
Report spam or abuse
+Gary Belliferous I'll do you one better: Psychologists could retire early on her mental problems.
Report spam or abuse
Why is the quality default always set on 144. No one wants to watch a fuzzy bill nye talk about how bad creationism is.
Report spam or abuse
+John Smith If you find out how to set the default to maximum, let me know. This is very irksome.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
When you observe an effect whose cause you cannot observe, which of the conclusions below would be the most reasonable for you to draw: 1. The effect has NO CAUSE 2. The effect is produced by a CAUSE THAT DOES NOT EXIST - i.e. "CHANCE" 3. The effect is produced by a CAUSE that DOES EXIST BUT IS UNOBSERVABLE TO YOU - SUCH AS GOD!
Report spam or abuse
+Transtlan Tico "So first you claim na ad infinitum line of causality..." REPETITIVE DRIVEL! Hahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu We can observe gravity in action, can we observe the cause of gravity?
Report spam or abuse
Poor bill nye. I'll pray for him.
Report spam or abuse
+matchlock fun"WARNING  –  The content of your post will not be tolerated by the dozen or so atheist trolls... " = Argument for intelligent design? I don't think so. You said "I don't believe in any deities" - looks like the 'atheist troll' here is you buddy.
Report spam or abuse
hmm. maybe it was just a warning
Report spam or abuse
One very good reason one might find so called convergent evolution in microbial families is that ingestion of other microbes often leads to incorporating their DNA. Unless you can show there was no history of such ingestion claiming actual convergent evolution for microbes is not good science.
Report spam or abuse
+Atharkas "It's so amusing to look at her shoot herself in the foot that she placed in her own mouth beforehand!" Still missed her brain by a country mile, though!
Report spam or abuse
+Chocolate Covered Reason A mile, nah! I'd say 1.6 kilometer! (She is canadian so, in theory, she should be using the metric system. Then again, I doubt she has the mental capacity to use it.)
Report spam or abuse
I don't have the faith to believe in evolution something from nothing doesn't make sense..engineers need to believe in man from monkey...lol..WHY???
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
Anybody that disliked this will probably die by natural selection in a couple of years.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
I reject the atheism faith because: 1: They have no arguments 2: They have no evidence 3: They pretend that atheism doesn't take faith 4: Most atheists feel ashamed because they know what they are is wrong, which is mostly true when they live in a religious family, most of these atheists quit religion because of things like: masturbation, stealing, lying etc. which are sin but they still want to do them but their religion doesn't allow it so they quit their religion
Report spam or abuse
+Fallible Fiend the Cowardly Fat Mouth Lying Ignoramus Punk Fallible Fiend the Cowardly Fat Mouth Lying Ignoramus Punk: Sock account. The entire post is drivel. Blocked.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
+Breast Reduction After all this only took me a few minutes. Tits will be back though.
Report spam or abuse
So, let me get this straight. Some bronze age illiterate goat herders had "visions" so I am supposed to ignore the work of Newton, Einstein, Bohrs, Feynman, Susskind, Hawking, Darwin, Dawkins, etc so I can worship a deity who had this as his "global plan": "ywhw/jesus sacrificed yhwh/jesus to yhwh/jesus to save us from yhwh/jesus"?
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu "Shall I QUOTE the DICTIONARY DEFINITION of "Creationism" to you? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" Oh would you....please !!!!!!!! Let me help you http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/creationism
Report spam or abuse
Tylerosaurus: Yet another sock account. Yet more absurd assertions. (Where the fuck do you guys get this stuff?) Blocked.
Report spam or abuse
+Nicholas Christie-Blick "Tylerosaurus: Yet another sock account. Yet more absurd assertions. (Where the fuck do you guys get this stuff?) Blocked." Spoken like a mature, ethical scientist, no doubting it whatsoever. Is that 27 or 28 blocked accounts now? Are you an OCD neat freak?
Report spam or abuse
Atheism means being grounded in an illusion of fake "reality" while ignoring truth
Report spam or abuse
+Tylerosaurus Tylerosaurus: Yet another sock account. Yet more absurd assertions. (Where the fuck do you guys get this stuff?) Blocked.
Report spam or abuse
Atheists don't believe in godlike beings but at the same time believe in aliens. Hypocritical much?
Report spam or abuse
+toshtao1   Ask Abraham, he had an idea to cut off the top of his cock and ended up marrying his half sister, the result?  Muslims, Jews and Christians. 
Report spam or abuse
+toshtao1 Okay Spock I think I have had enough of this pointless argument. It was pointless the moment you decided to determine who I was and use it as a basis for all your arguments before you began arguing with me. You are taking everything I say and twisting it into something super complicated. Not remotely. I'm simply explaining to you how your arguments aren't valid. If it's super complicated to you, I can use smaller words. But I do have to point out your logic of thinking. You say if there is no evidence for alien life then they do not exist. I never once said that. That was all you. And even if I did say that, do you or do you not find lack of evidence problematic in confirming the existence of anything? Just a simple "yes" or "no." Therefore, you are suggesting as of right now that aliens don't exist, which makes you a naive fool since you are suggesting that humans are the ultimate species in this giant universe. That is what you call arrogant. I'm not suggesting any such thing. Again, that is all you. All I can conclude from such a lack of evidence is that there is probably nothing out there. I'm more than willing to change my mind in the presence of a communication or some other supporting evidence of existence from an extra-terrestrial race. Even if we humans are the only sentient creatures in the universe we will eventually become gods anyways. Whether it is anti aging (Greek Goddess Venus's ability) or mind uploading it will happen. Humans will never become omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. Our nature prevents us from becoming these things, so your speculation isn't valid here. Also, if your mind were to eventually be uploaded into an artificial brain floating in a vat of life-sustaining fluids, are you going to worship technology? Yet, according to you, because we haven't discovered it yet there is no point pursuing it. Again, I never said that. That was all you. You're gonna stop putting words into my mouth right now.Do I make myself clear?  I've never once done that to you, so what gives you the right to do that to me? You are good at understanding science and especially overly complex grammar, but you lack creativity and innovative thinking. This summary judgment of me from you is based on your limited interaction with me. You don't actually know what I'm capable in terms of creativity and innovative thinking. How about I accuse you of the same thing? Would you call that a fair assessment of your personality based on my limited interaction with you? No? Then cut it out. Therefore, you are a naive, a little above average IQ, arrogant fool blinded by biasm and prejudice against anything you find ridiculous. It's "bias", and you're painting a completely incorrect picture of me. I don't believe in things that don't make any sense to me or have no inductive support for their existence. What exactly do you find unreasonable about waiting to believe a claim until it is adequately supported by verifiable evidence? Also FYI, labor is for low IQ people. Oh, like you've never done yard work or some other job that requires physical exertion. You sound either like a self-entitled, spoiled teenager or a Marxist when you say that.
Report spam or abuse
Numbernuts plays her onion card yet again. It's only a whole week since she last embarrassed herself on this very topic. Here's how her altercation with +matchlockfun was left: MLF - "...ploidy variants of the same stock. That's information for ya. Weird, hey?" Tits - "Yeh, ploidy variants. And that's why the "onion test" is nonsensical"
Report spam or abuse
MLF - "The "onion test" refers to the C-value. Not to repeated coding sequences. I hope that smarts helps". Tits - "You just don't get it. The 'C-value paradox' is conflated by the obvious presence of polyploidy in the onion, dufus clown" MLF - "The diploid onion? The diploid human has only about a quarter the pg quantity. Talk us through your story there, religious guru."
Report spam or abuse
So in giggle-tits world, onions are "obvious polyploids". Let's watch and see where she goes from here. She never did get back to us.........Expect the mother of all responses today - she's only had a week to try and dig herself out of her hole so it must be one hell of a humdinger she's about to let loose on the molecular biology community.....
Report spam or abuse
Athiest's : Gets Butthurt because some people believe in God(s)(dess)
Report spam or abuse
What does Bill Nye know about Darwinian evolution? Nothing, he's an engineer. I know a Tibetan Monk living in in San Francisco. Hmmm let's ask him about his opinion on poker. I know an auto mechanic in northern New Jersey. Lets find out what he thinks about raising tropical fish. Nye is using his celebrity to advance his belief in atheism and to be honest he is a scum bag. A pile of garbage masquerading as informed. The idiotic things he said in this video proves that man's hubris is more powerful than his sense. Nye has no career and is now looking for any spotlight he can find. That's why he debated Ken Ham. Even though atheists from across the planet told him not to because it was a bad idea, the selfish and egotistical piece of crap needed the spotlight more. It's all about him. Isn't that what selfish genes do anyway? Isn't he just following his genetic programming? No, he's just an uninformed selfish prick.
Report spam or abuse
+Robert Sparks 'That's not what's happening. That God doesn't exist for you then THAT determines what's logical to you or not.' No. What's logical for me are things that make sense. What's logical for me are things that stand up to scrutiny. The position you are describing that I need to take (and this is the position you are describing) is that I need to accept a claim that he exists and then accept any claims pertaining to him without questioning them. That's not happening.
Report spam or abuse
+lordlandraid The difficulty with claims about God is not merely the certainty with which those claims are made on no basis beyond authority and tradition. It is that the equally certain claims of different traditions are mutually incompatible and in many cases known not to be true on the basis of empirical evidence. That is why the maintenance of faith requires denial and refusal even to consider readily available information deemed potentially threatening to whatever is believed.
Report spam or abuse
I have to say this bill nye looks old as hell
Report spam or abuse
I really have to wonder what qualifications a gibbering IDiot has to determine whether something is "probabilistically plausible" simply because it doesn't fit her iron-age fairy tale.
Report spam or abuse
Still no response on a belief in sky wizards other than Yahweh, I see. Must be one you are ashamed of admitting to.
Report spam or abuse
The primary origin-of-life researcher involved with these experiments stated in 2006 that “the reason this is significant is that it has been proposed that clay promotes interesting chemical reactions relating to the origin of life."   "However, in our experiments, the organic compounds became so strongly held to the clay particles that they could not undergo any further chemical reactions."
Report spam or abuse
They not only carry the instructions to manufacture the cellular machinery that converts and utilizes chemical energy, but they also have everything they need to capture and store raw sunlight energy―as well as produce and secrete a sticky substance to which their cells adhere in order to form colonies.
Report spam or abuse
Guzman suspected that some ancient cell-like system was an integral step toward the first cell. This “prebiotic metabolism” must have operated “without enzymes playing a role,” presumably because enzymes are molecule-sized machines that are too rich in information to have arrived by any time-and-chance process alone.  However, experiments involving prefabricated organic compounds that were injected into deep hydrothermal vent environments have totally failed.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
+MikecuCUNT the faillible fiend pretending shithead And there goes your comment, you steamed little boy.
Report spam or abuse
I believe in "Intelligent Design", but the intelligence is coming from random variations constantly being sorted out by the "smarts" of all these "critters" looking for their next meal while trying to avoid becoming someone else's meal.      Curious how all these religious believers can be so blind to the obvious.    The idea that species can be changed has long been obvious to farmers selecting and breeding their live stock for desired traits.     The significance of Darwin's 1859 book is it ended the controversy  over the idea that one species could eventually change into another.    When the scientific minded read that book they concluded that it couldn't have happened any other way.
Report spam or abuse
+wallacewithoutgromit "I believe in "Intelligent Design", but the intelligence is coming from random variations constantly being sorted out by the "smarts" of all these "critters" looking for their next meal while trying to avoid becoming someone else's meal.      Curious how all these religious believers can be so blind to the obvious...." Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha! WHAT is CAUSING these "random variations" - if not INTELLIGENT ACTIVITY? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! "... The idea that species can be changed has long been obvious to farmers selecting and breeding their live stock for desired traits...." They are ALSO aware of the VERY STRICT LIMITS of such changes, aren't they? Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha! "....The significance of Darwin's 1859 book is it ended the controversy  over the idea that one species could eventually change into another. When the scientific minded read that book they concluded that it couldn't have happened any other way." By "scientific-minded", you mean ATHEISTS, don't you? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! People who DENY THE EXISTENCE OF GOD AND INTELLIGENCE have NO OPTION but to conclude that ALL EVENTS JUST OCCUR WITHOUT CAUSE/FOR NO REASON, isn't that so? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
Yet another day, yet not a single empirical evidence of an intelligent agent/deity is provided. Not a single thing that makes the scientific theory of evolution false. Why can't they present a single thing to support their claim?
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu You finally admit that what you said was nonsense! You are finally starting to wake up!
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
Wow I believe I hit rock bottom Internet, I think I has more sympathy for nazis than this comment section and this video, I used to respect bill nye, but he should of just stayed out, everything is a theory to humans God and evolution alike no one is right, you all are pitiful and should just get along fucking children.
Report spam or abuse
User Otar the mad said (15 hours ago), in a private yet visible conversation: "a christian can't possibly become an engineer? and they call us stupid... " His correspondent Naruto Uzumaki pointed out Bill Nye didn't say "Christians". Otar tried to explain why he finds Bill Nye closed-minded:  "the type of science that evolution and creationism are in are  COMPLETELY  different then the type of science engineering is in" Perhaps Otar is unaware of the rising use of evolutionary algorithms designed to mimic natural selection. They are used in engineering and robotics (and much more). A good Christian engineer would not pretend they don't work. Good thing most Christians accept some form of evolution, based on mountains of evidence.
Report spam or abuse
+Gary Belliferous Yeah. It's an interesting point , I often think about it. When I read back on old discussions with Alan Clarke and various others, I invariably see myself making the same mistake over and over - that is, I WRONGLY assume they can't be that dense, or that uninformed, or that dishonest. I simple PRESUME nobody is as faulty as all that. It's never clear when talking to them, it's only apparent afterwards, when you can see their projections of their own inability to grasp the topic, and their assumption that they're getting away with it. One thing I see myself saying so many times is that I CAN SEE what they're doing, so why do they think no-one else can. Yet it's not until later, on re-reading, that I can see JUST HOW MUCH bullshit they think is successfuly sneaking past. 
Report spam or abuse
+matchlockfun   I wander around 18 websites and no, I'm never surprised at the level of religious stupidity.  It's actually depressing to see how many lives have been ruined and stolen by ancient religious beliefs.  These people live in a flat colourless world, you can hear that in their words, I actually feel sorry for them, like you do too. 
Report spam or abuse
I studied holistic health for over 8 years and kept up with the science on this.  Bill Nye has "bowel cancer" shown in his face.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
+GoodScienceForYou Thanks, now providing I believed you in the first place, I now know what companies products to avoid since, provided you are one of the designers, they are shoddily built and can be trusted about as far as I could throw them.
Report spam or abuse
"Only the fool says in his heart "There is no god"" - Psalm 14 "Atheists are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none of them who does good." - Psalm
Report spam or abuse
Lol. Fuck your bible.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
+Breast Reduction Who underwent the most almighty of meltdowns right here, last year. Yes right here folks. But guess what? She's back and this time it's personal !
Report spam or abuse
The chew toy said : " But your exercise of abstract thought to confirm facts is completely DIVORCED from mere reproduction and survival. I see a problem here." Only you sees a problem. To be able to use abstract though helped the survival of our ancestor. It is a product of our evolution. Your very argument is evidence that evolution is real.
Report spam or abuse
+Extant Frodo2 I'm sorry, but what part about "express surprise-disgust" (from your own source) was too complicated for you, pee-wee? Stick around and we'll school and rule you some more on Canada, religion, science and the world. Again, how did you get so clueless?
Report spam or abuse
+Atharkas This is just DRIVEL! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
FUNgineer Sock Account: Blocked.
Report spam or abuse
+Nicholas Christie-Blick I wonder if youtube keeps track of the number of times an account is blocked and takes action accordingly when flags are raised.
Report spam or abuse
+ExtantFrodo2   Time to raise the flag Mr 2, enough is enough.
Report spam or abuse
This is a sack religious video, and I find it shocking, and appalling. Bill Nye, Just because a portion of the American society doesn't believe what YOU believe, doesn't mean anyone's being held back. People can believe and teach their children whatever they want to believe. I'm glad you don't get to say what belief systems children will be taught by their parents, because that's their choice. If you want to brain wash kids so much into believe what you believe in, why not have your own?
Report spam or abuse
Kids should be taught about creationism and its most certainly appropriate for them Bill Nye. You disappoint me Bill. Now jog on everyone else.
Report spam or abuse
+MethodOx You just contradicted yourself. Again, the passage from unicellular lifeforms to multicellular has been observed. Exemple  : https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21028184.300-lab-yeast-make-evolutionary-leap-to-multicellularity/
Report spam or abuse
"Oh no! I don't believe in evolution. Now I can't study any science or any subject for that matter ever again." What makes evolution have anything to do with how to engineer a bridge, or understand how stars or formed or anything that's not biology? I'm not saying evolution isn't a thing, but the points you make are skewed.
Report spam or abuse
+matchlock fun​ Oh, so suddenly you can't post a link to a scientific article you've written? And you're telling ME to think? ROTFLMAO XD Well, any excuse for a pussy like you. ^_^
Report spam or abuse
“In science's pecking order, evolutionary biology lurks somewhere near the bottom, far closer to phrenology than to physics. For evolutionary biology is a historical science, laden with history's inevitable imponderables.  We evolutionary biologists cannot generate a Cretaceous Park to observe exactly what killed the dinosaurs; and, unlike "harder" scientists, we usually cannot resolve issues with a simple experiment, such as adding tube A to tube B and noting the color of the mixture."
Report spam or abuse
-  Jerry Coyne  Professor of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, Of Vice and Men  The New Republic  April 3 2000  p.27
Report spam or abuse
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! Turkey Buzzard, WHY NOT TRY PRESENTING A LOGICAL ARGUMENT instead thinking dark insinuations alone will do your work for you against my arguments? THEY WON'T, you know? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
+Roger Campbell "Bone fingers in bat wings and whale fins" Sounds like one of those so-called "hopeful monsters" of the Darwinists! Hahahahahahahahahahaha! More like "HOPELESS MONSTER", if you ask me; None of them survive more than a few hours at most, do they? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
Denial of reality is unique to atheists, they are technically the stupidest... i mean you could say vegetarians but generally atheism is where the most stupidity and denial and rage happens, people still move from atheism and that is largely because of the unintellectual faggotry and the general misunderstanding of science... When you have a portion of the population that don't believe in God, it holds everybody back, i mean Christianity is the main idea in all of life science... livling life when you are an atheist is like trying to do geology without believing in tectonic plates, you're not going to get anywhere, your whole world is just going to be a mystery instead of an exiting place As my old professor carl sagan said "Atheism by defenition is stupid" Once in a while i get people that really or they claim that they don't believe in God, and my response is WHY? The world becomes so complicated when you don't, there is so much evidence and believing in God explains so much and your world view as an atheist just becomes self inconsistent, if you want to deny the truth and be an atheist then that's fine, but don't make your kids do it, we need scientifically literate voters and engineers You know in a couple of sentries i am sure that atheism won't exist, there is no evidence for it
Report spam or abuse
+Tylerosaurus Tylerosaurus: Yet another sock account. Yet more absurd assertions. (Where the fuck do you guys get this stuff?) Blocked.
Report spam or abuse
Likewise, a review article in the journal BioEssays reported that despite a vast increase in the amount of data since Darwin’s time, “our ability to reconstruct accurately the tree of life may not have improved significantly over the last 100 years,” and that, “[d]espite increasing methodological sophistication, phylogenies derived from morphology, and those inferred from molecules, are not always converging on a consensus."
Report spam or abuse
The knowledge currently stored in the libraries of the world is estimated at 10^18 bits.  If it were possible for this information to be stored in DNA molecules, 1 per cent of the volume of a pinhead would be sufficient for this purpose. If, on the other hand, this information were to be stored with the aid of megachips, we would need a pile higher than the distance between the earth and the moon.
Report spam or abuse
Bill Nye is ignorant on this subject. Sure I agree with him when he fits his house with solar panels/wind turbine, because I believe we need to be good stewards of this planet God gave us, but he states that creationism is just plain wrong. He does not even go through the trouble of differentiating between the different views of creationism, and ignores that some views align with that of evolution, but with a guided hand in the process. Take the present or future for example, if bacteria/virus, etc. knew we were genetically engineering them for our purposes, should they deny our guiding hand in the process which many could call creation ? How about when we eventually are successful to manipulate the human being by D.N.A. designs that change who we are, and what we do. Would he think that creationism that accepts all the current timetables for the universe still ignorant ? How is he so sure he is not the ant in the glass, and God is the being on the outside looking down ? His arrogance is baffling, simply baffling.
Report spam or abuse
+Bungalo Bill You are right, creationism being right is an assertion without evidence that can thus be rejected.
Report spam or abuse
+Annonymous4Life '-but he states that creationism is just plain wrong.' And rightly so, because it is. Even if you plan to go down the semantic route, he's obviously talking about the young earth version, so your comment is unnecessary.
Report spam or abuse
Mathematics is a case in point. As Chomsky observed, paraphrasing Wallace, mathematical capabilities: “could not have evolved by natural selection; it’s impossible because everybody’s got them, and nobody’s ever used them, except for a very tiny fringe of people in very recent times.  Plainly it developed in some other way."
Report spam or abuse
Denton continues: Ancient African hunters were equipped with all the basic linguistic and cognitive potential that modern human beings share. These they never used. The great frescos of Lascaux and Les Combarelles were painted only thirty thousand years ago. Written languages are only five thousand years old. Only during the past five hundred years have human beings undertaken a scientific revolution.
Report spam or abuse
It is curious that these human powers were acquired over only a few million years. Not only was the interval short, but the miracle occurred in small populations with limited reproduction rates and long generational times. Selection may be a powerful force, but it works effectively ONLY when given a large number of mutations. The size of DNA sequence space searched during primate evolution is a trivial fraction of that searched by bacteria in the human gut in a single day.
Report spam or abuse
If any one of these eleven parts were missing, the whole system would fail. In that case the body's ability to control its sodium content would be lost, resulting in death. In Darwin's Black Box, biochemist Michael Behe has characterized as "irreducibly complex" any system where the absence of a single part renders it useless.
Report spam or abuse
Explaining how such a system could arise via the unguided Darwinian mutation/selection mechanism, where each piece of the system must contribute an advantage even before the whole is complete, remains a major stumbling block for modern evolutionary theory. The system our body uses to control its sodium content would seem to demonstrate irreducible complexity.
Report spam or abuse
"the supposed natural mechanisms responsible for the fossil record in the lab with on-demand, real-time verifiable results" Are you asking science to make fossils in a laboratory. If not, what mechanisms are you referring to?
Report spam or abuse
+Nuclear Fallout Careful where you step, Socks McGee. You're walking the razor's edge between philosophical fratricide and... well, whatever it is you've resigned to be in your life right now. Still can't tell me if you're an atheist or not? That fence post must be riding up in your backside (which explains your behavior).
Report spam or abuse
+Gary Belliferous:  "With the predictions of where fossils should be found." Hardly.  Please point me to the "prediction" made by evolution that 20+ animal phyla should make a geologically abrupt appearance in the Cambrian.
Report spam or abuse
If all junk DNA have functions, then how come no creationist or ID proponent has been able to predict what these functions are? Just a little something to keep Numbernuts up at night and staring at the ceiling.
Report spam or abuse
+matchlock fun "Hypocrite liar" says the guy who can't name, let alone predict, a single function of junk DNA in fulfillment of the question I initially posed. I'm giving you an ultimatum: Either put up or shut up. If you can't name, let alone predict, a single function of junk DNA that isn't a thinly-veiled and overly-complicated jab at GENOME from CM or DI, then it's time that you hit the road, jack.
Report spam or abuse
+mikecucuk Looks like it's neither put up nor shut up, but rather 'pretend the ultimatum never happened and slink away'.
Report spam or abuse
"Truth be told, evolution hasn’t yielded many practical or commercial benefits. Yes, bacteria evolve drug resistance, and yes, we must take countermeasures, but beyond that there is not much to say. Evolution cannot help us predict what new vaccines to manufacture because microbes evolve unpredictably. But hasn’t evolution helped guide animal and plant breeding? Not very much...”
Report spam or abuse
"Most improvement in crop plants and animals occurred long before we knew anything about evolution, and came about by people following the genetic principle of ‘like begets like’.  Even now, as its practitioners admit, the field of quantitative genetics has been of little value in helping improve varieties.  Future advances will almost certainly come from transgenics, which is not based on evolution at all."
Report spam or abuse
-   Jerry Coyne  Professor of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, Nature  August 31 2006  p.984
Report spam or abuse
People really like to go against the tides when it comes down to what people believe in on how the Earth was made and what has gotten us to this point in history. As a youth raised in the clash between Creation and Science, I think I need to remind others that it doesn't really matter. I honestly only see having factual knowledge is the purpose of how the world was created and evolution. Since it is so slow we cannot see it, why bother? Yes, it demonstrates how we got to where we are, but is it nothing more than facts after that? And I've never seen many respectable religious youth in my day and age fully reject science. What irks me about Bill Nye is that, despite how a good sum of religions in the world call for acts of peace, love, charity, and coexistence with nature, why does he have to be blunt with denying anyone's beliefs? It's quite rude to outwardly deject a religion, you see, and I'm apparently being dejected. Yeah, so what if I'm a Christian? That doesn't mean I am lacking an open mind. I accept the Big Bang and evolution as God's "steps" to mankind. I try to find symbolic representations of science inside of The Bible to help connect the two, such as in Genesis, during the description of creation, man is the most recent and final life form to come into play on Earth. It would take some time to go into detail with every connection I have made so far, but I don't want to make this impossibly long, just long. But in all seriousness, people shouldn't go around spewing literal hate speech until they've sat down and analyzed things like I have in order to make both sides are happy with the end result. It is one of my two future careers, becoming a Christian pastor, that is.
Report spam or abuse
+matchlockfun I was more on the lines of addressing +ExtantFrodo2's comment calling Christians 'cromags'. Also, why does Nicholas persist at annoying me with his constant rambling and calling my beliefs nonsense. I never said science was nonsense and idiotic. I'm not the angry one here, +Nicholas Christie-Blick, and it's no wonder some people in religions choose not to accept science when people like you shove  a basic 'fuck your culture' down their throat.  
Report spam or abuse
+Mike Riles  What was your posting of "boring, end of discussion" if not a fuck you to everyone trying to help?
Report spam or abuse
Hopefully the ppl will grow up in the comments. this guy is just giving his opinion in the long run no one will remember it lol instead just let it go. You will never change someone's mind and how they live it.
Report spam or abuse
+Common Dissent You forgot to include yourself and your sock accounts on that list of cyberbullies and exclude everyone you listed so far. That's the only thing that needs fixing. ^_^
Report spam or abuse
Right on, thanks for the warning. Though my only issue was with him telling me how to raise my kids.. just the American in me I guess lol.
Report spam or abuse
Okay- so I'm supposed to believe in evolution because it helps the research of evolution gain more knowledge?
Report spam or abuse
+pridelandlions No. You're supposed to accept evolution as true because it's demonstrated to have occurred and still occur.
Report spam or abuse
Source of the Chew toy's latest canard : Evolution, a theory in crisis.... written in 1985. No actual criticism of the scientific theory and outdated nonsense, it's all she has!
Report spam or abuse
+Common Dissent (that echo again...) It matters not what you believe and/or care... your actions speak for you: You defend Jesus by way of Christian pseudoscience. 
Report spam or abuse
Fictional Santa answers her own questions, godunit, godunit, godunit, godunit godunit, the comedy of vacuous fundies.
Report spam or abuse
+Moderator (U-Banning bad users)  I'm wiping the tears from creationist cheeks as fast as I can, you wait in the corner with your cap on till it's your turn. 
Report spam or abuse
So what im getting from this is that people who don't believe in evolution cant be successful in a science career. Sounds pretty idiotic if you ask me.
Report spam or abuse
+Caiden Ortiz Smooth... Wanna try insulting his mother next?...
Report spam or abuse
Wallace’s Enigma Michael Denton: ”It is not language alone that seems absurdly powerful.  Human beings all share the potential for higher intellectual functioning.  Just as it is hard to envisage the utility of recursion on those brutal unforgiving plains, the same is true of our abilities in the fields of art, mathematics, and music. How could they have arisen by a series of cumulative steps governed by natural selection millennia before their utility was manifest?
Report spam or abuse
ddfe More than a century ago, Alfred Russel Wallace noted correctly that brain size is today more or less uniform across the human species. Assuming that brain size is a marker of intellectual ability, Wallace reasoned that prehistoric man did not use his brain to its capacity. The human brain was, for prehistoric man, “an instrument beyond the needs of its possessor,” and “of a kind and degree far beyond what he ever requires to do."
Report spam or abuse
Why should this be so? This is Wallace’s Enigma.
Report spam or abuse
Here is the next part the creationists always leave out (from biologist Jerry Coyne): As far as I know, there have been only two genuine commercial applications of evolutionary theory. One is the use of ‘directed evolution’ to produce commercial products (such as enzymes to protect crop plants from herbicides). The other is the clever use of insecticide-free ‘pest refuges’ to stop herbivorous insects evolving resistance to herbicides containing Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxins, a strategy derived from principles of population genetics. There will certainly be more of these to come. And evolutionary algorithms are used in designing computer programs, and may have uses in engineering and economics .
Report spam or abuse
+ergonomover Ho Ho Ha Ha Hee Hee. I just enlightened Edd E Coyote on Numbernuts' non-belief confession after he'd quoted Corinthians 6:14 at me - and he blew a gasket: Me: "Well ain't that a turn up for the books?....Edd E Coyote defending a self-confessed non-believer! Priceless. Is Numbernuts not capable of holding his own dick, eh Edd?" Edd:  "Am I expected to accept your LIES about other people when I already know how much you LIE about ME, Turkey Buzzard?Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" So which is it Numbernuts? Do you believe in a deity or not? Was it not you who exclaimed in one of your petulant outbursts : "Since I don't believe in any deity, I don't give a rat's ass that cancer exists!"
Report spam or abuse
+Chocolate Covered Reason Not long ago, anti-f*ggot zaki was defending (faker) Owen Atkins, who left his long-time gay lover last year. Now zaki will defend a self-admitted atheist? What next? HahahaI have a new name for the faker account below: Cerebral Flatulence
Report spam or abuse
Why is there some who still dont believe in evolution it completely baffles me. Its not a theory anymore its a fact there's consensus in the scientific community all evidence points towards evolution. Creationism is a complete joke all sciences whether it be geology to biology suggests creationism is false. Please if you still believe in creationism you really need to go back to school and take some basic courses. Its completely disgusting that we have this much ignorance towards science. Lets just put it like this do you believe in an ancient book or hundreds of years of scientific study and now to the point where over 97% of scientist agree that evolution is now a fact. For me im going with the 97% of scientist but its up to you
Report spam or abuse
Lets turn the heat up a little, shall we?
Report spam or abuse
+Breast Reduction We know how hot and bothered we can make Tits
Report spam or abuse
+Breast Reduction Simply by posting a batch of innocent little comments, intelligently designed to cause the utmost irritation in the Breast Region
Report spam or abuse
If there is no UNCONDITIONAL EXISTENCE - i.e. GOD - there can be NO CONDITIONAL EXISTENCE either! CONDITIONAL EXISTENCE - TO WHICH CATEGORY EVERYTHING AFTER THE BIG BANG BELONGS - CAN ONLY DERIVE FROM UNCONDITIONAL EXISTENCE; OR DO YOU THINK IT DERIVES FROM NOTHINGNESS - MAGICALLY? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! CONDITIONAL EXISTENCE IS THE UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE OF THE EXISTENCE OF UNCONDITIONAL EXISTENCE - GOD!
Report spam or abuse
+Mike Lushey "YOU'RE NOT REALLY EXPECTING THEM TO SPEAK ENGLISH, are you" "If a lion told you" ROTFLMFAO@u...etc..." EVEN ATOMS AND MOLECULES CAN TALK TO YOU, SHIT EATER - never mind sophisticated animals like lions! You just have to understand their language! HOW DO YOU THINK THAT GENES CAN BE DECODED, for instance, if they didn't have a language? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! These STUPID atheists(shakes head)! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
CONCLUSION   The methodology for inferring common descent has broken down.( Proponents of neo-Darwinian evolution are forced into reasoning that similarity implies common ancestry, except for when it doesn’t. And when it doesn’t, they appeal to all sorts of ad hoc rationalizations to save common ancestry. Tellingly, the one assumption and view that they are not willing to jettison is the overall assumption of common ancestry itself.
Report spam or abuse
Evolution is a theory(a belief)it isn't fact, no matter how much you want it to be. Evolution tries to explain how life evolved through natural selection, but how did life start in the first place Bill? Answer that one genius. And you need many species to already exist for natural selection even to work, so how did they get there? Answer that one genius. Evolution has never explained how a single celled organism has evolved into a full central nervous system. Ever. This might shock you, but I don't believe in evolution, and my world isn't a mystery, and it's still exciting.
Report spam or abuse
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE has ironically been blocked.
Report spam or abuse
+Chocolate Covered Reason Futile's account was created the exact same day as Dr len. (sept 11 2006)
Report spam or abuse
You'd think they'd learn and stop already.
Report spam or abuse
I can hardly wait for the almighty scientist Nicholas Christie Blick to block me. He has to, since I don`t appear to agree with his high and mighty scientist`s views on evolution... ...even though he`s not: a geneticist, a molecular biologist, a paleontologist, but merely a geologist. ...then again, who really gives a crap if you`re blocked by this old fart, anyway!?
Report spam or abuse
+ergonomover Resistance is Useless!! LOL XD If GigglesBorg here keeps up her shouting and ranting of the same bits over and over again, maybe someday she'll be promoted to Senior Shouting Officer.
Report spam or abuse
Seriously, when people think that being a Christian means deial of everything science it annoys me. God said that we are made of dust. We don't all live purposely in arrogance and darkness, guys.
Report spam or abuse
+Time4Gaming "We don't all live purposely in arrogance and darkness," If you deny what is demonstrated empirically then yes, you are living purposely in arrogance and darkness. Just ask Common Dissent (or her numerous other accounts) how she denies what is demonstrable empirically in favour the failed hypothesis of intelligent design.
Report spam or abuse
Plz give me one peace of observible evidense that proves darwins claim plz it has to be obserible from one creature chNging into a diffrent one plz
Report spam or abuse
+matchlock fun  What would the evidence look like for speciation Titsy Giblets?  It wouldn't look like 20,000 species of trilobite arthropods would it? 
Report spam or abuse
Yes the master want's to play game's with the laster Some got to lose to win sum yes shoe gum for every one what a lucky ducky day quack quack O is that a fact?
Report spam or abuse
+Transtlan Tico Ugh! This is just IGNORANT DRIVEL! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
The way our body makes sure it has enough sodium is not as simple as just taking in more salt.  Neither is it as simple as having properly working gastrointestinal and renal systems. To control its sodium content, the body needs: (1) the sensory cells in the kidneys with stretch receptors that produce (2) renin, which converts (3) angiotensinogen into angiotensin I that is then converted by...
Report spam or abuse
(4) a specific enzyme in the lungs into angiotensin II which attaches to (5) specific angiotensin II receptors on (6) certain adrenal cells that produce aldosterone which attaches to (7) specific aldosterone receptors on...
Report spam or abuse
(8) certain tubule cells in the kidneys, and (9) atrial cells with stretch receptors that produce (10) ANP which attaches to (11) specific ANP receptors in the adrenals and kidneys.
Report spam or abuse
+Chocolate Coated Reason  You are correct CCR. Applying the scientific method, the only example of complexity found at the level of the complexity found in DNA code has intelligent design as it's progenitor, therefore the scientific method points to intelligent design as the answer. Science says yes to intelligent design, while atheist weep at Darwins shrine, and Bill Nye auctions off his bow ties for less than a dime. LMAO!!!
Report spam or abuse
Hopeful education and not these deluded classical fiend risen two face rat race snot shot's  Yes what the fuck is so special about U in truth? Just a whorish self lie Sci guy
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
Tell us why do you hate Tesla and yet love to use the tech that originated from his findings? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you do know that Tesla wasn't straight, don't you?HAHAHAHAHAHA
Report spam or abuse
"A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool." William Shakespeare. That's for people like Bill, people who only believe what the crowd believes.
Report spam or abuse
+MethodOx "For example, E=Mc^2 makes perfect sense to me. The Space time continuum makes perfect sense to me. Time dilation..." So you'll understand why a young earth conflicts with the concommitent energy release of radioactive isotopes that you should be able to calculate if your Relativity is as good as you claim.  And its actually E^2=p^2c^2+m^2c^4. You'll also accept the time light would have needed to travel from distant stars to get to us.  "and the double slit theory make sense to me." Then why don't you accept the quantum mechanics and particle physics that describes the weak interaction that drives the fusion in the sun and radioactive decay? "I love studying history and astronomy. " OK so how old would you say the solar system is based on observations. How old would you say the universe is based on observations?  "Calculus makes sense to me. " You just couldn't make it as far as Schrodinger though? "And I believe in God" That's fine. Teach that too......but in bible study/R.E.  *Not* the science classroom.
Report spam or abuse
I get his concerns, but I respectfully disagree with his assertions. There is an vivid simplicity that is derived from looking at biology through creationist perspective. Not to mention, many people are extremely literate and competent in scientific fields and hold to creationism. The labeling of something as science or nescience is really dubious when aspects outside the observable are brought into question. In fact, strong arguments can be made on the nescience of Darwinian evolution and its derivations (albeit unpopular arguments). Also, there seems to be a strange amalgamation and slight confusion of semantics in what Nye was talking about. He shifted the context of the word evolution from biological evolution to stellar (or abiotic) evolution. At least, I thought I heard him make that segway.
Report spam or abuse
+ExtantFrodo2 How do fossils, and data from them, present definite, objective contradiction to creationist models?
Report spam or abuse
+ImpossibleIsNothin They don't present with all animals starting in the lowest layers  as would be the case if creationsim were true.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
So, here's our little problem...we look outside the window, we go out into the woods, or even into the jungle...and without exception, every single living thing appears to be designed for optimal adaptation to its habitat.  Our common sense tells us that design is the obvious default position...but is nature itself that smart, that capable of designing the whole biosphere?
Report spam or abuse
The argument goes further.  There is only a small genetic difference between humans and chimpanzees—about one percent, which is less than that between mouse and rat (three percent), or dog and fox (two percent). The genome of the chimpanzee provides NO SUPPORT for the thesis that our unique abilities came about as the result of natural selection.
Report spam or abuse
Only a few genes turned out to be under positive selection, and these had no apparent relationship to language or neural development. Subsequent genomic comparisons have confirmed that selection played no major role in shaping the differences between humans and chimpanzees. If the differences are not in the genes, selection has NOTHING TO SELECT.
Report spam or abuse
These suggestions amount to little more than after-the-fact assertions of evolutionary belief.  One cannot invoke a blind, unguided process to say that it "evolved to" meet the needs of the cell. Darwinian natural selection has no foresight.  The complexity of these coats, and the accessory proteins that build them, attach them to vesicles and disassemble them, defy unguided evolutionary explanations. They exhibit IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY; they don't work unless all the protein parts are present simultaneously.
Report spam or abuse
This evidence now implicates deep levels of design not just in the sequences of protein, but also in the regulation of the entire transcription and translation process. MicroRNAs must be specially tailored to bind to the proper mRNA transcripts in order to foster their degradation and repress translation, when appropriate. Other mechanisms must inhibit repression and allow for translation.
Report spam or abuse
If we investigate these experiments in detail, we discover that the bacterial enzyme (RDH, or ribitol dehydrogenase) mutating from the wild type to X1, then X2, then X3 merely became less specified and, by definition, its gene exhibited a loss of information.   Therefore, none of the mutants can be shown to have played a role in the “small steps” that are supposedly able to lead to macroevolution.
Report spam or abuse
U have not a pittance the force of will that has true nothingness
Report spam or abuse
+Transtlan Tico This is IGNORANT NONSENSE! Hahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
Houston, we're getting increased temperature readings from inside the Breast Restraining Apparatus (B.R.A.). We could be heading for another meltdown.
Report spam or abuse
Yes I can confirm those readings, Houston. Non-stop whining towards the Reduction and Enragement units indicates that a runaway thermal breach could be imminent.
Report spam or abuse
Is it just me or is this too black and white? I feel like one could believe in a God who created the universe, ie set in motion the big bang and embrace that the earth is indeed billions of years old and still be an intelligent science enthused human being.
Report spam or abuse
+Christopher Columbus This has nothing to do with believing in god. LOTS of people accept god and evolution. Example 1: Dr. Francis Collins is an evangelical who is was the director of NIH's human genome project AND he accepts evolution AND he explicitly rejects creationism, including intelligent design. Example 2: Dr. Ken Miller is a co-author of one of the main Intro Biology texts and was one the main scientific witness against ID creationism at the Dover trial. He is also an orthodox Catholic. http://www.millerandlevine.com/
Report spam or abuse
If an atheist truly believes that there is no god, then how does the atheist remain sane in a world with unpunished crimes that are unpunished by humans? Atheists have no real morals, and no real purpose in life other than pretending, richard dawkins: "Atheists do not have a purpose in life without god" "Only the fool says in his heart "There is no god"" - Psalm 14
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
+FUNgineer Sock Account Oh, not this moldy old chesnut again. * sigh *
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
+Zaki Aminu You are a fucking insane person. Get help.
Report spam or abuse
+AncientAndroidFromAnotherDimension "You are a fucking insane person. Get help." JUST BECAUSE I SAY IT'S ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE FOR SOMETHING TO COME OUT OF NOTHINGNESS? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Report spam or abuse
Atheists = Molest children Never admit they are wrong on obvious things Never admit that atheism takes faith Never admit that atheism has no proof or evidence but they still believe Are very sad, upset and angry because they can't disprove God so they can't win Deny that they are going to hell Commit suicide because they think they have no purpose in life... carl marks = suicidal Say "God is dead" WHEN they don't believe in God Are very sensitive
Report spam or abuse
+Tylerosaurus Tylerosaurus: Yet another sock account. Yet more absurd assertions. (Where the fuck do you guys get this stuff?) Blocked.
Report spam or abuse
+Tylerosaurus 'Atheists = Molest children' I admit, I laughed at that.
Report spam or abuse
Now that evolutionary theory has been roundly humiliated by the revelation that ‘junk’ DNA is actually NOT the residue of millions of years of copying errors, what is its role in the cell?  If it’s not coding for proteins, what is it doing biologically?
Report spam or abuse
These are just two illustrations of many safeguards in the cell. If you think about human monitors, like traffic cops or inspectors, they are aware of the downstream consequences of failure to meet requirements.  Robots and machines can also be programmed to detect contraband or errors. The robot may be "dumb," but whoever programmed it had to know; he or she had to have "forward thinking" and plan for the errors or failures to meet requirements.
Report spam or abuse
Show more Loading...
to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...