Loading...

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

7,513,365 views

Loading...

Loading...

Transcript

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading...

Loading...

Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Aug 23, 2012

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 • 401,274

Gary Bell
US Christians blaming gays for hurricanes, earthquakes and diseases is one of the many reasons that Christianity is dying so quickly in the US.  No one wants to be associated with hatred nor stupidity.
View all 260 replies
jebstuart
Answer what miss? You seem too ashamed to name it. I'm not a mind-reader.
Nuclear Fallout
Still can't answer it, Stuart?
Hide replies
jebstuart
Mutations are the ultimate source of all genetic variation. No designer in sight.
View all 16 replies
Narva77isback
ergonomover I bet Adam isn't aware of that...
ergonomover
Adam, what makes you think the bible is divinely inspired? You're aware of the pagan, polytheistic roots, right?
Hide replies
Bluebottle 99
Denial of evolution is spouted almost exclusively by those who have absolutely zero understanding of it. Coincidentally, their comprehension - of science in general - is so poor; I can imagine 3rd graders cringing with embarrassment at the sheer stupidity of it.
View all 4 replies
jebstuart
Insults are no substitute for reasoned argument.
Nuclear Fallout
Liar.
Hide replies
werriboy55
"How to make Bullshit sound reasonable" - The David Abel Method Firstly make up a scientific sounding name like The Gene Emergence Project, Department of ProtoBioCybernetics and ProtoBioSemiotics and Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc. You can give your home address as the address of these august bodies, it's not like anyone will ask why these research facilities are located in a suburban ranch-style bungalow' Second, register a name as a publishing company like LongView Press. No-one will notice that you are the only the only contributor. As long as you don't claim your work is peer-reviewed you aren't breaking any laws. After all if intellectually retarded religious types assume you are a credible scientific journal that's not your fault. Third, make up any definitions you want to. Don't try to justify the usage, just say this is what the words mean.This is crucial, if you try to define what you say your will get shot down in flames. Use phrases like "decision modes". If no-one understands what you are saying they have to agree with you because they can't rebut your arguments. Lastly, peddle your garbage for $8.99 plus tax and hope you con enough people to pay for your words that you can keep pumping baseless, uneducated crap onto the feeble-minded religious retards so that God will give you a special pace in Heaven, reserved for lying fucktards. Congratulations, you have just set science back 2000 years and shown what a useless pile of shit you are. You have achieved Creatard Nirvana.
View all 10 replies
werriboy55
Pick a point that Abel makes and we'll discuss it. Can't say fairer than that. You will, of course, be able (pun intended) to supply the definitions able uses on request. Ball is your court.
Nuclear Fallout
And yet you've done nothing to actually refute Abel's position on any specific point, so get lost, loser!
Hide replies
Scientist Flanders
Anything written by David Abel is simply evidence-free, non-scientific creationist opinion and, therefore, requires no "refutation".
View all 12 replies
интеллектуальные победы дизайн
+Atharkas: "It is dishonest to claim mutation was against evolution." How about "it is dishonest to WILLFULLY IGNORE that mutations are accidental, chance, haphazard, random, and UNPREDICTABLE molecular events? Hmm?
Scientist Flanders
Just reposting a comment by Enlightened to +Hydrogen Peroxide​​ (obviously flagged by a butt-hurt cry-baby creationist) "You want me to rebut your brown noser, yes-man, lap dog tactics concerning Abel and his heavily biased work? LOL 😄 To coin a phrase used very frequently in the film industry: hard pass."
Hide replies
Gary Bell
A creationist calling someone else, "clueless of the laws of evidence",  really?   From 476,323 comments we have precisely zero evidence presented for any gods and precisely zero evidence against the Theory of Evolution, that's a hint.
View all 211 replies
jebstuart
I'll be honest, I have no idea what your complaint is. If you're looking to me to show you why there is no god, you've lucked out. I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows. To complain about "nobody knows" being a "positive claim" while semanticcally true, is a wordgame. YOU NEED TO MAKE A CASE. You say something needed to cause our origins. I can only presume you mean something intelligent. Let's not call it a god, if that will make you stop complaining about "false charges". So you don't believe in a god, but you want ME to answer your charge that I should be able to prove its non-existence. As you say yourself - how can you be so dishonest about all this? Make a case for your .... "not god" or whatever it is you're claiming. Let's see if we can investigate. Double-negatives, sprachspiel, and a whining tone about how you feel you're being unfairly treated will not do. MAKE A CASE (for something - anything)
Nidair
So again you ignore my arguments for a god or something similar, very conveniently, and lie again about my position because again, I never claim the laws of nature are prescriptive. I said you need to account for their origins, which you still refuse to do, like you still refuse to acknowledge atheism is both a belief and a religion, using the philosophical definition of belief and religion. Then, you made a claim with absolute certainty (nobody knows the answer to our origins) which you say isn't a positive claim. This would get anyone laughed out of a philosophy class, but let's entertain you by saying it is. The statement is so vague that you could mean anything from abiogenesis to the origin of the universe, but let's assume the latter, and we certainly have some answers: that the laws of nature MAKE it possible, and something has to be responsible for creating the phenomena described by the laws of nature. They cannot be created by nothing. Afterwards, you pretend I am making a case for a specific god again, to which I can only answer: how can you be this dishonest in arguing and still claim I am the liar?
Hide replies
jebstuart
It must be wonderful to create your own view of the universe based on a dictionary definition. I'm still looking for a dictionary that says humans are supernatural.
View all 11 replies
Megan Finch
I don't think there are many scientists that get their information from the dictionary. Also, if you could get a good understanding of evolution from a dictionary, we wouldn't have this creationist problem in the first place.
Scientist Flanders
@MissSocks I only see sequitur.
Hide replies
Scientist Flanders
"Intelligent design (aka creationism) still works in science-fiction movies" - Michael Behe It's the only place it can work, because it's nothing but fantasy - pure imagination.
View all 4 replies
Scientist Flanders
@Gary lol
Gary Bell
We're experts here Al,  we do it everyday.  Say something!
Hide replies
jebstuart
Unguided mutations are the death sentence to designist dogma. There is no logical way to associate an all-knowing designer to the stochastic phenomenon of DNA alteration.
View all 3 replies
Enlightened
Unguided mutations would pose a bit of a problem if they could be directly connected to the fossil record - BUT THEY CAN'T. P1. "Unguided mutations would pose a problem if they could be directly connected to the fossil record." P2. From "But they can't", unguided mutations have not been directly connected to the fossil record. C1. Ergo, according to you reasoning, unguided mutations do not pose a problem to the fossil record. So basically, you're admitting that unguided mutations do not pose a problem to the fossil record. Thanks for admitting that for us. Now we have it on record and we're gonna use it against you for the rest of your days here on YouTube. ^_^
Hide replies
Gary Bell
Ignorance of science and history is inextricably linked to the Book of Genesis. See no facts, hear no facts, speak no facts.
View all 5 replies
Scientist Flanders
@Enlightened She doesn't do (real) education
Hide replies
Advertisement
When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next


to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...