Bill Nye: The End of Creationism is Nigh

[mentalfloss]

Bill Nye: The End of Creationism is Nigh

Bill Nye the eponymous Science Guy was in Toronto "Canadia" today as part of Planetary Radio's We See Thee Rise: The Canadian Space Program, and appeared on Global's The Morning Show to talk space and Europa and evolution (and make weird noises!). His debate with Ken Ham, and the topic of creationism vs evolution came up as the topic turned to the possibility of life evolving on the Jovian moon.

Video at link


Bill Nye: The end of Creationism is nigh

Also:

Bill Nye - Ready to 'go to hell' for his beliefs

Bill Nye, best known among a generation of kids as "The Science Guy," came face-to-face with one of the most articulate creationists in our land and has concluded that even if it means going to hell, he will believe what he believes.

You may remember the three-hour evolution vs. creation debate in February. Nye and Ken Ham, founder and president of the renowned Creation Museum, faced off in a much-hyped showdown. Nye wholeheartedly defended evolution, while Ham used the Bible and creationist scientists to dispute his anti-creation theory.

The dust has long settled on the live debate, but Nye is still talking about his evolutionist views and has offered some disturbing words about his potential fate in the September issue of Popular Science. The online version of the front-page story "Bill Nye Fights Back" shows an animated presentation of the evolutionist with hands wrapped buffeting the air.

'Even If I Am Going to Hell'

The subhead on the article reads, "How a mild-mannered children's celebrity plans to save science in America—or go down swinging." Again, the problem is he has admitted that he may go to hell in the process. This disturbs my spirit for Nye and all the little children he may be influencing. Wondering what Nye actually said that's so disturbing? Here are his words:

"Let's say that I am, through my actions, doomed, and that I will go to hell," Nye said. "Even if I am going to hell, that still doesn't mean the Earth is 6,000 years old. The facts just don't reconcile."

First, going to hell doesn't have anything to do with your actions—other than the ultimate action of rejecting Christ. We can't earn our salvation: "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9).

We all need a savior, whether we believe the Earth is 6,000 years old or not: "For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Rom. 3:22-26).

Graham explains the truth this way: "Every last one of us is born in sin, and while some may not think of themselves as sinners, God does. He hears every word we utter and knows the deepest secrets we lock away in the vaults of our hearts."

Evolutionist Bill Nye Ready to 'Go to Hell' Over His Beliefs

 

[CDNBear]

Do we really have a large population of creationists in Canada, and does anyone take them seriously?

 

[mentalfloss]

Probably not.

I read somewhere that Canada is one of the most accepting states when it comes to science.

 

[CDNBear]

Ya, I just went looking, we're up there. Iceland seems to be in the lead. I'd blame long cold winters and reading by the fire.

 

[55Mercury]

Ya, I just went looking, we're up there. Iceland seems to be in the lead. I'd blame long cold winters and reading by the fire.

I guess that could blind you, especially, as I suspect, if there's pornography involved!

 

[Walter]

Creationism and so-called science are not mutually exclusive.

 

[55Mercury]

Creationism and so-called science are not mutually exclusive.

where would be the fun without the mystery?

 

[EagleSmack]

"Let's say that I am, through my actions, doomed, and that I will go to hell," Nye said. "Even if I am going to hell, that still doesn't mean the Earth is 6,000 years old. The facts just don't reconcile."

Wow... what a stupid statement.

 

[petros]

Early Bible texts come from dramatic climate change campfire stories.

 

[damngrumpy]

He can't go to hell, there is no hell. Hell was a visionary thing for a troubled state of mind.
The answer is we don't know, I think the creationists get into trouble because they over
dramatize virtually everything. Science people don't like a mystery they have to solve it.
Both factions could end up in the same place many years down the road.
I do not believe the world is 6 thousand years old, or there will be a zombie apocalypse
and a whole lot of other things. There are no devils or evil spirits they are a human
condition and we have to blame someone for our shortcomings so the Devil must have
done it eh? The real answer is we don't know. I remember reading a passage somewhere
that said to God a thousand years is the blink of an eye or something like that so perhaps
there is a reconciliation of sorts but that is a long way off why? People want to argue about
what they believe instead of what might be

 

[petros]

Beware of the Macrobes!

 

[Tonington]

Do we really have a large population of creationists in Canada, and does anyone take them seriously?

In the last decade or so, it's anywhere from one in five to about one in six, depending on the poll.

Not an insignificant number. As for taking them seriously, I think that would depend on who you're asking. I wouldn't take them seriously if they were trying to explain the natural history of earth, but they could be perfectly credible on other topics.

Like Ham mentions, you could go out and find physicians and scientists who believe that we are as some creator intended. It wouldn't mean they're bad at, for example diagnosing a strep infection. However, if that same doctor tried to explain the prevalence and dissemination of antibiotic resistant strains of Streptococcus, their beliefs in evolution could hinder what sort of questions they might consider important, compared to another researcher who doesn't hold those same beliefs.

For example, we get this at the website answers in genesis:

Antibiotic resistance of bacteria is not an example of evolution in action but rather variation within a bacterial kind. It is also a testimony to the wonderful design God gave bacteria.

That's from a doctor. The sentences above are pure poppycock. Antibiotic resistance isn't just bacterial variation. You can't explain the prevalence of resistance and when it has developed without talking about the selection pressure. Without selection pressure, the resistance isn't needed, and there is no need for the favoured trait to survive in the population. You can see this when we look at wild type microbial populations versus those found in say agriculture, or human populations with antibiotic usage. Many people for instance don't even know that bacteria can share genes in a sort of sexual fashion. Transfering resistance between species.

So, I think it depends.

 

[CDNBear]

So, I think it depends.

I'd agree.

 

[Locutus]

Seems pretty clear that all the self-righteous creationism mockery c u m debate c u m criticism is directed at western Christians (meaning cons Republicans, stiff curmudgeonly types, pro-gun, anti-drug, pro-life and such).

Do these engineers, genetiscists, mathematicians and other know-it-all eggheads, pro-AGW'ers, anti-Washington Redskiners publicly lambaste the other religions and their sacred texts or stories when it comes to the origins of earth, people, nature and such?

Just seems a bit skewed towards the (veiled - although obvious veil is obvious) right-leaning conservative folk in the United States?

I mean, all those with a faith-based belief in some form of creationism should be all called-out as those with Bibles are shouldn't they? Or is it political squeamishness so as not to upset to peaceful, almost revered, pious and respected Hindus, Buddhists, Aboriginal peoples...even our Islamic brothers and sisters, and all that jazzy stuff.

I could have it all wrong of course, but I doubt it.

 

[CDNBear]

Fukkin touch screen!!! Sorry Loc

 

[SLM]

Seems pretty clear that all the self-righteous creationism mockery c u m debate c u m criticism is directed at western Christians (meaning cons Republicans, stiff curmudgeonly types, pro-gun, anti-drug, pro-life and such).

Do these engineers, genetiscists, mathematicians and other know-it-all eggheads, pro-AGW'ers, anti-Washington Redskiners publicly lambaste the other religions and their sacred texts or stories when it comes to the origins of earth, people, nature and such?

Just seems a bit skewed towards the (veiled - although obvious veil is obvious) right-leaning conservative folk in the United States?

I mean, all those with a faith-based belief in some form of creationism should be all called-out as those with Bibles are shouldn't they? Or is it political squeamishness so as not to upset to peaceful, almost revered, pious and respected Hindus, Buddhists, Aboriginal peoples...even our Islamic brothers and sisters, and all that jazzy stuff.

I could have it all wrong of course, but I doubt it.

Maybe, somewhat, I mean, they are an easy target right? It's not somehow deemed 'politically incorrect' to lambast Christians.

But on the other hand, it is predominantly Christians in the US who are fighting to have Creationism taught in schools and whatnot.

So, probably six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Fukkin touch screen!!! Sorry Loc

S'alright, I kissed it and made it better.

Lol.

 

[WLDB]

I mean, all those with a faith-based belief in some form of creationism should be all called-out as those with Bibles are shouldn't they? Or is it political squeamishness so as not to upset to peaceful, almost revered, pious and respected Hindus, Buddhists, Aboriginal peoples...even our Islamic brothers and sisters, and all that jazzy stuff.

I could have it all wrong of course, but I doubt it.

From what Ive noticed they do call everyone out, not just the Christians. It only appears that way because Christians happen to be the largest religious group in the west, where Nye and the others happen to be.

 

[mentalfloss]

U.S. Supreme Court rejects appeal of teacher fired for promoting creationism | CTV News