Bill Nye Lets the Creationists Down Easy [Video]

Bill Nye basically crushes the creationist viewpoint without so much as an angry word. I would imagine that any hearts Bill Nye has broken were very much ok quickly after…isn’t he just one of the sweetest scientists around? He’s literally saying that creationism is completely false, without doing it in a way that would instantly get their backs up.

Well done Mr. Nye and the most important part of the message is probably that you can believe what you want to believe, but don’t raise children in ignorance, because we need them, for a better and brighter future.

[Via Geekosystem]

47 Responses to Bill Nye Lets the Creationists Down Easy [Video]

  1. Why are the two ideas mutually exclusive OP? I fail to draw that connection. As a student of Science, I still am able to maintain a belief in Deity, and believe everything science has to offer. Science is the understanding of the world, and the universe in which we live– but that doesn't exclude the possibility that there is a creator of the Universe.

    • Agreed. I get a little weary of people (on both sides) who seem to think that evolution (which I fully, completely accept) means that there’s no God/creator/force beyond our understanding behind things. Just because a person believes in a creator doesn’t mean they necessarily accept the literal interpretation of the Bible that the Earth is only 6000 years old. I’d say that most don’t even. Heck, Pope John Paul II accepted evolution.

    • Evolution being factual and the existence of a deity are mutually exclusive ideas because one does not imply the other. However, if you ask the question about the existence of a deity, a scientist who follows the scientific method properly would say there isn't yet a reason to believe in one since no evidence has been presented to say otherwise.

      • The Scientific Method was developed by faithful Catholics and is used to deduct the true nature of something observed in this dimension. When it comes to a deity, Yahweh for example, there is no way to prove or disprove the existence with the Scientific Method because you're attempting to nail down a being that exists in the 4th, 5th, or higher dimension. We can only see the smudge of God's fingerprint on our fishbowl of a universe. Using the Scientific Method to prove God's existence would be like attempting to solve a Calculus problem using Arithmetic.

    • Why are they mutually exclusive?

      Good question.

      Perhaps you should ask the authors of damn near every single religious text in existence that exact same question, since they seem to not mention evolution.

      And there are FAR more people in this world who accept science and maintain certain beliefs than there are ones who follow the line of creationism exclusively, so I'd say that the blind ignorance is rather one-sided. That's faith for ya, and is the EXACT point Mr. Nye is trying to address in a very respectful way.

      And he's absolutely right.

      • It's a double edge sword though.
        Just because you can't prove there isn't a god doesn't mean you can prove there isn't one. Besides, being an abstract mathematics major has taught me one thing: God evolves w/ people for what people need when they need it and that "abstract god" is just something that is the origins of everything w/ no origin itself. That produces a logical fallacy in not believing in one bc eventually we'll have to find the beginning somewhere, to think there isn't one is foolish.
        I would like to also contrast your religious text by noting that none of them exclusively say either or, especially when you consider that biblical scholars have pointed out that absolute belief that the book of Genesis was more like a folk tale written around the time the events of Exodus took place. Besides, there are also tons of scientists that have written books based solely from an atheistic point of view, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" comes to mind.
        Point is, noone knows sh!t, we're all just a surface parasite on this dirtball floating around in the vastness of space, so why the hell can't we all just get along?

        • While I agree with what your saying, when I read, "Point is, no one knows sh!t, we're all just a surface parasite on this dirtball floating around in the vastness of space," I think about how depressing a life that is. It's a reminder that life is worth living as a child of God.

      • I'm guessing that you haven't read near every single religious text on this topic. Try reading some of the 'scientific texts written by religious scholars'. You can believe in a God that created as well as a process whereby things evolve. Restricting 'creation' to 6000 years ago and 'evolution' to man coming from apes does neither side good.

  2. Again, and again. “You ought to believe in evolution because we accept it.” It does conveniently explain things, yes, but no better than Creationism does.

    I would not be objecting, however, if Bill Nye opted to say, instead, “I so much prefer evolutionism because believing in a God makes no sense to me.” After all, if you look deeply at the science behind BOTH (yes, I have), you will see it’s ultimately a choice to believe in God or not.

    Believing in God is difficult if you never have before. But denying so much science that denies evolutionism is too.

    So me merely saying evolutionism is ridiculous is presenting an argument just as powerful as Mr. Nye’s. I’m afraid I can’t take that point to heart.

    But the “teach both” point I definitely agree with. I would that children are taught all theories–after all it has NEVER been according to the scientific method to consider only one theory. Teach both evolutionism and creationism (and hell, throw in Scientology if you want) so children can pick the obvious winner.

    • Let's teach the alternative to the theory of gravity. I claim that gravity doesn't exist, but the Flying Spaghetti Monster's noodley appendages keep us on the earth. According to your logic we should teach my theory alongside gravity.

      No, Bill Nye has mountains of evidence behind his claim that evidence is factual. You have none.

      If you have evidence that evolution doesn't actually occur, then present it.

    • I don't want my kid taught fairy tales. There are religious schools. Public schooling should be secular. Period. Always. Forever.

  3. I agree. I certainly believe in evolution and think that my Christian brothers and sisters who claim the Earth is only a few thousand years old are missing a screw or two (or a billion) but I don't think that believing in a creator is exclusive of believing in evolution. My science tempers my faith, but it certainly does not shut the door on it.

  4. @Formic: He said nothing about belief in a deity, he was arguing against the idea of Creationism.
    @The EE in the corner: There is very little science that 'denies' evolutionism, and a whole lot of science that backs it up, not to mention the huge amounts of evidence that 'denies' the possibility of the Abrahamic creation myth.

  5. The problem with "believing in both" is that none of you truly do. Whenever there is a conflict of interest between the two, you always side with your god because your faith requires that you do, even if there is evidence against the existence of your god. Faith and logic rarely go hand in hand.

  6. He is just saying that he doesn't get why people still only believe in "POOF, here is life." He never said you can't believe in God and Science – I personally totally agree with Bill Nye. I mean to just sit there and think all this incredible stuff in the world happend in a week is kinda silly. The world is too complicated and beautiful, the world was not created for us – we where just created IN the world. The world gave birth to us, not us giving birth to the world. Science Vs Faith, that is what it boils down too. Do you put yer faith in something that is tangible or place yer faith in something no one can be sure is even there – its up to you to make that choice for yerselves.

  7. Its not that evolution conveniently explains anything, its the fact that there is lots of proof to back it up, there really isn't for creationism. A book is not solid evidence its something someone wrote. A work of non fiction or fiction can be said to be true but that's up to the author to say if it happened or not.

    I do think that our children need to learn from their parents but have a chance to be their own person, create an identity for themselves and be who they want to be and believe in who they want to believe in. Teaching is a very important part of our communities and i think if religion was part of the curriculum it really would make people more open minded but if you were to teach one religion you have to teach them all. If you segregate religions to children who are simply sponges waiting to soak up knowledge when they are little then they will be forced to believe in what others tell them rather than what they want to believe in.

    I think that learning about the world around you is a very exciting and amazing thing! Our children and future children will grow up to be way more understanding of others opinions and cultures if only taught to be. This comes from not only class rooms but parents and other children. Children are born empty slates, they speak words we repeat to them, they eat the way we eat, they even develop our habits, good and bad. Our children are our future and i think what Mr. Nye was more or less trying to say was, let them decided who they are going to be and the future of our world will be much more tolerant and we will get a lot more things done as a community.

    Thank you

  8. Sorry, Bill, but that's all ya got? Denying Evolution is like Geologists denying plates? Lets put it this way, Evolution of Man (and no other species) is like a long series of coin flips that always come up Heads or in Man's favor. That breaks the Laws of Propability. But I guess when you have things that you don't have answers for, you throw a LOT of Laws out the window…

    I'm a man of God and Science. The two aren't different, they never have been. To get to know God is to get to know his universe and the incredible PERFECT designs that he's created. There are animals that only exist for a specific purpose. It's their design. Humans don't have a purpose. If Evolution were real… they would.

    • Humans have the same purpose as all the beasts, to propagate our genes.
      Every species that has ever been identified came up heads in your little coin-flip and then as the world changed, so did they, as did our ancestors. those that couldn't adapt quickly enough died. those that were just too good at over-hunting and over-foraging, quite literally, ate themselves into starvation.

      If the design of the human body is perfect, why do we have the Appendix? why do we require a gut full of bacteria to aid in digestion? why are the photo-receptors in our eyes hidden away behind the very blood vessels that service the cells? why are there ranges of colors that most of us cannot see? why do our bodies produce toxic waste products? why do we get cancer? AIDS? why do we age? why must we fear radiation? why would your god have un-dress be our natural state, when so much of this planet can kill us with exposure? why are we born nude and then told that we must be ashamed of nudity? why are we not the most deadly creature to exist when stripped naked and deprived of our tools?

      the only perfection to be had in this universe is in the functioning of physical Reality and even then it throws our best and brightest for a loop every now and then.

    • I think you're confusing a truly random process vs. a random process acting within an ordered set of rules. There are rules to evolution. There is an underlying system. Movement within the system can be random, but the system itself is not. It's just very complicated.

    • You're looking at it backwards. Of course it's almost completely impossible. If you faced those "coin flips" from the "haven't done it yet' side, it would be nearly impossible. You aren't though. You're seeing it from the 'completed' side. Sure it's improbable, but having done it, it's done. You're like the child of a millionaire lottery winner saying "It's nearly impossible to win the lottery". Daddy already did.

    • Oh, and as to "designed' animals. I'm recalling the garter snake that eats the incredibly toxic orange salamander. Seems like it was created just to predate the salamander….look again. After generations of eating this toxin, the snakes that are left can consume it safely. The salamander gets more toxic, the snake gets more immune. Looks like they were made for each other, but actually one just filled a vacuum. Serious complexity doesn't require a 'Deity'….just time and well….complexity.

  9. Once again, someone has managed to show their ignorance. A Theist does NOT, naturally, maintain any belief in the Christian Bible, or the Jewish Bible for that matter. A Theist is SIMPLY someone who maintains that there exists an intelligent being who you and I can interact with (On the contrary, Deism is the view that this being does NOT interact with us.).

    A creationist is by definition a Theist — or a Deist.. Deists or Theist do NOT, as I explained before, have to believe in any monotheistic philosophies..

    Also, if anything, the existence of the world CRAVES for a creator – it NEEDS a creator — someone or something which is MORE complex than that which is in existence itself.
    We DERIVE our logic, our understanding, and our morals on the BASIS of this being — we can only rationally understand the world because it is MADE rationally.

    • I absolutely 100% disagree that our morals are based on a creator. I'm atheist. I abhor most organized Christian religion (or moreso, many of it's followers and what it's become). I am very ethical, I don't purposefully hurt other people, and NOT because I'm forced to or I will go to hell – but rather because I CHOOSE to be good to people in general. I don't need threats of a creator looming over me, watching my every move, just to CHOOSE to be good.

  10. *sigh* Life really is a fanboy war isn't it? The fanboys of Science vs. the fanboys of Creation is just as stupid as the fanboys of the Xbox 360 vs the fanboys of the PS3.

    I have one irrefutable fact for you all. We don't know shit. You have 2 sides. Each side has their own guess as to how the universe and us came into existence. BOTH sides rely, at some point or the other, on people ignoring some pretty big logical fallacies and unanswered questions. The only thing we know for certain is that we don't know for certain. Evolution says two amino acids came together to eventually form life. Thank you oh great cosmic lottery for making that happen. Creation says that the world and everything in it were created in 7 days 6000 years ago. Ok, if the world is 6000 years old then why are there pots older than that?

    But here's the possibility few choose to explore. What if BOTH are correct? What if an intelligent being far more advanced than us used the Big Bang and Evolution for Creation? Are we so arrogant as to believe that our miniscule understanding of the universe is the absolute and definitive understanding of the universe? That if we can't explain it, it is thus impossible? A caveman wouldn't be able to comprehend how we can have living moving pictures in side of a square made out of materials he's never seen before. What makes us think we can comprehend with 100% certainty how we came to exist?

  11. Humans by nature create tools to aid them in their daily lives. It is easy to understand how people could come to believe that they too must have been built by a greater craftsman when trying to explain the universe. However the data just doesn't add up when you put it to the test. There is not even data to suggest that things were made perfectly if you want to continue belief in a creator. I'm pretty sure that the devil isn't around screwing with the panda's inefficient digestive system or giving whales finger bones. To know of the imperfections of the universe and to believe in a creator is to suggest that this creator is imperfect and makes mistakes. A big part of many faiths is that your god must be infallible. So you either have to flounder around trying to back step over this or to admit that natural selection is more plausible.

    It's not that hard people.

    • Just to clarify, most Christians teach that the world was created perfect, but became imperfect once sin entered the world. i.e., God created everything perfectly, then sin corrupted the perfection and introduced imperfection. This is part of the promise of Christianity, that at some point in the future God will come back and make everything perfect again.

      And, also to clarify, I'm not arguing for this position, just making it clear that the argument of an infallible God does not address the issue, and in fact Christians do believe that the introduction of the devil into the world actually did screw with the pandas and the whales and whatnot.

  12. Astonishing that a sensible, reasonable statement from an obviously intelligent and even-handed scientist brings out all these anxiety attacks in the religious. He never said there's no God, he said Creationism is bunk, the best we could come up with 2000 years ago to explain the universe. Are we heretics because we don't believe a giant dung-beetle rolls the sun across the bowl of the sky every day? The Egyptions once did but they grew up! We all did! Get over it people. Move on. Science not only has a better answer now but can prove it in a million different ways whereas there is not one shred of proof for Creationism beyond faith. There's more sense in the Theory of Intelligent Falling. Facinating that the one thing all religious fanatics in the world have in common, whether it's fundamentalist Islam, Judaism, Christianity or the religious belief in extreme politics is the desire to return the world to the ignorance of the Dark Ages. Why? Because the peasants are a lot easier to control if they're ignorant and terrified of an unseen, omnipotent deity with a bad temper.

  13. pffffffffffffffft he failed to debunk creationism he mearly puts the case for evolution … I as a chridtian agree evolution occurs that dosen't mean that an inteligent force didn't create the universe. It actually give more evidence to the argument I mean evolution is not a random occurence it is ordered and logical

    • Uhhh…evolution is not a random occurrence?

      I suppose we'll just go burn all the books on chaos theory then, right?

      Might as well, since we're in discussions about killing concepts that have been proven (quite literally) in stone.

  14. ok after reading all the posts here I would like to say why hate the poeple who belive in god one day we may be proved right

    I am a christian and there is Historical evidence that the bible is acurate
    I believe in Evolution I do not think the sun is influenced by dung beetles
    I enjoy learning about physics the laws that god created to keep this universe running
    and there is as much scientific evidence for god as there is for the boson higgs field

    • Actually, there is no evidence for God. None. At all. There's BELIEF in God. There's a LACK of evidence to disprove him, or prove him. That makes it a hypothesis at best. There's just as much evidence to the existence of god as there are unicorns, leprechauns, and Saint Nicholas — which is FAITH. Faith is defined as a "Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof." That last part is the most important "Based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof"

      There IS scientific evidence of the higgs boson, unless you missed the memo. But this video isn't about the higgs boson. it's about evolution vs. creationism. Why does everyone keep bringing up off-topic things that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand?

  15. Geez a whiz folks, I thought this was settled already! The Earth is a flat disc lying on the backs of 4 ginormous elephants standing on an almot unimaginably huge turtle flying, nay, swimming through the cosmos! And there is no one all powerful good or evil God, but dozens each with their own agenda, (and at times twisted senses of humor or sadism), gambling over the fate of humanity and using a multitude of ways and means, creatures and creations, mostly masked from sight of the uninitiated (and/or sober).
    Don't just take my word for it….
    to quote Casey Stengel…"Look It Up!"….!!!!!!!!!!
    and Johnny Standley….."It's In The BOOK!"…..!!!!!!!!

  16. Those who completely deny evolution do not understand what evolution is. The theory isn't that we came from monkeys. As a scientific theory, it has a multitude of evidence supporting it. I can understand being skeptical; we should always be questioning and looking for answers. But it's another thing entirely to claim an unsupported, theological belief is correct.

  17. Without going too much into the aspects of religion and such, I'll ask these questions: what is the evidence that proves the Evolution?
    I've heard about carbon dating and such, but I will ask a further question: who was around all those millions of years to verify that any given fossil is indeed, the millions of years old that carbon dating dictates that it is? And furthermore, where is such verification for any other science that says the world is that old?
    And as for Creationism, where is the proof that it is false? Please let me know if I'm missing something in my train of logic.
    I'll admit, Mr. Nye was quite polite, but in essence he's saying those of us who believe in Creationism are foolish… and even that we're even more foolish to pass that belief onto our children.
    And I strongly disagree with the notion that just because one believes in Creation, that they are thus not capable of functioning as a scientist or engineer. I think we are capable of that, the requirement being that we accept what is factually proven.
    Again, if I'm missing something, go ahead and let me know. And I'm also not trying to bash anyone or get into a heated argument, but to bring my own viewpoint to the discussion.

  18. Yes lost-in-her-eyes and the best books about the discworld borne on the back of the great turtle A'Tuin are written by that supreme humanist Terry Pratchett

  19. I am dismayed at how this debate has degenerated once again into a squawking of tiny frightened children asserting their right to believe in their particular Imaginary Friend. If Creationism is real your particular Parent substitute is so bored and/or cruel that he put the fossils in the ground for a laugh sometime between now and 4004BC. You find that easier to believe than Evolution?
    Now I don't know or care whether God exists or not. I will be equally happy either way but I care that idiots pass on their idiocy to the next generation. A country that believes god makes fake bones of monsters that never lived and that everyone has the right to carry military grade weapons has a few more problems better deserving of discussion than which flavour of Deity is the real one.

  20. So I guess he is saying that if you believe in creationism, that you cannot possibly be an engineer or an intelligent voter? You lost some respect points today Bill.

  21. I agree, Mr. Nye.
    Sadly (for me), you undercut your credibility by being an Obama supporter.
    Why are you pro-science, and against limited and responsible government?

  22. One of the key differences between rationale scientists and religious zealots is scientists do not feel a need to tell parents how to raise their kids or what to believe. Religious zealots always want to call CPS to take the kids away, control school lesson plans, and otherwise force their views on the rest of us…..yeah a real threat to the country….
    – Kevin, engineer, test pilot, religious zealot.

  23. What he doesn't seem to want to admit, is you don't have to be a sheep and agree with evolution to be a scientist, or an engineer, or an astronomer, or even a biologist. Sure it makes it simpler to discuss the prevalent theories of the day, evolution being the chief one, but it doesn't somehow keep you from looking, touching, feeling, or thinking. For someone who is supposedly open-minded about the wonders of the Universe, Bill Nye seems to be one of the most close-minded people in the world.

  24. It is fairly easy to prove that evolution isn’t true. When somebody is born they get half of their genetic information from their mother and half from their father. Therefore there is no new information and no evolution. When the two legs of land-dwelling creatures were in the intermediate stage between legs on the ground and the wings of birds in the air they were useless appendages that were neither legs nor wings, so the creatures had to flop around helplessly for millions of years until the wings evolved, but they would have gone extinct by survival of the fittest. Yeah, don’t use your brain just believe you came from a fish.
    Sorry Bill, you’re the one that believes in fairy-tales.

  25. Wow, now I totally get it. How could I have spent all these years believing in God when I knew that tectonic plates exposed. Totally crushed my faith and he did it in sick a nice way. I feel so much better now.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.