'Science Guy' Bill Nye: Religion dismissing evolution hurts US science

[cbayer]

Last edited Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:48 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/09/science_guy_bill_nye_christian.html

Published: Monday, September 24, 2012, 9:11 AM Updated: Monday, September 24, 2012, 9:20 AM

By The Associated Press





LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — The man known to a generation of Americans as "The Science Guy" is condemning efforts by some Christian groups to cast doubts on evolution and lawmakers who want to bring the Bible into science classrooms.

Bill Nye, a mechanical engineer and star of the popular 1990s TV show "Bill Nye The Science Guy," has waded into the evolution debate with an online video that urges parents not to pass their religious-based doubts about evolution on to their children.

Christians who view the stories of the Old Testament as historical fact have come to be known as creationists, and many argue that the world was created by God just a few thousand years ago.

"The Earth is not 6,000 or 10,000 years old," Nye said in an interview with The Associated Press. "It's not. And if that conflicts with your beliefs, I strongly feel you should question your beliefs."

more at link

[HopelesslyLiberal]

1. The message I'd like to be able to send to creationists is...

...that they are hurting their religions. Creationists lack the imagination and understanding to reconcile their religious beliefs with established scientific knowledge. Eventually, as people are faced with comparing the ambiguous results or prayer with the statistical reproducibility of science they are forced to question their beliefs. If their parents have resorted to lies to support their faith, they will be found to be frauds and, in turn, so will their faith.

In the end, Science will win. It doesn't have to but these people have set this up as an either/or contest. If they want to go head to head, they are setting themselves up to fail.

Oh, well. I won't shed a tear at their passing.

[cbayer]

2. Agree that creationists hurt their own religions, as holding on to unsupportable

positions put all of their positions in question.

However, I don't think there is a battle between science and religion that one will win. There is more than enough room for both at the table and they are not at all difficult to reconcile.

Those that can not do so are destined to be stuck in a 2 dimensional reality which will not stand the test of time.

[edhopper]

5. I am stuck in a 3 dimensiona reality

or 4 if i go with Einstein, or 11 I back String Theory.
I see nothing in religion that i need to reconcile with my world view.
Religion offers nothing about which science needs to reconcile.
Religion on the other hand must reconcile much of it;s literature with the facts that we have discovered through science.

I don't know what magical future you envision when we something presents itself, something that has remained hidden throughout the history of the Universe, that will make people of science accept any part of religious doctrine or belief.

"God, a deity or the supernatural do not exist"

When you can present some evidence that that statement is wrong, then science can consider religion in this context.
Until then.....

[cbayer]

7. I wasn't referring to you or any individual, but a broader view.

I was talking about compatibility. Those who wish to deny the importance or, even, existence of the other are exclusionist.

No evidence is needed for those those that embrace religion, nor should any be demanded of them. To tell them they are just flat out wrong is wrong headed, imo. Unless of course you can prove it. Which you can't.

Science need not consider religion at all, I agree. But religion does need to consider science. My point is that they are not incompatible.

[edhopper]

9. Okay

I would say that is true. Religious people can and do embrace science without losing their faith.

Wish more did though. (embrace science that is)

[cbayer]

11. We agree.

[Oregonian]

18. I have no problem telling people who make flatly wrong assertions...

...that they are wrong. No, Noah did not put every animal species on the ark. No, Jesus did not walk on water. And yes, if you embrace those things, and don't like me calling you wrong, then you need to prove it.

The religious who deny science are wrongheaded. Those who embrace science and ignore religion are no different than you, probably (unless you are embracing every religion in the world), because there is only one kind of science.

[cbayer]

19. Me neither. You are making assertions about something you can not possibly know.

No scientist worth her salt would claim that that which has not been proven definitely does not exist.

But an anti-theist would.

[Oregonian]

20. So baseless assertions are the province of the faithful

And the faithful alone? Only YOU are entitled to spout nonsensical bullshit?

This sounds oddly like your bigoted, brusque opinion on the liberal Christian thread where I posted a harmless remark about hate groups.

[cbayer]

21. No Baseless assertions and assumptions are held by many - believers and non-believers alike.

For example, you are making many about me.

You might want to step back. Calling other members bigots is generally frowned upon here.

[Oregonian]

23. You might want to read critically

I called your specific opinion bigoted and brusque. If you consider that a personal insult, or a labeling of you as a bigot, it's your reading comprehension problem, not mine.

By virtue of being a believer, your belief is baseless. You use faith, the writings of desert-dwellers from thousands of years ago, and the utter disregard of modern discoveries regarding physics and biology. Not only is your belief baseless, but it's been repeatedly debunked, over and over. Yet you claim you have more right to your baseless, debunked position than I have to my position that your position is baseless.

That's pretty funny right there.

[HopelesslyLiberal]

8. You're right

There is room at the table and they are easy to reconcile with a modicum of imagination. To be more precise, those who hold on to particular versions of religion that can not adapt and grow, will see their numbers decrease until they are alone.

[cbayer]

10. Which is why I think the U/U churches seem to be flourishing, as are

these newer congregations that claim no particular christian denomination but welcome those with a variety of views and beliefs.

That's a good thing, imo.

[HopelesslyLiberal]

12. And U/U pastors rock!

Or so I hear from the SB1070 protests!

[MineralMan]

22. They hurt more than their own religions.

They're literally trying to kill science. If you cannot see that, you are not looking. They harm the future by putting stumbling blocks in the way of children.

There is no room in our education system for creationism. It is a bankrupt fraud.

[Oregonian]

24. 100% agree, mineralman N/T

[kenfrequed]

4. I would agree

... but dark ages happen. Civilizations do collapse and do fall into recursive trenches of idiocy and blindness. Sciences and technologies are lost sometimes and we are no less likely to experience that now.

[trotsky]

3. He sounds like one of those uppity new atheists!

How dare he question others' sincerely-held beliefs?

[edhopper]

6. 46%!!!

We have a country of friggin morons!
No wonder Obama is still neck and neck with Thurston Howell.

[Jim__]

13. Can you post the link? Thanks.

[Jim__]

14. I found it. Thanks.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0924/Bill-Nye-former-Science-Guy-warns-creationism-threatens-US-science

[cbayer]

15. Argghh!! Second time today. Sorry about that.

[Jim__]

16. Your link is better than the one I found. More info and the video.

[2ndAmForComputers]

17. I said it before and I'll say it again:

I am truly, adamantly convinced there is no such thing as a creationist who is not an idiot.