Bill Nye 'The Science Guy' Hits Evolution Deniers

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicFireman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’d rather tell my children, if I had any, that they are a unique creation of God and that no one can tell them otherwise.

I liked Mr Wizard that aired on Nick…

And someone should tell Mr Nye that democats that are pro abortion deny the science of the development of an unborn child.
 
jediliz said:
I’d rather tell my children, if I had any, that they are a unique creation of God and that no one can tell them otherwise.

I liked Mr Wizard that aired on Nick…

And someone should tell Mr Nye that democats that are pro abortion deny the science of the development of an unborn child.
Click to expand...
👍
 
It makes me so sad to see these people, who’s minds are so incredible and capable of so much, deny God simply because they have no Empirical proof of him. Imagine the good they could do for everyone if they would stop treating science and religion as opponents and started treating them as they are, complimentary fields.

God created the universe, and he made it amazing, knowing that it would inspire us and fill us with curiosity. Science was begun as a way to understand God’s creation and our role in it… why can’t scientists now see that?

For the record though, I believe he is right that evolution should be taught to students. Just not evolution in absence of God.
 
Nye sounds like just one more in the long line of angry arrogant leftists. He hides it well, like Obama, but this article proves that the man has contempt for God-fearing people. Because they don’t agree with him, and because they probably prescribe to a moral code which he rejects. 🤓
 
Indeed.

BTW. What Moral Code do the Atheist, leftist, Obama supporters, Liberals have? Only mutually agreed upon temporary fads of morality, methinks.

Ask a Atheist Liberal to* define* ‘good.’ It’s quite amusing really…:cool:
 
Nimzovik said:
Indeed.

BTW. What Moral Code do the Atheist, leftist, Obama supporters, Liberals have? Only mutually agreed upon temporary fads of morality, methinks.

Ask a Atheist Liberal to* define* ‘good.’ It’s quite amusing really…:cool:
Click to expand...
Just because someone is an atheist, it does not mean that he or she is without morals–not at all. You are positing that anyone who is liberal or supports the current President is not of sound morals or follows moral “fads”. Ask an atheist liberal to define good? What are you even talking about? Many liberal atheists are quite well educated and could give you a very articulate response about their idea or definition of good. This response was presumptuous, judgmental, and uncharitable.
 
I’m curious after reading these responses: does one have to deny God to accept evolution?

I don’t know what Nye’s beliefs are regarding God, but unless I missed something his comments were restricted to belief/denial of the theory of evolution, not to belief/denial of God…:confused:
 
seekerz said:
I’m curious after reading these responses:** does one have to deny God to accept evolution?
**
I don’t know what Nye’s beliefs are regarding God, but unless I missed something his comments were restricted to belief/denial of the theory of evolution, not to belief/denial of God…:confused:
Click to expand...
No, the Catholic Church says that it is fine to believe in evolution. I don’t know why people on here want to dismiss the theory when even their own church supports it.
 
Et_Cetera said:
No, the Catholic Church says that it is fine to believe in evolution. I don’t know why people on here want to dismiss the theory when even their own church supports it.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge, that is the official position of the Church. We are free to believe or not believe in evolution as long as we acknowledge that God created the universe.

The comments just seemed to immediately assume (I’m not sure on what basis) that Nye is somehow denying God in that article.
 
What Bill Nye doesn’t say is that evolution is a theory that seems to best fit what evidence we have. But as Chesterton pointed out, any puzzle can have any number of explanations, of which the most obvious isn’t always the right one. That doesn’t mean that some aspects of evolution aren’t true or evident, it only means that we don’t have enough evidence to precisely say how life began, how humans are so unique, why we have longings and needs that can’t be met by simply feeding, clothing, and putting roofs over our heads–why we need occupation, why we build for our species, why we want to go to the stars, and so on and so on. Evolution has not answered the most important things and yet we are supposed to put absolute faith in it. He’s leaving out other equally important elements of reality if he thinks all we need is good engineers to “build stuff”. :rolleyes:
 
seekerz said:
To my knowledge, that is the official position of the Church. We are free to believe or not believe in evolution as long as we acknowledge that God created the universe.

The comments just seemed to immediately assume (I’m not sure on what basis) that Nye is somehow denying God in that article.
Click to expand...
I don’t get some of the comments in this thread either. Unless I’m missing a major part of the link provided in the OP, Nye didn’t seem to say anything that goes against what the Church believes. The only thing I see being upset about is that he is supporting Obama, but the rest of what he says isn’t contradictory to anything the Church has said about evolution.
 
Et_Cetera said:
Just because someone is an atheist, it does not mean that he or she is without morals–not at all. You are positing that anyone who is liberal or supports the current President is not of sound morals or follows moral “fads”. Ask an atheist liberal to define good? What are you even talking about? Many liberal atheists are quite well educated and could give you a very articulate response about their idea or definition of good. This response was presumptuous, judgmental, and uncharitable.
Click to expand...
Ahhhhhhhh… Someone took my bait. 😉 😃

In regard to:"… Just because someone is an atheist, it does not mean that he or she is without morals–not at all…"

Atheists have morals eh? Hmmmmm in terms of the** ideal,**I reiterate. The Ideal. That is; not Pathology in regard to a certain Philosophy -
  1. It is not Christians that accept abortion, now is it?
    2)     Yes! -Atheists may indeed have, individiually and often act, collectively in a quasi moral manner. They may have, for example, a belief it is wrong to kill another man and run off with his wife.
    However. They have no** absolute code** (such as the Bible) that is shared by all, to prohibit such described amoral behavior, now do they? They may have the Law of the Local Government, yes… As I said earlier, the said Law, may just be a code of behavior that may just be a Fad, of behavior, that enforces temporarily, such prohibitive strictures. At least, until the next Presidential administration comes along, or Supreme Court ruling,😉 that may negate any previous said Law. Can this be denied? No it can not. Ergo there is no reason on earth to compel them to behave in what Christains would call moral. Excepting, of course, for the reprecusions of amoral behavior.
With this in mind, is not sociopathy, the pinnacle of evolution? Why not? Certainly it has worked for the *shark,*yes? They have proven themselves far more fit, in regard to “evolutionary survival of the fittest,” for a far longer time than humans have… Yes?

Indeed, if one were to kill another man, and steal his wife, he is then in a far better position to self replicate, and propagate his species, is he not? The only proviso would be that he not get caught by those …er… less advanced, evolutionarily speaking, than he-yes?

In terms of :

" Many liberal atheists are quite well educated and could give you a very articulate response about their idea or definition of good. This response was presumptuous, judgmental, and uncharitable"

Uncharitable? Far from it. To endeavor to enlighten others from error is* not* uncharitable. Note as well: This is a …ahem… Forum. We are here to discuss, to banter ideas. We use the Socratic method at times. At other times we do not. Yes?😉

You say “… Many liberal atheists are quite well educated and could give you a very articulate response about their idea or definition of good.”

Oh yes? Well you* are* right about *one *thing. They can certainly give us their definition of their opinion of what is ‘good.’ But it amounts to just that. An opinion. This is where Christians and Atheists are radically different. Christians have an absolute standard. Atheists do not.

So. Let them bring their definition of ‘good.’ Then let them tell us why we, or Society, or the world,would ever* listen to, or adhere to, their opinion.:cool:* Why? Why would any Atheist obey any other Atheist’s opinion of what is good, when it may conflict with their* own* opinion of good???:cool:

Riddle me that one.😃
 
The biggest problem with the theory of evolution is this: there is no evidence of evolution in the fossil record. In fact, it’s quite the opposite; there are long stretches of nothing in the strata of the earth, then suddenly a huge pile of fossils. Where are the in-between forms that must have evolved from amoebas into dinosaurs? Where are the in-between forms from dinosaurs to mammals? Where are all the non-fit creatures that didn’t survive evolution?

If evolution is nature’s way of trying out new things until it finds one that work, then there should be as many failed creatures that became extinct as there were failures in Edison’s quest for the electric light bulb.
 
hmmmmmmmmm… If I recall correctly, debates regarding evolution have been temporarily banned-is this not so?
 
Et_Cetera said:
Just because someone is an atheist, it does not mean that he or she is without morals–not at all. You are positing that anyone who is liberal or supports the current President is not of sound morals or follows moral “fads”. Ask an atheist liberal to define good? What are you even talking about? Many liberal atheists are quite well educated and could give you a very articulate response about their idea or definition of good. This response was presumptuous, judgmental, and uncharitable.
Click to expand...
Nye’s hostile tone gives him away, I think. And I DO think that many good, moral people support Obama, to broach YOUR point, but all of them have been duped by a well-crafted but phony Madison Avenue image. There is no excuse at this point in time not to have seen through the guy. Watch “2016”, if you (meant generically) have the courage to be confronted with the truth. Blessings, Rob:)
 
Nimzovik said:
hmmmmmmmmm… If I recall correctly, debates regarding evolution have been temporarily banned-is this not so?
Click to expand...
Theories about origins are the stuff of the big questions about life. I hope that they could be discussed without rancor on a Catholic site. 🤷 Rob
 
I would be hostile if creationism-as-science were being taught to my child.

I am thankful that this garbage isn’t even presented in Catholic schools.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top