Bill Nye Debate: Creationists Respond; Scientist Politely Replies

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


  1. Ah finally. A creationist with a brain. Unfortunately for you, you are still wrong because the second law of thermodynamics says that the entropy of the UNIVERSE is always increasing which essentially means that disorder in the universe is always increasing. This does not mean that isolated incidents of increased order cannot happen. It simply means that if they do occur, the rate at which total disorder is increasing exceeds the rate at which total order is increasing. Sorry creationists. You’re still sht out of luck.

  2. “Bill Nye are you influencing children in a positive way?’
    How would encouraging children to seek truths that can be explained with science and to change their view as the evidence provides better or clearer answers over time be bad? Especially over the other option which is to allow them to read a book with inaccuracies, racism, sexism, and many other things that are viewed in modern times as outdated for a reason just so that you can think that your child is taking something good away from it.

  3. “What purpose do you think we are here for if not for salvation?”
    If we were just here for salvation then what would the just 298,000 species of plants be here for? I do not encourage that people get into the mindset of creationism mostly because it throws away scientific findings more often because people just want to believe that they are better or more special than other creatures in some way. There are other species on this planet and putting ourselves as a race above them is stupid because not to long ago we were like them as well. So instead of spending time preaching about salvation how about we actually work towards saving our planet not just for ourselves but for the other millions of species that live here.

  4. “If god did not create everything then how did the first single-celled organism originate? By chance?”
    It is very possible that due to circumstances at the time that it encouraged organisms to originate and some have been around longer than we have. The tardigrade for example are microscopic animals that have lived on this planet then us and have lived through five mass extinctions. So to think that one being or entity can create something as amazing as the tardigrade, that has outlived and probably continue to do such since it can live without water and even survived in space, and never mention it once but instead drone on about our species is in my opinion more to suit people’s selfish desire to be the center of the world than honest thinking. And if you want to make fun of chance as occuring in everyday life then how is this all creating god of yours originate in the first place? Did he create himself or just originate out of nowhere by chance, because this question is pretty much the same as you posed.

  5. “There has only been lucy…and only a few of the necessary pieces of proof have been found.”
    I think that it is somewhat hypocritical of creationist who need to see the step by step process of proof to believe in evolution but ignore the proof that is required to believe the book that they read claiming that all they need is faith. But I guess that is the difference between science and creationism, which is that science needs proof before it calls itself a fact instead of a theory. Though I will choose to believe in evolution over the bible based on the amount of fact backing each one, and instead of just putting faith in something as soon as proper evidence comes to prove it is wrong or that another possibility is more likely I will believe it.

  6. “Is it completely illogical that the earth was created mature?”
    Yes, mostly because there has been nothing to support that this is the case. Since if there is not evidence at all whether found in its favor or against they will claim it is a possibility there is no use in arguing with this one.