‘Even If I Am Going to Hell’: Bill Nye ‘the Science Guy’ Defends Evolutionary Beliefs

Bill Nye YouTubeIn the latest issue of a widely-circulated science magazine, Bill Nye ‘the Science Guy’ defiantly defends his evolutionary beliefs and says that even if he ends up ‘going to Hell,’ it still won’t prove that the earth is young.

As previously reported, Nye debated Answers in Genesis (AiG) president Ken Ham earlier this year in a historic creation/evolution debate that was viewed by millions. Two months after the debate, Nye attacked Ham’s biblical creation beliefs in an opinion column published by Skeptical Inquirer magazine.

“I held strongly to the view that [the debate] was an opportunity to expose the well-intending Ken Ham and the support he receives from his followers as being bad for Kentucky, bad for science education, bad for the U.S., and thereby bad for humankind,” Nye wrote in the Skeptical Inquirer column. “I do not feel I’m exaggerating when I express it this strongly.”

In the column, Nye asserted that his evolutionary beliefs are founded on “elementary science and common sense.”

“I did my best to slam Ken Ham with a great many scientific and common sense arguments,” Nye boasted. “I believed he wouldn’t have the time or the focus to address many of them.”

Now, several months after the Skeptical Inquirer commentary, another magazine is spotlighting Nye’s anti-creation views. In a front page story titled “Bill Nye Fights Back,” the September issue of Popular Science describes Nye’s evolutionary beliefs and his perspective on the February debate with Ham.

“Let’s say that I am, through my actions, doomed, and that I will go to Hell,” Nye told Popular Science. “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.”

  • Connect with Christian News

The Popular Science article, subtitled “How a mild-mannered children’s celebrity plans to save science in America—or go down swinging,” features images of “the Science Guy” throwing punches at the camera. Nye says his goal in debating Ham earlier this year was simple: “I want[ed] to destroy him.”

During the debate with Ham, Nye repeatedly claimed that technological developments would not be possible if everyone believed in biblical creation. He reiterated these allegations in the Popular Science article, saying evolutionary “science” makes technology possible.

“We would not have this, all this, without the body of knowledge of science,” he asserted. “And to have people suppress that, ignore that, it’s certainly their First Amendment right, but it’s not in our best interest. And I don’t just mean the people of Kentucky or America, I mean humanity.”

AiG quickly countered Nye’s claims and accused Popular Science of promoting humanism instead of science.

Popular Science has long been known for featuring the newest inventions and the latest electronic gadgets, and for looking at potential breakthroughs in technology,” wrote AiG’s Troy Lacey in a recent online article. “But, in recent years, they have been diving into more and more religious topics by pushing the religion of secular humanism.”

Lacey argued that Nye and Popular Science present a false dichotomy between faith and human reason or “science.”

“Both Ken Ham and Bill Nye use reason—the difference is that Bill Nye believes we can use autonomous human reasoning to determine our worldview concerning origins, whereas Ken Ham uses reason with God’s word (the Bible) as the foundation, for using this reason to develop his worldview,” the article states.

In a second article, Lacey rebuts Nye’s argument that evolutionary beliefs are necessary for technological advancements.

“The topic of origins has nothing to do with developing technology (except that anyone developing technology has to accept that the laws of nature and laws of logic that can only be accounted for within a Christian worldview),” he argues. “Actually, it is the belief in naturalistic evolution that will hold the population back!”

According to Lacey, the Popular Science article is an attempt to exalt secular humanism and denigrate Christianity.

“This is not ‘Popular Science’ but propaganda,” Lacey concluded.

Photo: YouTube

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has ChristianNews.net been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Jean

    You don’t go to hell for believing in old earth. You go to hell for rejecting Jesus Christ.

    You know. The guy who says let there be light and then there is light..

    In stead of debating, why don’t someone just give this guy a tract?

    Romans 1:
    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
    29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
    30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
    31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
    32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

    Notice the word debate in verse 29?

    • Nita Johnson

      You know when God created this earth and all that is in it , he didn’t create it,those things in it or Adam and Eve in their infant state of being, but rather many years old,at the start. Everything was created fully mature. That I would suppose has to account for things seeming older. God’s word tells us that, “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” (2 Peter 3:8)

      • Jean

        I never thought about it in that way before. Yet.. Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made every thing beautiful in his time: also he has set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God makes from the beginning to the end.

  • mreldcity

    The promotion of a 6 day old earth is one of the greatest heresies out there because it prevents any thinking person from considering anything else a Christian will say and makes
    God’s Word out to be a fairy tale.

    And the Bible doesn’t even teach that the earth is 6 days old. Genesis 1:1 tells us the earth was already created, and THEN proceeds to outline how it was gradually prepared for the habitation of man.

    And any Bible reader should know that ‘day’ in the Bible doesn’t always represent a literal day.

  • Brad

    Those who refuse to believe that every living thing is by design, by a higher intelligence who designed earth for us to inhabit and enjoy, is ignorant and at odds with our Creator God, and will be held accountable no matter what.

  • Festus

    The fool hath said in his heart there is no God

  • Erik Calvin

    Correct me if I am wrong if a 5 year old comes up to you and says daddy I don’t need you to tell me anything, I have been in this world 5 long years so i know it all. You probably would just ask your child did he bump his head. You wouldn’t entertain the thought because you know at 40 years old you don’t even know a third of the secretes of this world. So why would we let some like Bill Nye who is 58 years old tell us that a manuscript such as the Bible that has been around longer than any of his ancestors isn’t true. OR anyone else that think that they can stand against the Bible with their false wisdom. Keep in mind you never hear of a 100 year old Atheist telling you on how they lived so long based on their beliefs that there is no God. Go figure

  • Jean

    We are talking about GOD here right? The Creator of reality. Like a computer game company ceo busy creating a virtual game reality He will just tell his programmer crew ‘Let there be fish in the water before the end of the day.’ and behold: there will be fish in the water by the end of the day. The real problem for us is that God also prepared a hell for the devils and the only very easy way not to end up in it yourself is not to reject Jesus Christ. It sounds a bit more like a close call horror than a fairy tale

  • Rob

    Evolutionism (the belief that your great…..great grandparents were reptiles) is not even science. Evolutionists continue to pretend it’s a God vs Science issue when it’s an anti-science (Evolutionism) vs Science issue.

  • Kevin

    I watched the debate. I myself do not have a strong opinion about young or old earth. But I am aware that many conservative theologians hold to an old-earth perspective, because the they do not think the Biblical account, in the original languages, has to mean 6 literal 24 hour periods. The point is that you dont have to be a young-earther to be a conservative evangelical. Some assume that an old-earth understanding must be heretical or at least unorthodox, but remember – its by grace thru faith in Jesus that we are saved. Our salvation is not based upon if we have a young earth belief. Salvation is not even dependent on if we consider the Bible infallible, though it would definitely harm our growth in faith if we don’t consider it infallible. Old earthers evangelicals believe the Bible is God’s Word too.

  • There is no conflict with Genesis or the age of the earth—the earth is billions of years old and this does not contradict scripture. Besides arguing about the age of the earth is not Salvific—its silly—you can still believe in Jesus as your Lord & Savior and believe that the earth is millions of years old.

  • It’s funny. AiG claims that evolution is false, yet they themselves believe it is true, and their museum even has (or had) an exhibit showing how the millions of modern species today evolved from a relatively few thousands of common ancestors on board the Ark. Genesis can’t account for all the species we have today unless evolution is true, because there are far too many species for a mating pair of each species to fit on board the Ark. AiG’s explanation is that there were only a few thousands of pairs of “kinds” on the Ark, and that all modern species are descended from them. But that’s exactly what On the Origin of Species was describing: new species arising by descent with variation from common ancestors. AiG knows that Darwin was right about new species evolving, AiG needs the evolution of species in order to reconcile Genesis with reality, and yet they still preach that evolution is false.

    Makes you think, doesn’t it?

  • Paul strano

    In all religions faith is absolutely essential and atheism/secular humanism is no different. I am a Christian who has FAITH that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. My friends of the atheist/secular humanism RELIGION believe that Charles Darwin is Lord and that EVERYTHING both great and small in all the heavens and the earth came from NOTHING!!!! To believe that everything came from NOTHING takes much more FAITH than to believe in God as creator. I tip my hats to all of you of the atheist/secular humanism RELIGION for the sheer amount of faith you have to have to ascribe to your belief that something can come from NOTHING!!!! If only I had that amount of faith!!!!

  • dvd

    The End Is NYE

  • DisqusBurner1983

    Don’t the Catholics accept evolution? Why can’t other denominations?

    • Oboehner

      Catholics worship mary too, what’s your point? Evolution is a religion.

      • DisqusBurner1983

        Um, no. Evolution is not a religion by any standard of definition. My point is that Catholics and several other Christian denominations have accepted evolution as the likely scientific explanation for the modern world. This doesn’t appear to have shaken their belief in God too much, since presumably they believe God is behind evolution as much as any other theory on our origins. So why is evolution such a far-fetched idea for Baptists and Evangelists and all those other weird, bible-belt US Christians?

        • Oboehner

          Um, yes. Merriam-Webster – Religion: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group, a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices.
          I could care less if Catholics and several other Christian denominations dance around naked in main street parades with “apostate” tattooed on their foreheads, evolution is a religion with no scientific proof what-so-ever. Any true Bible-believing Christian would know that evolutionism is just another false religion.

          Bill Nye explaining evolution- “molecules just happen” “somehow, probably… these molecules hooked together”.

  • Donna Kemp-Long

    Scientifically speaking, neither evolutionism or creationism can be proven. If one does their research without blindly following either point of view, there are many scientific conclusions that do not support an evolutionist theory simply because it consistently debunks the 2nd law of thermodynamics. There is not one person in the world that can prove evolution substianted with scientific FACT, it cannot be done. The same for creationism. Either theory is opinion and that’s it!!!! Both take faith and unfortunately only one side is taught in our schools. Both sides should be equally and objectively presented. It does not have to be about religion, I think some (not all) scientists like to pull the “religious fanatic” card when they can’t present concrete facts. It deflects attention from their inability to prove their theory. Same for creationism. Each person has to decide what they believe but only FACTS not opinion need to be taught in our schools.

    • Brian Huggett

      I agree, but my opinion is that since the laws of thermodynamics don’t allow for an eternal universe it must have had a beginning, which leads us to the other great law, the law of cause and effect. The cause must be immaterial, and must be of unimaginable power and intelligence to bring into being such a universe. As you can tell I believe that cause to be the God of the Bible… just my opinion.