I was familiar with the name Bill Nye, the science guy; I watched a few of his shows here and there and became a fan; when his show was on, I believe I was in college by than and really didn't keep up with much tv; I was very busy studying, but I remember the coin, Bill Nye, the science guy. After seeing him, he did attract me to him with his chrism and wit; that's one thing I had grown to like about Tyson, also; I'm really glade he took time out to debate a creationist; it allowed rebuttals to the accepted norm to be introduced. The thing is though, the way they smug the Christian faith and sometimes spread misinformation greatly decreased the respect that I had for them; however, they're still a bit more pleasant than Richard Dawkins; I believe that both Nye and Tyson are open to the right type of new evidence; the problem is their tendencies to dismiss creationism and intelligent design websites stunt their growth; I believe this is what separates me from the likes of them, as I have a very open mind; the scientists introduced by Ken Ham shows that there are other scientists like me; also, you can describe me as the natural antithesis to bullying; if I get a sense that some one is bullying, which is the jive I'm kind of getting from them, I just have a natural response of disagreement for there position, despite what the position might be; if I sense you're mocking someone, I just cannot respect you; such is just my nature; I'll admit that I'm probably a bit biased in knowing that Christianity will prove true and will be vindicated in one day dispelling some of the anti-science stereotypes; however, at the end of the day, science is what science says and for me, after thorough investigation and in the absence of rebuttal, I must accept whatever the findings might show; when thought about properly, I see science as getting better at identifying how God made the Universe or the mechanisms at His disposal thereof; right now, I just simply see nothing developing in science that displaces the idea of a Creator behind the scenes of the Universe and natural laws; but perhaps the greatest threat to a Creator that I've found appeared to be the work of Lawrence Krauss, until the information that rebuts his ideas are brought into proper into the discussion; and to him I'd ask, if his principles held true, why aren't we observing other Big Bang events throughout the vacuum of space all the time, if particles can seemingly come in and out of existence? If someone could conclusively and scientifically explain to me how something comes from nothing as clear as I understand F=ma or even the mole in chemistry, than I'd have pause for concern that the Universe could be possible absent a Creator, while it would still be implausible to than assume the principles of life coming from lifeless molecules to produce even a virus, eventually; that would be next in line for development; after that, it would be a matter of creating an evolution like model that is much more sound, coming from a chemistry perspective, which is my field; my mind really loves organic chemistry, but biochemistry is a bit more rough for my liking, for one, because the nomenclature in biochemistry does jive with me as well as organic chemistry; I've been contemplating a long study of a field called bioorganic chemistry, hoping that it would jive more with the way my brain is most comfortably working, as compared to biochemistry; these changes to science would be a development that would render my mind more neutral away from religious, perhaps, except for the matter of how God works miracles for me all the time; but the key, no such evolution like model is predictable at the moment, when taking all sides of the argument into account; I just have a mind for justice that way; I will not just simply dismiss one side of an argument, unless said side has views that are designed to be inflammatory, clearly outside of logic, patently absurd, irrational, and clearly scientific nonsense; the scientific information that I've come across that supports creationism and intelligent design clearly does not amount to a level as escaping logic and most certainly is not information that level that would make me consider information as outside of logic, patently absurd, irrational, and clear scientific nonsense.
Log in to comment