He's pretty bad ass
Someone please prove me wrong, but I don't think he actually said that.
@Eat me, so it's a fictional story? Damn.
@AnotherIdiot, That's what the government wants you to think!
@Banditofiddlesticks, Bill Nye is a straight-up G. When discussing the believability of the movie Interstellar, he said something along the lines of, "Well, not too believable, I mean, if to have someone like Anne Hathaway onboard and expect me NOT to jump her bones? Yeah, right."
@Eat me, misclicked downvote, sorry :(
@Niam Leeson, I up voted myself to balance it out. No worries.
@Eat me, I can't see the site. Is it true or not?
@afro samurai2012, false
Bill Bill Bill Bill
@Kriztofer, bill nye the scienceee guyy
Most religious people (at least the ones I know) still believe life begins at conception. I do too, although I'm not really religious
@Sexy Homunculus, I don't understand how there is any other defining moment
@Sexy Homunculus, my friend says it's at 3 weeks because by then the fetus has a closed circulatory system and thus it's a complete human life. Me on the other hand am not sure where I stand on the line. However I bring this up as some food for thought.
@arealwerewolf, that's certainly one way to look at it. I personally believe in what's considered the Law of Genesis, which basically says each species will create after it's own kind. So basically dogs will reproduce dogs, cats will reproduce cats, and humans will create humans. I know some people (like your friend) will argue about when the unborn are considered human, but to me it's all just a different level of development in the life process of a human being.
@Sexy Homunculus, that's actually a point (or at least with the given example of Genesis) I haven't heard of. I'm more lenient towards your pov anyways but hey as long as we can get some more opinions like we've got going right now (civil is what I mean) then we might learn a thing or two (I know I have). Sorry if none of this makes sense. I'm beyond exhausted but am always willing to partake in discussions like this.
@arealwerewolf, I agree. It seems like most people nowadays don't care about civil discussion and are only concerned with furthering their agendas (this goes for both pro-life and pro-choice individuals). I'm glad to see someone like you agreeing to hear my my side of things in a respectful manner. I try to do the same with other people, and even though we may not agree on everything I still give them a chance to explain their viewpoint as long as they're willing to hear mine
@Sexy Homunculus, Well I say thank you for the civil talk I thoroughly enjoyed it.
@arealwerewolf, it's not an easy question to answer, because people are really disagreeing about what life itself really is.
If life means consciousness, then life starts at birth.
If life means a heartbeat, then life starts ~6 weeks after conception.
If life starts when you are given a soul, then it starts (presumably) at conception.
@Sexy Homunculus, it isn't just religious people that believe that (as you obviously demonstrate by your own admission). It is hard to imagine any other defining instance in the development process that isn't clearly a step of an already existing human life growing and developing.
@Sexy Homunculus, you all are impressively talking about this in a way I never expected online. People argue and get negative a lot even here on funny pics. You guys (no joke) have restored a little bit of my faith in humanity.
@Demacsspider, Ya, the funny pics community doesn't really argue over things, rather we usually just discus. Sometimes with minor debate.
@Leprechaun Giant, at the point in time where the fetal nervous system is complex enough to qualify as conscious; there is no exact date and it would vary from conception to conception but it's accepted to be around early to mid trimester. Meanwhile creationism belief of life at conception came from people believing that the sperm carried the baby in the way it was going to be at birth but in microscopic form, something we know is false and science can prove that a blastula is not in anyway conscious. Another thing Nye mentioned in a different debate is that the only thing religion has on science is that they have specified point in time for their belief where science doesn't: because they had no way to measure anything (like point of full consciousness during conception) they more or less arbitrarily assigned points where as science is trying to pin things down by observation of things that in reality are never constant.
@The Megaton Bomb, alright this is interesting I've not heard of these ideas before thanks for sharing. I swear funnypics is the awesome and more civil side of the Internet.
Way to go guys high fives all around.
@Sexy Homunculus, I agree that life begins at conception simply because I've never heard a reasonable explanation for why it starts later. The one I hear the most often is "A fetus isn't a human, just a cluster of cells" but all fvcking matter is "just a cluster of cells". Does that mean if I have a few less cells then someone else it is more ethical to kill me because he's a larger cluster of cells? I've just never understood any pro-choice argument.
@Sexy Homunculus, do you understand what evolution is/how it works?
@I Are Lebo, for me, the word "consciousness" is out because that would negate plants which been accepted as living. Heartbeat is interesting because a regulated heartbeat is a sign of some level of brain activity. Science has some definition around brain dead.
@KMN, as I said, there's no 'right' answer because we can't even agree on the question.
@I Are Lebo, I think we can agree that if the question has the words "right" or "left" in it there will be no agreement in the the 'United' States.
@Sexy Homunculus, There is no defining moment that constitutes "alive". The only difference between abiotic and biotic things is the way their parts interact with each other and their surroundings. For something to be alive, it really just has to exist in space and continue to do so by some chemical processes. Rocks could be said to be alive because they take a certain form and maintain it astoundingly well, but most people wouldn't agree because we can't relate to rocks as they don't exhibit bevahiours or have sensory organs.
@Iron Grape , to be fair, biology has a list of criteria that something must match to be considered "alive". The major criteria are ability to grow, reproduce and ability to metabolize (use an energy source). There are other criteria, as well. Rocks cannot metabolize, but at some point, unborn children can. One could say that the "cluster of cells" can gather and utilize energy to grow into a person and thus those cells are alive. That being said, I personally believe it's one's choice which route they take as an unborn child *technically* fits the definition of parasite and we kill tapeworms all the time. My two cents. :D
@Sexy Homunculus, I would like to add that I enjoyed reading these comments. It's nice to see a topic discussed in a productive manner where both sides can present a well thought out argument and learn about the totality of a situation rather than becoming hostile and stubborn.
@HoorayFerSocks, personally, I'm all for abortion. The attitude of 'every life is sacred and we all have a right to exist' is why the planet is so dangerously overpopulated and getting more so every day.
@I Are Lebo, I agree 100%. In fact, I say very similar things about overpopulation on this topic as well as topics related to world hunger and medicine. I also joke that I'm not pro-choice or pro-life. I'm pro-abortion. Kill em all.
@jklyt1, Although I'm late here, I'm pro-choice because it's not my body. If it was, then I would want the choice.
Sometimes, you're just not ready, and that's okay. An unwanted child won't have the same opportunities or chance, and I'd prefer the suffering to end earlier.
However, it's not a matter to be taken lightly. You shouldn't be forced to abort or keep by a partner, or ANYONE else. If one of you isn't ready or healthy, then the situation changes to whatever works. That could mean abortion, or it could mean a single parent, or it could mean foster parenting, or it could mean compromises. I don't care as long as once the child is born or not, it gets respected and loved as it should be.
@HoorayFerSocks, but it's not as comical to kill babies! That's why you just murder the fratboys!
@Fantabulous Toaster, the obvious counter argument though is that the child is not the woman's body, what would be your response to that? Is the baby not supposed to be given the same rights because it's still in the womb?
Just saying that this is like .05% of "Christians" just like you could pick a crazy evolutionist. For example anyone on Ancient Aliens lol
Sources need to be cited
Let me preface this with mentioning that I do not agree with Todd Akin: I would have little-to-no remaining respect for Bill Nye (who was once my childhood hero) if these quotes were actually legitimate. As it stands now, I see him as a much more petty and egocentric man than I did as a child.
@Doctor Krieger, it's fine to disagree with something, but bill nye has become such an asshole about it
@Doctor Krieger, This isn't actually a quote. It's part of an internet story someone wrote about Bill Nye.
@Doctor Krieger, nye hasn't done anything wrong. He's been the most level headed about it. He's getting tired of people being stupid about evolution and climate change but he's still keeping his head level. That should have earned him your respect if nothing else
@Doctor Krieger, this is a fake quote from him. However, I do hear he swears like a sailor.
@Doctor Krieger, brace yourself, because I'm about to blow your mind, but… This quote is something you read on the Internet that was actually not true. Someone made up false information and then posted it next week picture of a person claiming they said those words. There, I said it. Steady yourself… Are you okay? Go throw up if you need to, I understand.
@Doctor Krieger, Do you believe everything you read on the Internet?
@CriTiKa1, "if these quotes were true."
@DarkSock, "if these quotes were true".
@Skitty2901, I am aware.
@Sniper of Puns, I. Am. Aware.
@Shaygirgenti, he's a complete asshole.
@Doctor Krieger, guys, did you know: I'm aware that these quotes are fake, but you just don't seem to understand hypotheticals?
I'm so used to hearing fvck that I didn't even think it was strange and thought he meant he didn't normally use the word "idiot".
Even if he didn't say this, it's totally brilliant
The Rape Stork doesn't fvck around
I dont really think the meme was necessary
@The Great Wang, It's Neil DeGrasse Tyson, a fellow science guy.
@The Great Wang, *know
@therutabagaclub, i knoe
@The Great Wang, astrophysics black guy always has bill nye's back. Of course it was necessary.
Can I just say that I am a Christian and don't believe that breast milk is related to homosexuality, I do know how babies are made, and that I don't appreciate being generalized, just as much as the next demographic? I mean I get where he is coming from. But to debate and to entirely preclude the opposition from an entire field of discussion on the premise that they can't be believed are two different things. Standing and as hominem are not valid arguments. Alright. Rant over. Thank you community.
@Tyrellious, most Christians are rationally-thinking human beings. There's a huge difference between Christianity and idiocy. Some, like the person Nye was describing, blindly accept anything controversial in the name of their God, which in itself is against reason. Nobody, Christians included, should ever blindly accept anything they're told.
@Tyrellious, Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, he was referring to people like Todd Akin, who are fvcking retarded?
@CriTiKa1, it's possible. But I wouldn't put a generalization past nye.
@Tyrellious, I would, especially since he didn't actually say this.
@CriTiKa1, I understand that
I feel like somehow the sanctity of my childhood is a bit ruined... But I gotta say, I agree with the man.
Religion is so dangerous.
@JakobJeanCiccone, Unquestioning belief in anything is dangerous. Doctors, who used to be the most trusted professionals, were largely appalled when sterile bandages were first introduced. They were offended when it was implied that the cloth and bandages they used were making their patients sicker/infected (after surgery, etc). These were men of science and still ignorant as well.
@JakobJeanCiccone, that's just an example of course. Bloodletting to get rid of sickness, the "humours," geocentricity (the Greeks believed it long before the Cheistians)...are just a few more where "science" has been dead wrong and sometimes dangerous.
Snopes says nopes
Bill Bye gives 0 fvcks.
Bill Nye the savage guy
Remember folks, Bill Nye said mutts are healthier than purebreds which isn't true at all!
Is the bottom guy Steve Harvey?
Just realized that meme is Steve Harvey with hair 😱
I can't imagine him saying that because I can't imagine him being so vulgar. It's like mr. Rogers cussing; it just wouldn't happen.
*scrolls down to see infinite walls of text debating babies and ethics and such* - *next picture*
Those two are actually bffs in real life
Get owned with education!
"He's pretty bad ass"
Will San the science man!
He's like the Bob Saget of science, but about a thousand times better!