The Holy Wars on Science

The Holy Wars on Science

Ideology and Profits are blinding us from Science

“The facts... the scientific facts are overwhelming”

Those are the words of Bill Nye, the CEO of the Planetary Society, and former science guy. Bill Nye is, through and through, a man of science. But that’s not everything. He is a man of evidence, adventure, knowledge, progress, education, and above all, discovery. You may know Nye from his work on his infamous show that everyone who’s ever been in middle school has seen. But that was nothing compared to the work Nye is up to these days. Today, as I mentioned before, he is the CEO of the Planetary Society, an organization dedicated to advancing planetary and space science. It’s a private organization, but works in tandem with NASA. He also frequents a podcast called StarTalk that he co-hosts with Neil de Grasse Tyson, where they bring on guests and have entertaining discussions about, you guessed it, science and space. Other than those things Nye is often out talking to audiences, debating creationists, doing interviews, and making Netflix specials.

But recently Nye has taken on a task bigger than ever before...

Saving the world.

Okay, maybe that was a little melodramatic, but in a way, it’s true.

Nye has been crusading, for years, defending global climate change and its effects on our planet (aka Global Warming) and vehemently going after climate change deniers. It is completely undeniable that global warming is indeed happening, and it is damaging our planet. And while a very large majority of scientists have overwhelming proof and evidence of this claim, there are still millions out there who, without proper evidence or backup, claim that our earth is not in danger and everything is A-OK. These people include, Fox News reporters, rich fossil fuel CEO’s, the Republican Party, and the best of all, our President.

All of this, especially that last one, is so incredibly damaging. Denying climate change only benefits one thing, and one thing only, WALLETS. By denying climate change, our government can deregulate companies so they can romp through our planet plucking every last bit of life from it and destroying everything around them. Dumping coal waste into rivers, building pipelines through reserved land, and quite literally making the EPA (whose job is to protect the environment) utterly and completely obsolete. How does this benefit literally anyone else but the companies making money off them? In return we get dirty water, polluted air, and continued years of sporadic weather and increasing temperatures in our atmospheres. Sure, you might not see a great impact now, but your children will, and so will theirs. We need to be taking care our planet, not destroying it.

We can go about this two ways:

1.) We acknowledge the existence of climate change and global warming, continuing with regulations and policies and plans to conserve energy, starting production of more green renewable energy like solar and wind. If global warming turns out to be false, then we lose nothing, instead gaining a healthy planet for years to come and our society, industrialization, and economy will be better because of it.

2.) We continue to ignore global warming, let fossil fuel companies and corporations continue to destroy our environment so said people can get fatter pockets and votes to keep them in their seats. If global warming turns out to be real, then we’ve only made things worse and probably to a point that is irrevocable. If global warming is false, then the environment destruction just ramps up, and NEWS FLASH, those fossil fuels WILL RUN OUT. So not only will our planet be ruined, but we won’t have our fuel. We won’t have anything. But money. Because everyone will still care about money when they can’t grow any food or go outside because it’s all water or the air is too bad to breathe.

So, it seems obvious right? If we go with option 1, either way, we’ll benefit as a planet. Some corporations will have to change some things and maybe even take a hit on the billions upon billions that they’re already making. If it saves the planet, I think it’s worth it.

But this is simply one aspect of a larger issue going on. We live in 2017. We’ve never had smarter populations, better technology, and more advanced methods than we do right now. Yet, we live in an age where science is a fad to the American people. People don’t want to believe the scientists anymore. They’d rather believe their pockets, their politicians, or their gods before believing the millions of incredibly intelligent and critical people that are advancing us forward as a species. You wouldn’t be reading this article without science, you wouldn’t make coffee without science, you wouldn’t drive to work, or wake up when you do, or understand how gravity works without science. Everything you did today, this week, this year, your entire life, is possible because of science. Because of algebra and quantum mechanics and our understanding of our solar system, everything that deals with technology or your food or your medicine is possible. Without science, we’d be living in caves and eating tree bark still.

You just can’t deny thousands of years of evidence and scientific work because a book says otherwise. I’m sorry, but that’s just not how we can think if we want to advance any further in our society. We need real science to be taught in schools, we need our children to learn about evolution and how the world and our universe works. Even if we don’t have all the answers now, they can discover them in the future. The bible cannot stagnate our growth and ruin our future. I’m not saying religion shouldn’t exist or have a place in society, but it doesn’t replace science, it doesn’t replace factual truth.

That was some hard stuff right there. I probably ticked some people off, but someone has to say it. It’s just incredibly strange to find us in a situation where we trust Donald Trump over the intelligent men and women who took mankind into space. It’s really a bad scene, but I think we can overcome it. I know we can overcome it. But it will take more than Bill Nye and all his work, it will take all of us, voting in the right people, leading by example ourselves, and doing our own part. If we all work together we can, dare I say...


Cover Image Credit: National Geographic

Popular Right Now

To The Parent Who Chose Addiction

Thank you for giving me a stronger bond with our family.


When I was younger I resented you, I hated every ounce of you, and I used to question why God would give me a parent like you. Not now. Now I see the beauty and the blessings behind having an addict for a parent. If you're reading this, it isn't meant to hurt you, but rather to thank you.

Thank you for choosing your addiction over me.

Throughout my life, you have always chosen the addiction over my programs, my swim meets or even a simple movie night. You joke about it now or act as if I never questioned if you would wake up the next morning from your pill and alcohol-induced sleep, but I thank you for this. I thank you because I gained a relationship with God. The amount of time I spent praying for you strengthened our relationship in ways I could never explain.

SEE ALSO: They're Not Junkies, You're Just Uneducated

Thank you for giving me a stronger bond with our family.

The amount of hurt and disappointment our family has gone through has brought us closer together. I have a relationship with Nanny and Pop that would never be as strong as it is today if you had been in the picture from day one. That in itself is a blessing.

Thank you for showing me how to love.

From your absence, I have learned how to love unconditionally. I want you to know that even though you weren't here, I love you most of all. No matter the amount of heartbreak, tears, and pain I've felt, you will always be my greatest love.

Thank you for making me strong.

Thank you for leaving and for showing me how to be independent. From you, I have learned that I do not need anyone else to prove to me that I am worthy of being loved. From you, I have learned that life is always hard, but you shouldn't give into the things that make you feel good for a short while, but should search for the real happiness in life.

Most of all, thank you for showing me how to turn my hurt into motivation.

I have learned that the cycle of addiction is not something that will continue into my life. You have hurt me more than anyone, but through that hurt, I have pushed myself to become the best version of myself.

Thank you for choosing the addiction over me because you've made me stronger, wiser, and loving than I ever could've been before.

Cover Image Credit:

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

Dear Nancy Pelosi, 16-Year-Olds Should Not Be Able To Vote

Because I'm sure every sixteen year old wants to be rushing to the voting booth on their birthday instead of the BMV, anyways.


Recent politicians such as Nancy Pelosi have put the voting age on the political agenda in the past few weeks. In doing so, some are advocating for the voting age in the United States to be lowered from eighteen to sixteen- Here's why it is ludicrous.

According to a study done by "Circle" regarding voter turnout in the 2018 midterms, 31% of eligible people between the ages of 18 and 29 voted. Thus, nowhere near half of the eligible voters between 18 and 29 actually voted. To anyone who thinks the voting age should be lowered to sixteen, in relevance to the data, it is pointless. If the combination of people who can vote from the legal voting age of eighteen to eleven years later is solely 31%, it is doubtful that many sixteen-year-olds would exercise their right to vote. To go through such a tedious process of amending the Constitution to change the voting age by two years when the evidence doesn't support that many sixteen-year-olds would make use of the new change (assuming it would pass) to vote is idiotic.

The argument can be made that if someone can operate heavy machinery (I.e. drive a car) at sixteen, they should be able to vote. Just because a sixteen-year-old can (in most places) now drive a car and work at a job, does not mean that they should be able to vote. At the age of sixteen, many students have not had fundamental classes such as government or economics to fully understand the political world. Sadly, going into these classes there are students that had mere knowledge of simple political knowledge such as the number of branches of government. Well, there are people above the age of eighteen who are uneducated but they can still vote, so what does it matter if sixteen-year-olds don't know everything about politics and still vote? At least they're voting. Although this is true, it's highly doubtful that someone who is past the age of eighteen, is uninformed about politics, and has to work on election day will care that much to make it to the booths. In contrast, sixteen-year-olds may be excited since it's the first time they can vote, and likely don't have too much of a tight schedule on election day, so they still may vote. The United States does not need people to vote if their votes are going to be uneducated.

But there are some sixteen-year-olds who are educated on issues and want to vote, so that's unfair to them. Well, there are other ways to participate in government besides voting. If a sixteen-year-old feels passionate about something on the political agenda but can't vote, there are other ways of getting involved. They can canvas for politicians whom they agree with, or become active in the notorious "Get Out The Vote" campaign to increase registered voter participation or help register those who already aren't. Best yet, they can politically socialize their peers with political information so that when the time comes for all of them to be eighteen and vote, more eighteen-year-olds will be educated and likely to vote.

If you're a sixteen-year-old and feel hopeless, you're not. As the 2016 election cycle approached, I was seventeen and felt useless because I had no vote. Although voting is arguably one of the easiest ways to participate in politics, it's not the only one. Since the majority of the current young adult population don't exercise their right to vote, helping inform them of how to stay informed and why voting is important, in my eyes is as essential as voting.

Sorry, Speaker Pelosi and all the others who think the voting age should be lowered. I'd rather not have to pay a plethora of taxes in my later years because in 2020 sixteen-year-olds act like sheep and blindly vote for people like Bernie Sanders who support the free college.

Related Content

Facebook Comments