Bill Nye Explains Evolution Using Emojis: VIDEO

Screen Shot 2014-12-17 at 4.36.48 PM

Scientist Bill Nye uses emojis to explain the theory of evolution in a recent YouTube video. Right wingers will no doubt continue to deny evolution's validity despite how easy Nye makes the subject to understand. Watch Nye break things down in a digestible, fun way for the rest of us AFTER THE JUMP



  1. Gregory in Seattle says

    @Matt – “Theory” does not mean “guess.” It means the best model we currently have to explain observed phenomena. Thus we speak of things like the theory of gravity, and atomic theory, and germ theory, and the theory of plate tectonics, and the valence bond theory. And, oddly enough, the theory of evolution.

  2. David From Canada says

    It’s all Greek to me, especially when he uses cartoon characters to make his point – not the best idea.
    Besides, you can’t take a man too serious who appeared on Dancing With The Stars.

  3. says

    Not to defend a moron, but “evolution” is a bastardized term. I’m pretty certain when he said “evolution,” he was referring to how inanimate molecules “evolved” into animate molecules. Seems how most scientist agree that spontaneous generation is a statistical impossibility, evolution is just as silly an “explanation” for the origin of life as any other theory. Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t mind finding out how life began, but anyone actually discovering an inarguable answer is more of a statistical impossibility than spontaneous generation.

  4. simon says

    It is obviously a difficult and deep question. Most scientists would say the appearance of self-replicating molecules from atoms is statistically improbable, not statistically impossible. The number of planets in the universe is estimated to be 10 to the 22 i.e. 1000….. with 22 zeros. You only need this rare event to occur once on one of them i.e. here on Earth. Richard Carrier has examined arguments put forth by the religious to support their claims of the existence of a creator. None of them hold water.

  5. simon says

    It is also factitious to claim “god” is the answer when science has not reached a conclusion. An explanation that explains everything actually explains nothing.

  6. Vint says

    Biopoiesis (abiogenesis) has been confused with “evolution” by creationists, and Bill Nye does no one any favors by confusing the two.

    The origins of life from “non-life” are the subject of various scientific theories, but the theory of evolution deals with the ways that natural processes can lead to the development of new species.

    That is, Garth, the theory of evolution is silent on the origin of life, but rather discusses how it is that one form of life can give rise to another.

  7. simon says

    It is also facetious to claim “god” is the answer when science has not reached a conclusion. An explanation that explains everything actually explains nothing.

  8. Not that rob says

    Here’s a new theory on how life arose. It makes sense if you understand physics.

    “From the standpoint of physics, there is one essential difference between living things and inanimate clumps of carbon atoms: The former tend to be much better at capturing energy from their environment and dissipating that energy as heat. Jeremy England, a 31-year-old assistant professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has derived a mathematical formula that he believes explains this capacity. The formula, based on established physics, indicates that when a group of atoms is driven by an external source of energy (like the sun or chemical fuel) and surrounded by a heat bath (like the ocean or atmosphere), it will often gradually restructure itself in order to dissipate increasingly more energy. This could mean that under certain conditions, matter inexorably acquires the key physical attribute associated with life.”

  9. anon says

    What he skipped over was the way that self-ordering systems help improve the odds of life evolving from nothing. You can see some spectacular examples of self-ordering on YouTube. The most basic example is oil and water, which separate under gravity, and in fact all cellular membranes to this day make full use of this exact separation principle on the insides and outsides of the membranes, but cells are not dependent on gravity, but use organic molecules that do the same job.

  10. Chadd says

    Bill Nye is incorrect when he says that people “used to” believe the earth was only a few thousand years old. Truth is that many religious people believe the earth to be about 5000 years old.

  11. says

    Abiogenesis, as many have pointed out here cannot strictly be equated with the subsequent process of biological evolution by natural selection.

    Nevertheless it can certainly included with the broader evolutionary process that can be traced as least as far back as the formation of the chemical elements within stars.

    Furthermore, the transition to the biological phase of chemistry must almost certainly have involved selective mechanisms.

    So Nye’s conflation of the two can perhaps be excused since there is really no sharp dividing line that can be drawn in the transition from non-biological to biological chemistries.

    With particular regard to abiogenesis: For reasons laid out many years ago by Robert Shapiro in ‘Origins, a Skeptic’s Guide to the Creation of Life on Earth” simplistic models of molecular evolution loosely based on the primeval soup scenario as this just do not cut the mustard.

    Neither do the “cell first” models. The many and varied proposals are riddled with physical and chemical inadequacies that make the probabilities of their occurrence vanishingly small. Flow, concentration and energy gradients are among the numerous parameters which are wanting.

    In recent decades, however, the discovery of the sub-marine alkaline vents have identified conditions in which these conditions are met. The existence of myriad cavities in the superstructures which could serve as matrices for proto-cells has at last provided a plausible and coherent scenario for the co-evolution of cell and its metabolic processes. At the same time bringing the probability issues within reasonable bounds

    This model of abiogenesis is explored in chapter 9 of my latest book “The Intricacy Generator: Pushing Chemistry and Geometry Uphill”

Leave A Reply