Creationists Demand Airtime On 'Cosmos' For The Sake Of Balance


The Creationist group Answers In Genesis, which was already incensed
about Neil deGrasse Tyson’s revival of Cosmos, is now complaining that
the show lacks scientific balance because it fails to provide airtime
for evolution deniers.

Danny Faulkner of Answers In Genesis and the Creation Museum appeared on
The Janet Mefferd Show yesterday to criticize Cosmos for not providing
airtime for Creationism adherents. When Mefferd asked if Cosmos will
“ever give a Creationist any time,” Faulkner responded by lamenting that
“Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them, they wouldn’t
even consider us plausible at all.”

Mefferd agreed that the show isn’t being very fair and balanced: “Boy,
but when you have so many scientists who simply do not accept Darwinian
evolution it seems to me that that might be something to throw in there,
you know, the old, ‘some scientists say this, others disagree and think
this,’ but that’s not even allowed.”

“Consideration of special Creation is definitely not open for discussion
it would seem,” Faulkner added.

Arguing that evolution, the foundation of modern biology, and one of
many theological beliefs on human creation are simply “two sides” that
merit competing time on a science program is much like the equally
absurd argument Creationists use when trying to undermine the teaching
of evolution in public schools.

http://tinyurl.com/mf6y358


If the “creationists” weren’t such sad sacks, they’d be laughable.

"They wouldn't even consider us plausible at all." Damned straight.
A mention of religious superstition such as creationism as anything more
than religious superstition has *no place* on a science-based television
program. There is nothing underpinning creationism beyond religious belief.

I had to look up "special creation." It's been decades since I heard the
term, so I had forgotten what it was about.

From Wiki:

"In the creationist use of the phrase, special creation adheres to a
literal interpretation of the account of creation in the Book of
Genesis, accepting it as an accurate historical account of the creation
of the universe in essentially its present form over the course of six
24-hour days."

Why would a science-based program seriously consider "special creation"
as a topic worthy of discussion?



--
Rand Paul & Ted Cruz…your 2016 GOP nominees, because ‘Mericans deserve
crazy!

On 3/22/2014 9:35 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
Creationists Demand Airtime On 'Cosmos' For The Sake Of Balance


The Creationist group Answers In Genesis, which was already incensed
about Neil deGrasse Tyson’s revival of Cosmos, is now complaining that
the show lacks scientific balance because it fails to provide airtime
for evolution deniers.

Danny Faulkner of Answers In Genesis and the Creation Museum appeared on
The Janet Mefferd Show yesterday to criticize Cosmos for not providing
airtime for Creationism adherents. When Mefferd asked if Cosmos will
“ever give a Creationist any time,” Faulkner responded by lamenting that
“Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them, they wouldn’t
even consider us plausible at all.”

Mefferd agreed that the show isn’t being very fair and balanced: “Boy,
but when you have so many scientists who simply do not accept Darwinian
evolution it seems to me that that might be something to throw in there,
you know, the old, ‘some scientists say this, others disagree and think
this,’ but that’s not even allowed.”

“Consideration of special Creation is definitely not open for discussion
it would seem,” Faulkner added.

Arguing that evolution, the foundation of modern biology, and one of
many theological beliefs on human creation are simply “two sides” that
merit competing time on a science program is much like the equally
absurd argument Creationists use when trying to undermine the teaching
of evolution in public schools.

http://tinyurl.com/mf6y358


If the “creationists” weren’t such sad sacks, they’d be laughable.

"They wouldn't even consider us plausible at all." Damned straight.
A mention of religious superstition such as creationism as anything more
than religious superstition has *no place* on a science-based television
program. There is nothing underpinning creationism beyond religious belief.

I had to look up "special creation." It's been decades since I heard the
term, so I had forgotten what it was about.

From Wiki:

"In the creationist use of the phrase, special creation adheres to a
literal interpretation of the account of creation in the Book of
Genesis, accepting it as an accurate historical account of the creation
of the universe in essentially its present form over the course of six
24-hour days."

Why would a science-based program seriously consider "special creation"
as a topic worthy of discussion?





Why would anyone waste bandwidth in a boating newsgroup with this BS
unless he was just trying to cause problems and be disruptive?

On 3/22/14, 9:45 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/22/2014 9:35 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
Creationists Demand Airtime On 'Cosmos' For The Sake Of Balance


The Creationist group Answers In Genesis, which was already incensed
about Neil deGrasse Tyson’s revival of Cosmos, is now complaining that
the show lacks scientific balance because it fails to provide airtime
for evolution deniers.

Danny Faulkner of Answers In Genesis and the Creation Museum appeared on
The Janet Mefferd Show yesterday to criticize Cosmos for not providing
airtime for Creationism adherents. When Mefferd asked if Cosmos will
“ever give a Creationist any time,” Faulkner responded by lamenting that
“Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them, they wouldn’t
even consider us plausible at all.”

Mefferd agreed that the show isn’t being very fair and balanced: “Boy,
but when you have so many scientists who simply do not accept Darwinian
evolution it seems to me that that might be something to throw in there,
you know, the old, ‘some scientists say this, others disagree and think
this,’ but that’s not even allowed.”

“Consideration of special Creation is definitely not open for discussion
it would seem,” Faulkner added.

Arguing that evolution, the foundation of modern biology, and one of
many theological beliefs on human creation are simply “two sides” that
merit competing time on a science program is much like the equally
absurd argument Creationists use when trying to undermine the teaching
of evolution in public schools.

http://tinyurl.com/mf6y358


If the “creationists” weren’t such sad sacks, they’d be laughable.

"They wouldn't even consider us plausible at all." Damned straight.
A mention of religious superstition such as creationism as anything more
than religious superstition has *no place* on a science-based television
program. There is nothing underpinning creationism beyond religious
belief.

I had to look up "special creation." It's been decades since I heard the
term, so I had forgotten what it was about.

From Wiki:

"In the creationist use of the phrase, special creation adheres to a
literal interpretation of the account of creation in the Book of
Genesis, accepting it as an accurate historical account of the creation
of the universe in essentially its present form over the course of six
24-hour days."

Why would a science-based program seriously consider "special creation"
as a topic worthy of discussion?





Why would anyone waste bandwidth in a boating newsgroup with this BS
unless he was just trying to cause problems and be disruptive?


Waste bandwidth? Oh, you mean so there would be more room in a boating
newsgroup for posts about model airplanes, golf, RV's, grandchildren,
obsolete computer operating systems, and suchlike? How about a
discussion about the relative value of stamps, perforated or unperforated?

The only thing "boating" about this newsgroup is the title, "rec.boats."
Most of the few remaining posters here haven't owned a boat for years
and some, for decades.

--
Rand Paul & Ted Cruz…your 2016 GOP nominees, because ‘Mericans deserve
crazy!

'Nuff said.

On 3/22/14, 10:00 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:
'Nuff said.



JohnnyMop thinks he is in control.

--
Rand Paul & Ted Cruz…your 2016 GOP nominees, because ‘Mericans deserve
crazy!

On 3/22/2014 10:02 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/22/14, 10:00 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:
'Nuff said.



JohnnyMop thinks he is in control.

Of what?

On 3/22/2014 10:17 AM, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 3/22/2014 10:02 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/22/14, 10:00 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:
'Nuff said.



JohnnyMop thinks he is in control.

Of what?


Discussions about hobbies, recreational activities, RV'ing and whatnot
have a lot more in common with recreational boating than five times a
day cut and paste posts of obscure political issues or bitching about a
religious group's beliefs.

The newsgroup is called "rec" boats, after all.

On 3/22/14, 10:23 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/22/2014 10:17 AM, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 3/22/2014 10:02 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/22/14, 10:00 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:
'Nuff said.



JohnnyMop thinks he is in control.

Of what?


Discussions about hobbies, recreational activities, RV'ing and whatnot
have a lot more in common with recreational boating than five times a
day cut and paste posts of obscure political issues or bitching about a
religious group's beliefs.

The newsgroup is called "rec" boats, after all.



Now you are defining what a hobby is or isn't? A hobby can be a favorite
occupation or topic, pursued for the amusement or interest it affords.
That definition includes all topics, eh?

But not to worry. You righties have managed over the years to chase out
almost all of those who don't share your political view, but for two or
maybe three of us. I'm sure in the not-to-distant future you'll be
discussing quilting and stamp collecting.

Oh. Model airplanes, RV'ing, and "what not" have very little to do with
recreational boating. They are just "other" hobbies. Discussing
political issues may also be a hobby.



--
Rand Paul & Ted Cruz…your 2016 GOP nominees, because ‘Mericans deserve
crazy!

On Saturday, March 22, 2014 10:23:26 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/22/2014 10:17 AM, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:

On 3/22/2014 10:02 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/22/14, 10:00 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:

'Nuff said.







JohnnyMop thinks he is in control.



Of what?





Discussions about hobbies, recreational activities, RV'ing and whatnot

have a lot more in common with recreational boating than five times a

day cut and paste posts of obscure political issues or bitching about a

religious group's beliefs.



The newsgroup is called "rec" boats, after all.

Nooooo ****.

On Saturday, March 22, 2014 7:17:03 AM UTC-7, H*a*r*r*o*l*d wrote:
On 3/22/2014 10:02 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/22/14, 10:00 AM, Mucho Loco wrote:

'Nuff said.







JohnnyMop thinks he is in control.



Of what?

Yeah.... of what? I'm kinda wondering that myself...