Neil DeGrasse Tyson on Why "Cosmos" Will NOT be Accompanied by Creationist Explanation for...well...the Cosmos

Neil deGrasse Tyson came out swinging when evangelical types complained that the TV show, Cosmos, which presents the evolution-based theory of how the universe came into being, ought have a few scenes explaining "an alternative theory," creationism. DeGrasse had a brilliant retort: “You don’t talk about the spherical Earth with NASA, and then say let’s give equal time to the flat Earthers." 

Views: 1187

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

@sk, I wish my family would watch. They really believe the show is the devil's doings. Much like supreme court un - justice Scallia (sp)? ranted about on the interview that was posted on AN.

k.h. ky, Antonin Scalia IS the devil.

That is a brilliant reply! Chalk up several points here for Neal. I knew there was a reason that I liked this man!

Could they be reminded more by including Lamarck's theory of use and disuse?  LOL

Important point, people: Cosmos runs only 13 episodes, or something thereabouts.  After that, Fox goes back to its usual drivel and eventually, the conversation about it dies down among those who haven't the dedication or interest that we have.  I suppose one could argue that the people may need a rest after something as intensely factual and compelling as Cosmos, but the fact is that eventually, there should be followup.

Perhaps this is a topic for a separate discussion, but how do we keep the momentum rolling after Neil deGrasse Tyson has left the immediate consciousness of the general public?  How can we distract them again from Long Island Medium and Nostradamus?  They WILL go right back to those, given a chance; indeed, some of them haven't left them.

The floor is open for discussion.

Loren, I agree, this will make a good topic for a separate discussion. In the meantime, We now face an even more daunting challenge with the Supreme Court, in all their wisdom, allow money to buy our elections. Therefore, we have to be intelligent, persistent and determined more than ever before. 

* Demand and expect explanations for how religious can justify the mystical stories of their faiths; 

* Hold religious accountable for current evidence of corruption in the church;

* Take away tax breaks for religious property and income; 

* Ask the tough questions; 

* Stop using terms of being against anything and find a term that is pro-...  whatever;

* Find and expose the joys of being a secularist, or whatever label one wants to use;

* Organize secularists only to the point of joining forces against a common challenge;

* Think creatively of ways to support skepticism; 

* Take positive action and let it be known as a skeptic, publicly;

* Look for ways to celebrate being a skeptic;

* Sing, dance, drum, potluck, wear T-shirts in celebration of skepticism;

* Patronize businesses of secularists; 

* Take on the tough problems like hunger, homelessness, ignorance, health care, no jobs, unemployment, family violence, The Dominator Society; 

* Brainstorm for more/other ways to reveal the benefits of secularism.  

* Use Riane Eisler's The Caring Economy Campaign program;

* Use Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed

* Use Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals 

First task, it seems to me, is to come to some kind of agreement of a term that is positive, pro-active, not re-active, and that gives a feeling of triumph, success, and self-respect. 

Extreme wealth, Grace Cathedral, L.A. CA 

Extreme poverty, food lines  

u gotta love this guy! u tell them Neil.

Christians have no theory for the creation of the universe.  Proclaiming an invisible wizard conjured the universe in six days is not a theory it's just stupid. 

Hope you don't take this the wrong way, but all I can respond to your post is: Amen.

@James l tend to use 'Amen' when I strongly agree with someone too. I can't seem to find another word that conveys the same meaning as well.

Could it be force of habit from a religious upbringing. I donno, I tend to use an awful lot of religious expressions. For example, why surprised, I still say "My God!" and when wishing or hoping, "I pray...." And so forth. Brought up as a Plymouth Brethren, a very fundamentalist sect in England, the late poet, mountain climber, occultist, &c., Aleister Crowley, so hated his use of such expressions that he took a razor blade to his forearms when he used them. I myself set out to rid myself of smoking but not by cutting my flesh, a bit drastic; no, I affixed a rubber band to my forearm and when I offended, I simply pulled it back almost to breaking and let go. Once the sting subsided I realized I really didn't need that "nicotine delivery device" after all.

S'funny; my JW sister is the one who says "Ghod-dammit" whenever something annoys her the least little bit. 

I say "blast!"  Or "drat," or if it's something really horrible (like another effing quake), "Ohhhhhh, shit."

You notice I even say "effiing" instead of the actual "F-word."

I don't know why...except it was something Heinlein wrote that the use of the usual 4-letter words display a lack of imagination.  I'm trying ....

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service