Author Topic: “Cosmic” meltdown! Neil deGrasse Tyson under siege from Christian right  (Read 3316 times)

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
“Cosmic” meltdown! Neil deGrasse Tyson under siege from Christian right

Evangelicals complain "Cosmos'" excludes creationism -- as if it were the only creation myth worth exploring
AMANDA MARCOTTE, ALTERNET


Conservative Christians are really mad about the reboot of the legendary science series Cosmos, starring Neil deGrasse Tyson. The complaint? That an ancient myth about creation invented by Hebrews thousands of years ago is not being included in a show that is there to teach science. Christian conservatives have been taking to the airwaves complaining about the non-inclusion of ancient myths in a science program, with Danny Faulkner of Answers in Genesis whining, “Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them,” and Elizabeth Mitchell of the same organization decrying the show for having “blind faith in evolution.” (She’s just straight up lying here. Evolution is well-established by evidence, something Cosmos covers in its second episode.)

While it’s tempting to laugh off the idea that a creation myth should be injected into what is supposed to be a science program, maybe it’s not as zany as it initially seems. After all, anthropology is a science, and a creation myth segment could be a great way to introduce the way scientists study ancient cultures. But there’s no reason it has to be the one in the Bible, which everyone knows already. There’s been thousands of creation stories throughout time, so in the interest of fair-and-balanced, why not given one of these others a chance? Here are some potential creation stories, and the pros and cons for telling each one.

1. The ancient Greeks. Chaos, a goddess who also happens to be the entire universe, gave birth to Gaia, the Earth, and Uranus, the sky. Brother and sister married and gave birth to a bunch of Titans. One of those Titans, named Cronus, had a bad habit of eating his children, but Gaia was able to hide one of those babies, named Zeus, away from him. Zeus’ wife managed to get Cronus to barf up all his eaten children, and those children ended up, alongside Zeus, defeating their father in battle to become the Greek gods we all know and love. The invention of people is something of an afterthought in this legend, but a big deal is made out of how one gentle Titan, Prometheus, gave the people fire. This irritated Zeus, because he just really didn’t like people for some reason, and so he chained Prometheus to a mountain and made a bird steal his liver on the daily. He then punished people for fire-stealing by giving them a woman named Pandora who opened a box that released sin into the world.

Pros: The image of the sky copulating with the earth is pretty cool. The animations you could come up with for Cronus vomiting up his children would also be entertaining.

Cons: Just as with the story of Eve and the apple, this is a misogynist creation myth that blames all the misery and sin in the world on women.

2. Ancient Japanese creation myth. The gods, kicking around in the formlessness of space, decided to stir Earth into being so they had something to occupy their time. Two of them, a man and woman, do this little stirring dance-like routine, but the lady steps on the man’s lines, speaking before he does. This causes their babies to be rejects they have to throw out. So the couple redoes their little stirring routine and she acts more submissive this time around. Female submission, being magic, means that this time around, she is way better at producing usable children. Those children end up being a bunch of islands, because Japan, as you know, is a bunch of islands.

Pros: Many creation myths show the gods copulating the world into being, but few really spend much time on their pre-child dating life. This story has the appeal of a rom-com, complete with a dance scene.

Cons: Misogyny, just like in the Bible and the Greek creation myth. For some reason, men the world over were fond of making up creation stories that concluded with a lesson about how women are always screwing things up and therefore should not be allowed to have power.

3. Ancient Egyptian creation myth. The first god to emerge from chaos is named Atum. He, um, spits–okay, let’s be honest, he masturbates–and out shoot his two children, Shu, the god of air, and Tefnut, the goddess of moisture. (That, or he masturbates into his own mouth, rolls it around, and spits out his kids. I mean, it’s not, objectively speaking, any grosser than the methods we use today.) They commit incest, which is common in creation stories, making a god of earth and a goddess of sky. More incest results in more godly grandchildren, who get into ugly power struggles that result in the creation of the underworld, which was a big deal to ancient Egyptians.

Pros: This one is a winner for fans of body fluid. Not just because of Atum’s baby-making strategies, but because Tefnut’s name actually invokes body fluids in ancient Egyptian. Not particularly misogynist, either, suggesting that you can have a creation story without making “and women are terrible” the kicker.

Cons: People seem really unimportant to this story, so the narcissists in the audience might get bored. Also, as entertaining as Atum’s baby-making methods are, showing it on prime time TV would be impossible to get past the censors, even with Seth McFarlane’s support as a producer.

4. Ancient Norse creation myth. Fire and ice meet in the middle of nowhere to create Ymir, a large and sweaty giant who produced other giants by sweating them out. There was also a giant cow who licked salt licks until gods emerged from them. A salt lick god and a giant-sweat giantess got it on and produced Odin, who is their major god. Odin killed Ymir, the sweat creator, and built the earth out of his body, which means that if you’re taking a dip in the ocean, you’re swimming in sweat giant blood. The gods made people out of trees, which is a little nicer than the Bible’s God making people out of mud and ribs.

Pros: For one thing, the Avengers movies have made Norse mythology a little more familiar with their use of the god Thor as a character. More importantly, you can show giants emerging from another giant’s armpit while the gods bust out of salt licks. What’s not to love?

Cons: While watching a giant sweat out other beings is safer for broadcast television than watching an Egyptian god ejaculate out his children, it’s also not nearly as entertaining. Also, while you have to give points to the Norse for the loopiness of the image of a cow licking a salt lick until it ejects gods, cows just don’t make for good TV.

No one wants to hear the same old snake-and-apple routine we’ve all heard a thousand times before, but Cosmos could definitely give “equal time” to a creation myth while making it entertaining and educational. Just pick one of these four, or any of the thousands of others anthropologists have gathered over the years. Not that this would placate the conservatives demanding that ancient mythology be given a spot on a science education program. After all, a segment on creation myths would only serve to show that the myth in the Bible is just one of many, and lead many viewers to conclude that there was no more an Eve eating an apple than there was a Pandora opening her box.

Amanda Marcotte is a Brooklyn-based freelance writer and journalist. She's published two books and blogs regularly at Pandagon, RH Reality Check and Slate's Double X.

http://www.alternet.org/belief/neil-degrasse-tyson-under-attack-christians-who-want-more-biblical-creationism-his-show

bears

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2195
I've never understood this garbage. 

I went to a catholic high school.  actually an Opus Dei catholic high school.  we were taught evolution.  we read Darwin.  we were never inundated with any of this shit.  we were always taught that the existence of evolution does not preclude a belief in God.

where do they find these people?


Archer77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14174
  • Team Shizzo
I wonder why they didn't include judeo-christian myth.
A

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31027
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
I wonder why they didn't include judeo-christian myth.

It's a combination of all the ones that came before it.

I ETA PI

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
  • TAPPA KEGGA BREW!
The Big Bang theory was proposed by a catholic priest (who also happened to be a theoretical physicist)

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
I've never understood this garbage. 

I went to a catholic high school.  actually an Opus Dei catholic high school.  we were taught evolution.  we read Darwin.  we were never inundated with any of this shit.  we were always taught that the existence of evolution does not preclude a belief in God.

where do they find these people?



Catholics aren't usually hung up on the Creationism (I was raised Catholic and went to Jesuit University)
it's the bible thumping evangelical fundies who go nuts with the creation myth.   

haider

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11978
  • Team Batman Squats
Catholics aren't usually hung up on the Creationism (I was raised Catholic and went to Jesuit University)
it's the bible thumping evangelical fundies who go nuts with the creation myth.   

interesting. it won't last long, just a matter of the old generation clinging to stupid ideas. Thank goodness we all face death, can you imagine how many fucked up ideas would still be around if older generations were still alive?
follow the arrows

GigantorX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6370
  • GetBig's A-Team is the Light of Truth!
Catholics aren't usually hung up on the Creationism (I was raised Catholic and went to Jesuit University)
it's the bible thumping evangelical fundies who go nuts with the creation myth.   


This is an excellent point.

The media et al love to group every single Christian-related sect with the maniacs and pretend they are all the same. It simply isn't true.

They call it the "Christian Right" as every if every single last Christian that is right leaning or more is some wacko who believes Jesus rode a T-Rex around.


Archer77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14174
  • Team Shizzo
This is an excellent point.

The media et al love to group every single Christian-related sect with the maniacs and pretend they are all the same. It simply isn't true.

They call it the "Christian Right" as every if every single last Christian that is right leaning or more is some wacko who believes Jesus rode a T-Rex around.





Jesus rode a triceratop.
A

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
interesting. it won't last long, just a matter of the old generation clinging to stupid ideas. Thank goodness we all face death, can you imagine how many fucked up ideas would still be around if older generations were still alive?


It will last our life time and well beyond.  Religion isn't going away anytime even close to soon.


haider

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11978
  • Team Batman Squats

It will last our life time and well beyond.  Religion isn't going away anytime even close to soon.


creationism is not religion, it is a psuedoscience that comes about from a literalist misinterpretation of religion. It is insane to think that the genesis account is literally true.
follow the arrows

AbrahamG

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18159
  • Team Pfizer
Catholics aren't usually hung up on the Creationism (I was raised Catholic and went to Jesuit University)
it's the bible thumping evangelical fundies who go nuts with the creation myth.   


Same here.  Catholic grade school education here.  I am a liberal, but even my more conservative catholic family and friends aren't retarded when it comes to evolution. 

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
creationism is not religion, it is a psuedoscience that comes about from a literalist misinterpretation of religion. It is insane to think that the genesis account is literally true.



No, you're trying to split hairs and you can't even do that right.

Creationism is a belief.  Creation Science is what you're referring to.

It doesn't matter how you want to split hairs.

Religion, faith, creationism, mysticism, deities, ritualism...all going to be around for a long time to come.


Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
creationism is not religion, it is a psuedoscience that comes about from a literalist misinterpretation of religion. It is insane to think that the genesis account is literally true.

You don't find it equally insane to believe in a personal god? it's absolutely just as absurd.

Religion is absurd.

haider

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11978
  • Team Batman Squats


No, you're trying to split hairs and you can't even do that right.

Creationism is a belief.  Creation Science is what you're referring to.

It doesn't matter how you want to split hairs.

Religion, faith, creationism, mysticism, deities, ritualism...all going to be around for a long time to come.


You are confused.

follow our conversation back, and see where you made the assumption (falsely) that I was talking about religion. It should have been clear that I was referring to 'creation science' as you put it in my original reply. By the way, in this type of discourse there is no distinction drawn between creationism and creation science. I suspect it's something you pulled out of thin air to make a point.

As to the point of my original post- there is plenty of evidence that society is continually evolving and shedding old nonsensical beliefs. Just look at how society has evolved in its treatment of blacks. The same is becoming true of homosexuals.
follow the arrows

haider

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11978
  • Team Batman Squats
You don't find it equally insane to believe in a personal god? it's absolutely just as absurd.

Religion is absurd.
you have become too dogmatic with this atheist nonsense (saying this as a friend). arguments about god are silly, they miss the point for the most part.
follow the arrows

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
you have become too dogmatic with this atheist nonsense (saying this as a friend). arguments about god are silly, they miss the point for the most part.

I am not an atheist, I believe in a pantheist thing that exists. Alan watts has similar thinking to me or vice versa better yet.

A personal god is absurd, if he exists, he is nothing like us.

No offense taken you gay, we simply disagree.

haider

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11978
  • Team Batman Squats
I am not an atheist, I believe in a pantheist thing that exists. Alan watts has similar thinking to me or vice versa better yet.

A personal god is absurd, if he exists, he is nothing like us.

No offense taken you gay, we simply disagree.
I'm glad you didn't take offense. I don't even know what "God" is, it doesn't really interest me atm.
follow the arrows

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
I'm glad you didn't take offense. I don't even know what "God" is, it doesn't really interest me atm.

I would say the same thing, I have thought about it enough. It still locks me in existential crisis but I rail against religion as it enslaves the mind. It's fine for a guide book, peace of mind, but the tenats of religion are at their core are sadomasochistic life manuals with david miscavage at the end.

Absolutely nothing can be found in religion that can't be found by thinking and meditating.

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
You are confused.

follow our conversation back, and see where you made the assumption (falsely) that I was talking about religion. It should have been clear that I was referring to 'creation science' as you put it in my original reply. By the way, in this type of discourse there is no distinction drawn between creationism and creation science. I suspect it's something you pulled out of thin air to make a point.

As to the point of my original post- there is plenty of evidence that society is continually evolving and shedding old nonsensical beliefs. Just look at how society has evolved in its treatment of blacks. The same is becoming true of homosexuals.


Nope, not confused at all.

I grouped creationism and religion (and still would).

You wanted split them out, but you're too stupid to know the difference between creationism and creation science. 

I'll help you.

Creationism is a widely held belief that a divine being created the universe, humans, perhaps in the abstract, everything within.

Creation science is the failed attempt by a small group to apply scientific proof to the creationism belief.  And when I was in high school, the Supreme Court ruled it inappropriate for teaching in school.  For whatever that was worth - I attended multiple high schools and never once came across the teaching.

As for the change, I agree that we have made significant strides, but there is no massive push to eliminate creationism (or religion as I would argue).  There are no protests, no 'causes', in fact I don't know of any push whatsoever.  To me, it's not even close to being equivalent to civil rights or gay rights.

Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899

Nope, not confused at all.

I grouped creationism and religion (and still would).

You wanted split them out, but you're too stupid to know the difference between creationism and creation science. 

I'll help you.

Creationism is a widely held belief that a divine being created the universe, humans, perhaps in the abstract, everything within.

Creation science is the failed attempt by a small group to apply scientific proof to the creationism belief.  And when I was in high school, the Supreme Court ruled it inappropriate for teaching in school.  For whatever that was worth - I attended multiple high schools and never once came across the teaching.

As for the change, I agree that we have made significant strides, but there is no massive push to eliminate creationism (or religion as I would argue).  There are no protests, no 'causes', in fact I don't know of any push whatsoever.  To me, it's not even close to being equivalent to civil rights or gay rights.

Yes creation science is different, what are the facts of each theory, could you compare and contrast them?

haider

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11978
  • Team Batman Squats
From wikipedia:
"Creationism is the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, such as in a literal reading of Genesis, rather than by undirected processes such as evolution"

dictionary.com:
cre·a·tion·ism  [kree-ey-shuh-niz-uhm]  Show IPA
noun
1.
the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.
2.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) the doctrine that the true story of the creation of the universe is as it is recounted in the Bible, especially in the first chapter of Genesis.
3.
the doctrine that God immediately creates out of nothing a new human soul for each individual born


Merriam-webster:
cre·a·tion·ism noun \-shə-ˌni-zəm\
: the belief that God created all things out of nothing as described in the Bible and that therefore the theory of evolution is incorrect


Oxford dictionary:
The belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution.


Somene please notify the above sources of the strict distinction between creationism and creation science! Creationism is merely religion- the belief that God created everything, and has nothing to say about the scientific theory of evolution!
follow the arrows