You may know that the series "Cosmos" has been rebooted featuring Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Well, the first segment got a review from none other than Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell. If you've never heard of her, she's a physician -- and a researcher for Answers in Genesis:
I don't what to comment on the level of intellectual development involved in liking colorful graphics and charismatic storytelling as opposed to information -- I'll let you draw your own conclusions on that score.
One also has to wonder about the mindset that leads to characterizing acceptance of evidence as "unconditional blind faith."
This is undoubtedly one of the best examples I've ever run across of the blinkered mindset of the religious right:
There you have it -- If you're trying to understand the universe, actually investigating the universe is irrelevant.
There's more in the article that only underscores the self-centered arrogance of the "Christian" right. I just find it astonishing that anyone who's in the least aware of the world outside their own head can come up with comments as patently ridiculous as those.
And this woman's a doctor? Don't want her anywhere near my body.
Footnote: One of the commenters at the article made an astute observation: Doctors aren't scientists, they're engineers.
A creationist has reviewed the new “Cosmos” reboot, featuring astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, and it may come as no surprise that she wasn’t terribly impressed.
“If the first segment is any indication, [“Cosmos”] will attempt to package unconditional blind faith in evolution as scientific literacy in an effort to create interest in science,” said Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, a physician and Answers In Genesis researcher.
She praises some aspects of the program, such as its “colorful” graphics and “charismatic” storytelling, but Mitchell complains that the program spent too much time describing phenomena that contradict biblical teachings.
I don't what to comment on the level of intellectual development involved in liking colorful graphics and charismatic storytelling as opposed to information -- I'll let you draw your own conclusions on that score.
One also has to wonder about the mindset that leads to characterizing acceptance of evidence as "unconditional blind faith."
This is undoubtedly one of the best examples I've ever run across of the blinkered mindset of the religious right:
Mitchell said Tyson had overlooked the only relevant source to the universe’s origins by scanning the galaxy and studying its physical properties.
“Drawing correct conclusions about the unobservable past requires evaluating ideas about the past within the framework of the Creator’s history,” she said. “Drawing correct conclusions about our own nature, how we should live our lives, and what will happen to each of us when we die also requires that we get our information from the Word of the Source of life, the One who created the cosmos.”
There you have it -- If you're trying to understand the universe, actually investigating the universe is irrelevant.
There's more in the article that only underscores the self-centered arrogance of the "Christian" right. I just find it astonishing that anyone who's in the least aware of the world outside their own head can come up with comments as patently ridiculous as those.
And this woman's a doctor? Don't want her anywhere near my body.
Footnote: One of the commenters at the article made an astute observation: Doctors aren't scientists, they're engineers.
2 comments:
Somehow I had the idea that people had to study science to become doctors. This woman obviously has not studied science in any definition I could comprehend. I agree with you -- keep any doctor like this well away from my body!
Your basic GP, or even a surgeon, are as much technicians as anything -- their field is complicated, but not heavy on theory. It's the researchers in the field who are more theory oriented -- they need that sort of framework to structure their work.
Post a Comment