Neil deGrasse Tyson vs. the Right: “Cosmos,” Christians, and the Battle for American Science

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/neil-degrasse-tyson-vs-right-cosmos-christians-and-battle-american-science




The religious right has been freaking out about Neil deGrasse Tyson’s “Cosmos” for what feels like an eternity. And, while the theological complaints seem laughable for their rancor and predictability, it’s time we thought harder about what they represent, because the Christian right’s “Cosmos” agita actually indicates a far deeper problem in religious conservatism — the selective acceptance of Enlightenment values. Religious conservatives have selectively adopted the legacy of liberal Enlightenment, from free speech to science, and jettisoned it when it does not suit their narrow ideological aims.

There is a nasty tendency for those arguing for their case to adopt a stance of enlightened empiricism on one issue to devolve into empirical nihilism on another. There is also the habit of shifting from a high praise of liberal values on one issue to utter contempt on another. Of course, our various liberal values will come into conflict frequently and must be weighed, but we must be disturbed at how quickly some, particularly on the religious right, are willing to twist these traditions for their own gain.

The odd conflict of science and religion has come to define modern religious fundamentalism. While most religious people happily accept scientific theories about gravity, claims about the age of Earth are subject to a strange scrutiny by those who believe that the literary creation narratives in the Bible describe actual events.

The scientific consensus about global warming must be untrue, because, as Dr. Innes writes in “Left, Right and Christ,” the world is “not a glass ornament that we might accidentally destroy … we are not capable of destroying it, whether by nuclear weapons or carbon emissions.” Young earth creationism is the ultimate attempt to both accept modern science, but also to deny it. Fundamentalists like Ken Ham argue that the world and laws we currently observe simply bear no resemblance to the past.

[chervilant]

1. This:

Religious conservatives have selectively adopted the legacy of liberal Enlightenment, from free speech to science, and jettisoned it when it does not suit their narrow ideological aims.

So sad; so true.

[pangaia]

2. Ask a creationista why we do not fall off the earth.

See where that leads..

Actually this post got me to wondering where all this gobble dee gook comes from. I am no bible scholar, duh!
So, having my coffee I did something I rarely do- I WIKIED!
ssshhh..

"Young Earth creationism"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism

"Since 1982, between 40% and 50% of adults in the United States say they hold the young Earth view that "God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" when Gallup asked for their views on the origin and development of human beings."

YIKES!! How is that possible "humanly" ??

"Septuagint"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint


The next time I come across a young earth creationist I will have a little info to 'discuss' with, on HIS/HER terms, not just science...

I actually find both these articles quite interesting and will pursue for my own education.