Danny Faulkner & Janet Mefferd #fundie

Danny Faulkner & Janet Mefferd #fundie rightwingwatch.org

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.

55 comments

old comment by Doubting Thomas

“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.”

Probably because those few scientists who dispute evolution are not experts in any field which uses evolution, like biology. They're always structural engineers or something like that, if not "doctors of divinity."

If we start forcing our science programs to give equal time to every crackpot theory out there, "Cosmos" will start looking like the old "In Search Of..." which gave credibility to just about any wacko idea.

old comment by dionysus

Faulkner responded by lamenting that “Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them, they wouldn’t even consider us plausible at all.”

There you go. You answered your own question. Just as legitimate medical documentaries don't talk about the Philosopher's Stone or the Elixir of Immortality, so a show about the latest findings of science isn't obligated to present creationism. It's not that alchemy and creationism are false, it's that they haven't been demonstrated to be true to the foremost experts in the fields they want to be a part of. When creationism is seriously considered by science, then it'll belong in a science documentary.

old comment by

That's because special creation ISN'T SCIENCE! Even as much as you clowns try to tell everyone it is, calling it 'creation "science"', trying to somehow fool the gullible into thinking there is any science at all behind it. Science works with something called "evidence" that you morons apparently don't understand. And no, don't go trying to shift the burden of proof forcing us to prove that there isn't a supernatural magic sky-pixie behind everything. You claim there is, your burden of proof. And no, some Bronze Age book saying so isn't proof.

You want airtime? Go do like the Cosmos show did, and BUY YOUR OWN FUCKING AIRTIME! Last I checked, it's a free country, you can actually do that, you know, buy your own airtime. You don't see the scientists whining about getting time on the religious shows, do you?

If you want time on our show, fine; give us time on yours first; otherwise, quit your fucking whining.

old comment by Qazamir McSmarty Britches

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.”

Yeah, I know what you mean, Cosmos doesn't even aknowledge that Odin slew Ymir and created the World and everything we see from his body. He also formed Ask and Embla, the first man and woman, from two tree trunks that had washed ashore after the diluge of Ymir's blood.

Wait, what do you mean that's just a myth?

old comment by crealms82

Yes there are many scientists that don't accept evolution but they tend to be in fields not related to biology. Also over all the percentage of those who accept it compared to those that don't accept it is too vast to matter. It Yeah it's hundreds even thousands of scientists but they represent maybe five percent tops of all scientists.

Project Steve proves that. If a list of scientists who accept evolution and are all named steve is like ten time larger then AIG's list of scientists that don't accept evolution then it shows how small this conflict is.

AiG and other creation groups want the general public to believe that the controversy is much bigger then it really is.