The Gadfly Has Returned -- Meh . . . . .

Greetings comrades!  (sorry - The Gadfly just knows that will get picked up by the NSA filters as well as pop a few veins in the foreheads of the wing nuts - which is why The Gadfly does it).

The Gadfly has been extremely busy this past week tying up loose ends with his private business venture, so apologies for the dearth of postings.

There - now that the niceties have concluded - let's do some catching up - shall we?

Let's start off with this bit of comical buffoonery:

Creationists are accusing astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson's reboot of "Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey" of being scientifically unbalanced because it doesn't represent their beliefs.

Right Wing Watch posted audio of Danny Faulkner of Answers In Genesis and the Creation Museum speaking Thursday on "The Janet Mefford Show,” in which he blasted deGrasse Tyson for ignoring the creationist point of view.

"Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them, they wouldn’t even consider us plausible at all," Faulkner told host Janet Mefford.

"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," Mefford said. "You know, the old, ‘some scientists say this, others disagree and think this,’ but that’s not even allowed."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/creationists-neil-degrasse-tyson-cosmos-unbalanced


Sigh . . . . hey asshole (Danny Faulkner) - the principal reason that Cosmos, a show about science and scientific principles, neglected to devote time to your pet religious project - young Earth creationism - is for the simple fact that creationism is not science - except of course in the fevered and dogmatic minds of you and your zombie-eyed, fellow cult members.

Science, and the principles that guide it, has been around for centuries.  It is man's constant pursuit of knowledge and facts based on the reality based world that we (most of us anyhow) live, and yes, evolve in.  It is, according to The Gadfly's dictionary, "a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws."

The key term in that definition is "general laws."  You want to know what a "general law" is dear readers.  Ok - let's say there is a monkey, we will call him Monkey #1.  Monkey #1 has two (2) bananas.  One of Monkey #1's fellow primates, we will call him Monkey #2, in the exhibit at the Zoo where they are being held hostage, gives Monkey #1 two (2) more bananas.  The Gadfly is pretty sure that most of us would agree that it is Monkey #1's lucky day for now he has a total of four (4) bananas - because 2 + 2 = 4.  That equation, 2 + 2 = 4, is what is known as a general law of mathematical science.  2 + 2 does not = 5, nor does it = 319.

That is science. It is ever evolving, it is ever being challenged.  Is it perfect and unerring?  No - because human history is replete with examples of scientific theories and statements of purported fact that were subsequently proven to be incorrect.  But the difference is - when those corrections occurred, the science and it's practitioners adjusted their views, accepted the new evidence, and moved on.

Creationists on the other hand - have no general laws.  What they have is an ancient religious screed known as The Bible.  A screed that was cobbled together from the primitive mythological and superstitious beliefs of dozens of writers and sects spread across several centuries of time and cultures.  They accept it as being infallible - without question.  They do not pursue, or have any interest in doing so, any knowledge beyond the written pages of that book. If there were a passage anywhere in the book telling them that 2 + 2 = 9, they would be bound to believe it to be true because to admit that their divinely inspired book could contain untruths, would undermine their entire world view as well as the very foundation of the messianic cult for which they have immersed themselves in.

So for this bozo, Danny Faulkner, to go crying to his conservative media friends about how that mean old well-respected and highly honored scientist, Neil deGrasse Tyson, is snubbing his nose at Danny Faulkner and his Creationism "Science" is some pretty goddamn (offense intended) hilarious shit if you ask The Gadfly.

Oh - and lest The Gadfly allow it to go unnoticed -- that line from Faulkner about how "so many scientists" don't accept evolution -- pure fucking horseshit lying.  There is ample, documented evidence indicating that upwards of, and likely beyond, 95% of scientists accept the Darwinian theory of human evolution - and unless Danny Faulkner has his own version of mathematical science wherein 5 is greater than 95 and can be proven to be so, The Gadfly is well within his rights to label Danny Faulkner a pure, fucking lying sack of horseshit.

Lastly - let us hope that Tyson and the producers of the series 'Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey' don't get all weak-kneed and go apologizing or appeasing these flat-earther denialists.  For that would truly upset The Gadfly, not to mention be a wholly disrespectful slap in the face to the great Carl Sagan.

And that is about all that The Gadfly has to say on this sordid subject dear readers.



----TFG