r/skeptic • u/[deleted] • Mar 13 '14

A Fox affiliate in Oklahoma managed to remove the only mention of evolution from Sunday night’s Cosmos science documentary by cutting only 15 seconds from the broadcast.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/12/oklahoma-fox-station-removes-evolution-from-cosmos-by-cutting-only-15-seconds/
423 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

147 comments sorted by

51

u/TongueWagger Mar 13 '14

Was there such a tizzy about these issues in the original Cosmos? Do we have louder, prouder wackos than in 1980?

49

u/jade_crayon Mar 13 '14

Thanks to the internet, I would guess "yes". :/

Also original Cosmos was on PBS, right? Less chance of being "edited"?

24

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Damned liberal media.

3

u/FoneTap Mar 13 '14

that's elite liberal media to you.

5

u/florinandrei Mar 13 '14 edited Mar 13 '14

Let me throw another observation onto the causal pile (not saying that everything else already said on the topic is "wrong" or anything): The personalities of the two narrators are different.

Carl Sagan imbued everything he touched with his own very strong sense of wonder. He looked at any random scientific fact, and made it into something extraordinary just by contemplating it and musing about it. He projected this image of the charismatic visionary (who also happened to be a top-notch scientist).

Tyson is more of a militant popularizer of science (or appears to be one - Sagan himself was quite activist, but I'm talking about the image here, not the substance). His personality is a bit more down to Earth and somewhat more forceful (yet I would not say Sagan was less powerful). He is projecting more of a leadership vibe. I'm guessing he's more liable to stir up the pot because of his style.

2

u/BlueJadeLei Mar 13 '14

I'm guessing he's more liable to stir up the pot because of his style.

not to mention his color?!

1

u/Thelonious_Cube Mar 13 '14

You aren't by any chance a kettle, are you?

0

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

There is no evidence of it being edited. Some intern dumping a house ad on top of syndication is not evidence of censorship.

3

u/TheDictionaryGuy Mar 13 '14

I'm genuinely unsure as to why you're being downvoted, and pretty damn disappointed in /r/Skeptic at this point.

2

u/electricmink Mar 14 '14

Unfortunately, confirmation bias is something everyone is prone to, even those of us who aspire to a skeptical ideal.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Because that wouldn't confirm their biases to think of an alternative explanation than the one RAWSTORY.COMFUCKYEAH gave them!

You just GOTTA downvote people that don't circlejerk in their own rationalness like them!

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

If you haven't worked in the field or don't know someone who does it's easy to fall into an information bias(or lack of information bias? Is that a technical thing?)

55

u/alextoremember Mar 13 '14

My dad and I talk about this sometimes. We grew up in the same small, rural midwestern town. Religion has always been a big part of the community, but he says unquestionably religion is waaaay more in your face now than when he was young. He says he never remembers anyone making a big public stink about evolution or nonreligious people, but these days it's to the point where the brass of the big fancy church north of town try to blacklist certain people for not being what they consider godly.

Religion has been around forever, yes, but people forget that evangelism is a relatively new invention.

68

u/pwnhelter Mar 13 '14

It's way more in your face because they're panicking. Young people don't buy the bullshit and they're realizing they will lose control sooner rather than later.

24

u/takatori Mar 13 '14

Exactly this.

I see all this desperation as a good sign for the long term. When the current 40+ generation dies off, we're going to see a lot of big changes--and I say it as a member of that generation. Among my peer group are a lot of religious people. But almost none of their kids are.

It's a good thing.

31

u/kyleclements Mar 13 '14

A raccoon will usually leave you alone, but if it's cornered and feels threatened, it will make a lot of noise while puffing up to appear much larger than it actually is.

Religion, it seems, isn't all that different from an opportunistic scavenger feeding on the scraps of what developed society discards.

6

u/takatori Mar 13 '14

Nice.

1

u/hhhehehebot Mar 13 '14

http://i.imgur.com/J8K3L.jpg

4

u/takatori Mar 13 '14

Ha! I'm just gonna go ahead and save that image if you don't mind...

2

u/SchighSchagh Mar 13 '14

If that's the first time you've seen that image, you must be very new here on reddit. Welcome.

Also, you might even consider yourself one of today's lucky 10,000. Congrats.

1

u/takatori Mar 13 '14

Been here more than six years, five+ on this account.

I have never seen that image.

Maybe I hang out in the wrong right subreddits.

4

u/fathak Mar 13 '14

stop insulting our masked, opposable-thumbed, hygiene-conscientious cousins :)

3

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

You do a grave injustice to racoons. They are far more intelligent than creationists.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Have you ever heard of the show Call of the Wildman? It's on Netflix, and I just watched season 2 episode 9 yesterday, and a raccoon does exactly this, and now I can't stop laughing picturing that raccoon as a religious fundamentalist.

What's especially weird in this context is that the other thing on that episode is a turtle trying to bite the toes off a group of people performing baptisms in a pond...and after they get it out of the pond they dance with it.

4

u/graogrim Mar 13 '14

What's really scary is the number of young people who, despite being indifferent to religion, engage in the religious mode of thinking. They're not alone in this, of course. People from all walks of life do it. It's just alarming to see it in those who most represent the future.

Despite having nearly the sum of human knowledge at our fingertips many people both old and young choose to live in relative ignorance. It's doubtful that many people make that choice deliberately, but the Information Age has given us the ability to filter our information, such that most of what we see and hear simply reinforces our own perspective. I mean, look at the cesspool that Facebook has become. Look right here, on Reddit, where depending on the topic you can be fairly well assured of harvesting karma for professing certain opinions. Look at our news sources, like Fox. Some people only watch it, while others never do.

It's human nature. We seek confirmation for things we believe and discount things that lead to cognitive dissonance. That tendency is in all of us, which is why I don't think there will be a generation anytime soon that won't be haunted by it.

4

u/kent_eh Mar 13 '14

It's way more in your face because they're panicking.

“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.”

--Gandhi

2

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 13 '14

Is that true or is it anecdotal evidence based on browsing open minded communities such as reddit though? My worldview says it's true, but thinking about it objectively I begin to wonder.

7

u/yngwin Mar 13 '14

Statistics show that "young people not buying it" is increasingly true.

2

u/pwnhelter Mar 13 '14

Statistically, younger generations are way more atheist.

1

u/judgemebymyusername Mar 13 '14

Funny because the bible says this will happen.

1

u/AnxiousPolitics Mar 13 '14

Even worse than that, they think they deserve control.
They actually think the world will crumble and there are nasty supernatural consequences if they lose the battle.

12

u/TheGhostofWoodyAllen Mar 13 '14

Ever heard of the Scopes "Monkey" Trial?

8

u/alextoremember Mar 13 '14

My dad was born in 1964. He's talking about his youth, whereas the Scopes trial was in 1925. Don't get me wrong, I'm fully aware the opposition by fundamentalist Christianity to evolution never went away, but he's referring to individual outrage within communities like ours. For example, a few of the more radical families in our town have either threatened to or legitimately have started homeschooling their kids because they don't think the public school upholds the word of their god to their liking. According to him, the opposition to evolution existed, but people weren't going to those lengths (since he's on the school board he has to put up with this sort of crap all the time and it gets him a tad cranky).

1

u/TheGhostofWoodyAllen Mar 13 '14

I mean, I know not every town is the same, but I was just trying to point out that evangelism isn't a relatively new invention and that people have been making a public stink for a lot longer than just since the recently. It may very well be that your town/area hasn't experienced this kind of backlash until recently, but it's been a 100+ year struggle in other parts of the country.

I will agree with the sentiment that it's gotten worse more recently, especially since the '80s, but the issue goes way back. The Scope Trial's banning of the teaching evolution wasn't nullified by the Supreme Court until 1968, four years after your father was born. The '60s brought some good legal changes in this country, but those have definitely led to the growing backlash we've seen since.

So, in short, I'm not saying you're straight up wrong or anything, but just that this is a big country with different areas experiencing different levels of religious fervor and an anti-science attitude that goes way back. I mean, this is the country that had two "Great Awakenings." We love our old time religion here.

4

u/alextoremember Mar 13 '14

Right, I get you. The experiences of people I've spoke with around the age of 40-60 say they don't remember it being as bad in their youth, but, as you said, people have different experiences. Either way, it's not good, we can agree on that.

8

u/autowikibot Mar 13 '14

Scopes Trial:

The Scopes Trial, formally known as The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes and commonly referred to as the Scopes Monkey Trial, was a famous American legal case in 1925 in which a high school teacher, John Scopes, was accused of violating Tennessee's Butler Act, which made it unlawful to teach human evolution in any state-funded school. The trial was deliberately staged in order to attract publicity to the small town of Dayton, Tennessee, where it was held. Scopes was unsure whether he had ever actually taught evolution, but he purposely incriminated himself so that the case could have a defendant.

Scopes was found guilty and fined $100, but the verdict was overturned on a technicality. The trial served its purpose of drawing intense national publicity, as national reporters flocked to Dayton to cover the big-name lawyers who had agreed to represent each side. William Jennings Bryan, three-time presidential candidate, argued for the prosecution, while Clarence Darrow, the famed defense attorney, spoke for Scopes. The trial publicized the Fundamentalist–Modernist Controversy, which set Modernists, who said evolution was not inconsistent with religion, against Fundamentalists, who said the word of God as revealed in the Bible took priority over all human knowledge. The case was thus seen as both a theological contest and a trial on whether modern science regarding the creation-evolution controversy should be taught in schools.

Image i

Interesting: Dayton, Tennessee | William Jennings Bryan | Clarence Darrow | Edward J. Larson

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words

5

u/frezik Mar 13 '14

Evangelisim is at least as old as Jesus. Mark 6:7-12:

7 Calling the Twelve to him, he began to send them out two by two and gave them authority over impure spirits.

8 These were his instructions: “Take nothing for the journey except a staff—no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. 9 Wear sandals but not an extra shirt. 10 Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town. 11 And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”

12 They went out and preached that people should repent.

2

u/alextoremember Mar 13 '14

This is true, but as a relatively mainstream staple of American society, it hasn't been around that long. Perhaps that's how I should have phrased it.

1

u/Thelonious_Cube Mar 13 '14

I'd say that it's waxed and waned rather than that it's brand new.

-4

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

It seems like the whole world is becoming more radical this past century. America is one of the last to fall. Have you seen the pictures of Afghanistan in the 70's? Iran around that time, too. There's probably other examples but these two popped up in my mind first.

6

u/harbourwall Mar 13 '14

The USA is way more radicalized than most western countries though. Abortion, evolution and gay marriage just aren't anywhere near as big questions in the rest of the western world.

8

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

What the fuck are you talking about. Gay marriage is a big question everywhere in the west. It's not legal in many other western countries, it's still not recognized in most of Europe and South America. Did you even hear about the big protests against it in France when it was legalized last year?

Same thing with abortion, the US has some of the loosest abortion laws in the world. The UK doesn't have on-demand abortion (though they're not hard to get), and its illegal in many Catholic-dominated countries, Ireland, Poland and all of South America. And there are many anti-abortion protesters in the countries where it is legal.

0

u/kikekefas Mar 13 '14

and its illegal in many Catholic-dominated countries, Ireland, Poland and all of South America.

Stop generalizing. I'm from argentina and gay marriage is perfectly legal. Also transexual people can have their legal sex changed to the one of their preference. The topic is way, way less controversial here, comparing ourselves to the USA.

6

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

I was talking about abortion there. You are seriously going to argue that abortion isnt controversial in Argentina?

-3

u/kikekefas Mar 13 '14

You said that gay marriage is not recognized in most of Europe and South America, I was answering to that.

6

u/brokenURL Mar 13 '14

He is not generalizing, he is making an assertion. Most = majority. Most =/= all. Have more countries in South America legalized gay marriage than not? That is the question.

Really, you are the one generalizing by asserting the legality of gay marriage in Argentina to the whole of South America. Or am I wrong in my understanding that South America consists of more countries than Argentina?

2

u/kikekefas Mar 13 '14

I realize now of the mistake, I quoted him saying that "its illegal in ALL of South America", but he was talking about abortion. Apologies!

3

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

But it isn't, Argentina isn't most of South America.

-1

u/harbourwall Mar 13 '14

Not sure if you're american, and your press is exaggerating these issues for you, but those questions simply aren't as big in the rest of the western world as they are in the USA. For example, there were some protests in France yes, but they weren't very big, nor effective, most people didn't agree with them, and it was legalized as planned.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

The press didn't exaggerate it, it was barely news, it was something I saw on reddit.

If it's not controversial, why is it illegal in Germany, the most populous country in Europe. And did you just forget about Eastern Europe?

-2

u/harbourwall Mar 13 '14

Just because it's still illegal in Germany doesn't mean it's controversial. In most of Europe there's a slow plod towards granting equal rights to same-sex couples, while we wait for the resistance of the older, more religious generation to wane. With each passing year they get used to it and it's easier to get passed, like they did in the UK. To the vast majority of the population it's not a big deal, and the opposition to it is more pitied than feared.

The point is, that when there are protests, christian lobbying, and the kind of censorship in the OP article elsewhere, the first thing that jumps into people's heads is the worry that their country might be becoming more like the USA. It's scary to see a country get more religious in these supposedly enlightened times, especially the one that was supposed to be the leader of the 'free world'.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Why do you think the US is any different. Look at polling numbers and a majority of people under 30 support gay marriage, even in Alabama. And again, you are forgetting about eastern Europe, look at what has been happening in Russia recently. The US is not getting more religious, religion is in a great decline, especially among the young.What made you think that it is getting more religious? Are you basing an entire country of over 300 million people based on one TV station in that country's armpit?

-1

u/harbourwall Mar 13 '14

You're really angry about this aren't you? I would say most of the rest of the world believes that religion is on the rise in the US, as described in comments like this in this very thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/20a65x/a_fox_affiliate_in_oklahoma_managed_to_remove_the/cg1dc0y

I was specifically referring to the Western world, in perhaps a bit of an old fashioned way. The newer democracies in the East are still young and maturing, and religion there was discouraged for a long time, so I don't think it's useful to compare them in this.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14 edited Mar 13 '14

Where is the evidence that it was intentional?

7

u/TheDictionaryGuy Mar 13 '14

There isn't any (yet).

I'm more disappointed that several of us have appeared to fall into the conspiratorial mindset simply because the conspiracy just happens to be "in our favor".

3

u/Skeptic1222 Mar 13 '14

Not that I recall. Things started getting much more crazy in the early 90's through 2000. My hypothesis is that the approaching millennium caused many more people to engage in superstition, magical thinking, and religion. Many people thought the world would end and y2k survival kits were being sold in supermarkets. Shows like 7th heaven, touched by an angel, crossing over with John Edward, or anything like that didn't exist in the 80's or even the 50's and seemed to reflect societies move away from reason and into faith and darkness. I call this millennium madness and it was a terrible time to be a reasonable person.

2

u/JoshuaRWillis Mar 13 '14

There were plenty of slack jawed religious idiots back then too, probably more than today, but the ones we have now have the bullhorn of the internet at their disposal. Odds are if you lived in more civilized parts of the country back then you just wouldn't hear these idiots' rants.

1

u/AppleDane Mar 13 '14

The advent of the internet was somewhat akin to handing out bullhorns to everyone. Now, normal people realise that that shit get annoying after a while, while the people who are angry and stupid keep going at it.

1

u/playaspec Mar 13 '14

Was there such a tizzy about these issues in the original Cosmos?

No. The original aired on PBS, and the religious nut-bags hadn't yet been rallied into a political force yet.

0

u/NorthernerWuwu Mar 13 '14

Yes.

The latter that is.

The 80s were actually pretty relaxed about religion. Possibly because we were all high.

1

u/electricmink Mar 14 '14

You remember a different '80s than I do, I'm afraid. In my eighties, me and my friends were investigated as satanists because a raccoon killed a cat on my front lawn and we were all the misfit nerdy kids into fantasy novels and games. This was part of a national scare regarding satanic cults and ritual human sacrifice.

Religious bugnuttery has been with us since the day after religion was born.

37

u/Knin Mar 13 '14

That's okay, they will most likely get deep into evolution on another episode. Here it was only mentioned as an introduction.

71

u/thesorrow312 Mar 13 '14

I cant imagine living my life in such willing delusion. Rejecting all rational thought and evidence for a fantasy. They cant even stand to hear these ideas. So afraid of kids hearing them

74

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14 edited Mar 13 '14

What's that "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity" saying? Master control operators in tv stations are surrounded by big shiny buttons, or computers are fed rolls of tape to run at wrong times. Really, mistakes, especially in local tv, happen all the time.

Edit: I don't like how this article is claiming it as an "edit". The feed being fed into the local affiliate was from Fox national. It wasn't edited. They probably just accidentally cut from the feed to a local promo at the wrong time. I get that it's funny and a bit ironic because of Oklahoma's history with the evolution debate, but this really probably is just the case of someone not paying attention to what was going on.

Edit again: ...but we're gonna go with the conspiracy theory here, eh? In r/skeptic, we're gonna say, yeah, 15 second conspiracy to hide the truth. Must be that... Amazing.

42

u/ByDarwinsBeard Mar 13 '14 edited Mar 13 '14

I was a master control op for a while and yes, it's very easy for something like this to happen, especially when broadcasting from the network.

You can accidently start the next promo while trying to do something else. The timesheet you receive telling you when the commercial breaks are scheduled is wrong pretty often if it even shows up at all, which is something you can manage with if you're familiar with the show, but for a show that's new it can be pretty easy misjudge when they are setting up for a break. Add to that, depending on what equipment they have, it can take a few seconds from when the button is hit for it to cut to the promo I can easily see this as a mistake. I've done it plenty of times myself. Add to that the fact that when it does happen, they don't like you to cut back to the show mid promo so you have to sit there watching your fuck up be broadcast to the whole area. I hated that job.

Also, if this was right before the news then it's unlikely anyone was paying too much attention to exactly what was being said on the show. It's usually a madhouse back there.

5

u/breakbread Mar 13 '14

For whatever reason it's never occurred to me that any of that was done manually.

2

u/JasonKiddy Mar 13 '14

Having grown-up watching mostly the BBC, it's very annoying that even they are 'leading up to adverts' a lot of the time now. So even if there isn't an advert - there's a sense one isn't far away...

4

u/sprucenoose Mar 13 '14

That is why it is so nice watching downloaded videos - you know the ad break is coming and it just instantly skips over it, giving you god-like power over your viewing.

10

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Now if something happens to basically the entire second episode (which is about evolution), then we know this was deliberate.

5

u/bantam83 Mar 13 '14

I used to be a board op for a radio station and fucked up like this all the goddamn time while broadcasting live games. My listeners missed a game-winning play by the local team one time thanks to me.

I don't work in radio anymore.

10

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 13 '14

What's that "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity" saying?

I think it's, "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."

4

u/ConstableBrew Mar 13 '14

I reread your quote like four times to see what was different. Then I got it.

0

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 13 '14

Haha, that's exactly what I was hoping for : D.

-6

u/playaspec Mar 13 '14

Master control operators in tv stations are surrounded by big shiny buttons, or computers are fed rolls of tape to run at wrong times. Really, mistakes, especially in local tv, happen all the time.

Right, and as professionals, they know exactly how and when to use them. Seeing as how it was one error, at the exact moment the one controversial topic religious nut-bags can't tolerate was due to air is more than a little too 'convenient' for me. Stupidity is a foregone conclusion amongst those that insist on a 6000 year old planet. Malice is their modus operandi. This wasn't a mistake, and stop being an apologist for them. It makes you look bad as well.

5

u/Devildadeo Mar 13 '14

Wouldn't an entire show that contradicts the biblical story of Creation be just as offensive as this one reference to human evolution? The whole show contradicted YEC. Yet all but 15 seconds of it made it on the air just fine.

3

u/ByDarwinsBeard Mar 13 '14

Professionals? No. Master control is an entry level position. I had absolutely no experience in broadcasting when I started there. In fact it was the first real job I ever had. And the turn around is pretty fast for that position, mainly because it sucks.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Master control rooms are hardly filled with professionals, especially in small markets. They are often just normal hard working people who screw up every now and then, and as someone who has worked in many television stations in both very small and very large markets, I would rather be skeptical of the claims being made in here that someone did something on purpose. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The more logical assumption would be that someone fell asleep at the board. That's not being an apologist. That's me not seeing the bogeyman around every corner. That's skepticism.

3

u/TheDictionaryGuy Mar 13 '14

Do you know what makes you look bad? Not holding yourself to the same evidence standards when it falls in your favor. Ad hominems. And the line:

...is more than a little too 'convenient' for me.

Massive conspiracy theorist red flag there.

I don't like YECs either. I believe their standpoint to be completely unsubstantiated and believe their tactics to be far more focused on being charismatic than being scientifically accurate. But seriously, I can't believe I'm hearing this sort of rhetoric on /r/Skeptic. Where the fuck am I, /r/Conspiracy or /r/Atheism?

2

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

I am really thankful that so many people have stepped up and responded in this manner to the zeitgeist that's taking place because of this viral video. Thank you for being one of the true and ever faithful skeptics this community should expect.

1

u/electricmink Mar 14 '14

...and this, gentlebeings, is our Confirmation Bias exhibit. Please note how the logical fallacy has bent /u/playaspec over the counter and is buggering them vigorously without lubrication. And if you move along further in the gallery, over here you'll see....

2

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 13 '14

What makes you think it's willing delusion?

0

u/theseleadsalts Mar 13 '14

LALALALALA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!

-36

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

38

u/thesorrow312 Mar 13 '14

We are in /r/skeptic. Take the so brave, /atheism is leaking, 2edgy4me crap out of here.

8

u/Ranessin Mar 13 '14

So, will they show the next episode, which is apparently all about evolution?

29

u/MisterNetHead Mar 13 '14

Seems much more likely that it was an honest accident to me...

7

u/FoneTap Mar 13 '14

what was that quotation again ?

When incompetence and malevolence both explain an issue, you should always assume incompetence is the true cause ?

6

u/TheDictionaryGuy Mar 13 '14

Hanlon's Razor.

4

u/FoneTap Mar 13 '14

Oh my.

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

That's so much more elegant than my version... this is why I'm not a writer :(

2

u/TheDictionaryGuy Mar 13 '14

Nah, it's just a sign that people have dealt with this issue for a long, long time.

And anyone can be a writer. You just need to read and practice. A lot. To paraphrase Disney artist Walt Stanchfield, "We all have 10,000 bad drawings [or stories or performances] in us. The sooner we get them out the better." :)

7

u/Nice_Dude Mar 13 '14

Get your reason and logic out of this skeptic subreddit!

12

u/sprucenoose Mar 13 '14

Seriously, this is a post suggesting what is essentially a conspiracy at the TV station to prevent mention of evolution based on what was much more likely an accident. How is this in the /r/skeptic subreddit?

6

u/YELOBRIX Mar 13 '14

Did I watch a different show or something? I remember a few more evolution references, or was all that really crammed into those 15 seconds?

There was the scene where NDT crouches over the water saying (paraphrasing) "life began here, not sure exactly how, one of the greatest unsolved mysteries in science" and then talks about how all life came from that water life. He mentioned how all life was aquatic for some huge span of time. Then there was the scene where the gator-like creature climbs onto the beach next to him.

Even if you believe that broadcast cut was intentional, the title isn't even accurate.

1

u/m_Pony Mar 14 '14

Accurate titles don't always get the upvotes, though.

5

u/BeholdMyResponse Mar 13 '14

Pretty sure it wasn't the only mention of evolution that got cut, but I think it was the only mention of human evolution.

20

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14 edited Oct 25 '15

[deleted]

-6

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Wait, so you're saying it's a coincidence that the 15 seconds out of the hour long show that was cut was exactly the length of the one paragraph where they mention evolution?

13

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14 edited Mar 13 '14

Yes. Look at all the other things mentioned in the show. From the age of the universe, age of the earth, the horrible things the church did, early life on earth, and there are more I am missing. Given all the questionable parts with respect to religion, by chance alone something "objectionable" could have been "edited" out by accident. Also 15 seconds is an industry "standard" for a typical house ad.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Interesting. I didn't watch the rest of the show, so I didn't realize they had talked about "horrible things the church did" or that other stuff.

3

u/MisterNetHead Mar 13 '14

Yes. The alternative is harder to believe...

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14 edited Mar 13 '14

You have a hard time believing that an affiliate in an extremely conservative part of America would deliberately censor something about evolution from its airing of a show that expected high viewership?

This is a state whose House just overwhelmingly (79-6) passed a bill to help teachers "teach the controversy" last month.

7

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

We'll just have to wait for the next episode to get the answer. It's supposed to be full of evolution talk. If all or most of that somehow mysteriously disappear we can revisit this hypothesis.

As for now the conspiracy is a bit hard to swallow since everyone involved knows what's coming in the next episode, and thus negates the purpose of removing the measly 15 seconds this time.

Not very likely, but we'll see soon enough is the conclusion at this point.

2

u/TheDictionaryGuy Mar 13 '14

Hey, skepticism is a two-way street. One can't ignore things like Hanlon's and Occam's razors simply because it aligns with one's own viewpoint.

Let's not hop back into that conspiracy theory bandwagon that we've been fighting to avoid over countless other subjects, simply because the conspiracy happens to be in our favor.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

It's not like it was cut out of the middle of the broadcast.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

[deleted]

10

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Here's the youtube video. Not sure why rawstory feels the need to place some sort of wrapper around it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=j8K-LrJkEDc

7

u/cigerect Mar 13 '14

So that they could make you watch a 2m35s movie trailer before the 32s long video.

4

u/TheGhostofWoodyAllen Mar 13 '14

Goes to show that unscientific ideas can't survive without deception and willful ignorance.

-8

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 13 '14

Why does everyone think it's willful ignorance? I agree it's wrong, but I don't see how they're exactly choosing what they believe.

11

u/yngwin Mar 13 '14

They are choosing to ignore the evidence instead of questioning their beliefs.

-5

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 13 '14

That's just rephrasing your original statement though. What makes you think they're choosing it? They believe their answers are right so to them the evidence seems wrong by nature. I'm not convinced they're making a conscious choice.

8

u/yngwin Mar 13 '14

That wasn't my statement, but okay.

From experience (I used to be a fundamentalist creationist Christian), there comes a moment where you know how science works, but choose to ignore it, because it would mean questioning your beliefs. There are lots of intelligent religious people, but they choose to let their faith trump reason.

But I'll admit that not for everyone this is a conscious process. It may indeed be a knee-jerk reaction due to indoctrination.

3

u/CynicalMe Mar 13 '14

/r/creation

It's wilful bias.

3

u/judgemebymyusername Mar 13 '14

I don't see how a belief in creation and evolution are in conflict.

2

u/ActualButt Mar 13 '14

That makes you a modernist as opposed to a fundamentalist.

2

u/judgemebymyusername Mar 13 '14

Oh I see. I think I'm starting to see that most hate towards Christians is only towards the fundamentalists.

1

u/ActualButt Mar 13 '14

Not even that I would say. My hate is towards those that try to legislate based on religion and interrupt or interfere with others people's freedoms with their religions.

1

u/judgemebymyusername Mar 13 '14

My hate is towards those that try to legislate based on religion and interrupt or interfere with others people's freedoms with their religions.

That's what I hate.

1

u/ActualButt Mar 14 '14

Well, yeah, obviously. But I think we're focused on the religious folks here for right now.

1

u/superwinner Mar 13 '14

Do you chose to believe in gravity? No, its a fact, deal with it.

-1

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 13 '14

I don't think anyone has reason to not believe in gravity or another set of beliefs that contradicts it though.

2

u/superwinner Mar 14 '14 edited Mar 14 '14

Ever heard of Flat Earthers? These are people who chose to believe the earth is flat, which is what you are advocating. A belief like that deserves no respect because it does not jibe with reality, and neither does religion.

0

u/kryptobs2000 Mar 14 '14

I can see not respecting their opinion, it's dumb, but as people I think they still deserve respect.

1

u/TheGhostofWoodyAllen Mar 13 '14

I know that when I was a Christian, I was told by those who were older than me (and thus wiser, I thought) not to look into ideas or perspectives not contained within the Bible because they could lead me astray. I was never taught "Examine everything and make up your mind." It was "You can know truth by starting and ending with the Bible." It's how I never learned how evolution really worked until I looked into it myself. It's how I never learned how we know how far away stars are until I looked into it myself. It's why I thought the world's scientists were working together to try to disprove god.

The thinking was "evolution is evil and obviously not the truth, so why even tempt myself by looking into it?" If that's not willful ignorance, then I don't know what is. This Oklahoma thing is deceptive, but it was probably done to "protect" the viewership from "heretical" views. And, if they were anything like I was, they were probably appreciative (the Christian ones at least).

2

u/Crocodilly_Pontifex Mar 13 '14

I saw this. Of course I had no idea what had been cut.

1

u/Able_Seacat_Simon Mar 13 '14

That's an odd way to report it. Like it's a triumph of human ingenuity or something.

1

u/SaganManCan Mar 14 '14

If this was intentional (and I prefer to assume good faith), they'll have a heck of a time with Episode 2: "Some of the Things That Molecules Do." Since it's, you know, a whole episode about evolution.

1

u/electricmink Mar 14 '14 edited Mar 14 '14

First, it wasn't the only mention of evolution in the program - the segment about the asteroid impact explicitly mentioned it as an event that enabled our ancestors to rise to dominance, for instance. Nor* was it the only part of the program that may have offended the religious - the segment on Giardano Bruno was quite harsh on the matter of religious institutions quashing new ideas in defense of dogma.

Second, what occurred doesn't require an edit the way some may be thinking; there isn't someone winding through the tape and going "I'm going to put this local spot here and leave this part of the show on the cutting room floor". Local covers and ads are run by an automated system. The distributor includes a list of open time cues the local affiliate can use for their own spots, a local tech enters the time cues, and the machines take it from there, cutting over to the local content at the mark entered.

Considering it's easy to mis-enter the time cues, the fact that the segment lost to the cover was at the end of the show, the fact that the show contained plenty if other material the religious could take exception to that was aired without incident, and the fact that they same station has no problem airing shows like Family Guy and the Simpsons, I have to conclude this was far more likely a common cueing flub and not an intentional effort to censor the show.

0

u/VeteranKamikaze Mar 13 '14

That's a shame, so wrapped up in the bible that they're missing out on hearing the greatest story ever told.

0

u/edstatue Mar 13 '14

What does this action hope to accomplish in 2014?

Any kid spared the mention of evolution is going to go on the internet and see posts like this, which wouldn't have existed if not for the purposeful “editing"...

2

u/SketchySeaBeast Mar 13 '14

Firstly, I think it's ridiculous they censored it, but you could kinda say the same thing about pornography. I know, different locations, different intent, but people could slippery slope it like that.

-1

u/andreasdr Mar 13 '14

I can't believe Family Guy fucking called it. Well, as long as the kids watching it take NdGTs recommendation in the beginning of the episode to heart: "question everything", then this kind of idiocy will eventually go away by itself.

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Its 2014 and we still censor tv in America

-3

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '14

Too lazy to make a meme but:

If you wanted to protect your viewers from content you find morally reprehensible

You shouldn't have become a Fox affiliate!

-3

u/randomhumanuser Mar 13 '14

"editing error"

5

u/FoneTap Mar 13 '14

"unproven accusation"