Five days to go ...
Until the launch of Blueprint, our natural history series. But then you knew that, didn't you? Have you seen one of our TV teasers yet? You can watch here. In addition, you may have noticed one of our billboards in various towns and cities across Northern Ireland. My colleagues in the 主播大秀's marketing department and press office have done a terrific job on the various elements of the campaign leading up to next Monday's launch day. Look out for more press coverage in the next few days.
(4000 years ago, there were Brown Bears in Ireland.)
Comments
I have no reason to doubt that there were Brown Bears once on this island. Presumably, human greed or aggression removed this beautiful creature from Ireland. God created an extraordinarily diverse environment and I hope, William, that your programme will include some reference to the Creator. Some questions you should answer for us:
1. How can a programme called Blueprint ignore the existence of a Designer? Is a blueprint possible without a designer?
2. Do you mention Christ in this programme? For example, do you use the expression "BC" (Before Christ) or "AD) (After the year of Our Lord) to describe time periods and dates?
3. Do you mention the FACT that many extremely able SCIENTISTS disagree with evolution and with the unscientific claim that the world is billions of years old?
Can you answer William?
600,000,000
00,000 -
--------------------
6,000 =
For the benefit of those in the 主播大秀 who are using faulty calculators or perhaps their fingers have been too eager with the zero key when they have been working out the time line for Blue print. May be those in the 主播大秀 could work this one out. 鈥淗ow come when Adam was created that he was of mature age when in actual fact he was only seconds old.鈥 The earth then being of mature appearance is actually young in age,a young earth that looks mature to the eye, for we walk by faith, not by sight.
PTL, can't you get your head round the idea that Will has made a programme about science? It's NATURAL history. Not supernatural history. There is no basis whatsoever for including religious language, such as "designer", in a programme about natural history. Why would the programme mention BC? That's an insult to other faiths, and isn't an accurate way of recording history anyway. As for your scientists who are creationists - sorry, I just don't buy that. I've heard creationists go on and on about how many of them have PhDs. Their PhDs are always in irrelevant disciplines.
Here's a question for you. Find me ONE professional geologist in a proper university who argues publicly that the geology of the world is only six thousand years old.
Billy, that's the daftest thing I've heard in a long time. First, your "equation" makes absolutely NO sense. Then you say that God created the world with the impression of age. did he do that just to deliberate fool all the scientists with that carbon dating equipment?
At the end of the day the creationist controversy comes right down to intelligence. No one with half an education can seriously propose that the world is 6,000 years old. we can dress this up as a difference of opinion or a clash of worldviews, but really, it's just about education. That's why it's vital that creationists are not allowed to pollute the education of our children by getting into the schools. They should not be allowed to teach their nonsense in any forum in schools. If I discovered that one of my kids had a science teacher who was a creationist, I'd have him moved to another school. It's educational child abuse.
Hello PTL,
I've read a number of your young earth creationist posts on this blog recently. Might I recommend some reading by someone of pretty strong Christian credentials:
Seems to me that this series will probably contain much in the way of speculation, imagination and CGI; not so much undisputed scientific fact.
Am I being too cynical? Then perhaps the 主播大秀 will plan to have a similar series - comparably funded and produced - to present the opposing view - ie. the Christian view of God as Creator.
Why this fear to give the cogent case for Creation a fair hearing?
Seems to me that this series will probably contain much in the way of speculation, imagination and CGI; not so much undisputed scientific fact.
Am I being too cynical? Then perhaps the 主播大秀 will plan to have a similar series - comparably funded and produced - to present the opposing view - ie. the Christian view of God as Creator.
Why this fear to give the cogent case for Creation a fair hearing?
Seems to me that this series will probably contain much in the way of speculation, imagination and CGI; not so much undisputed scientific fact.
Am I being too cynical? Then perhaps the 主播大秀 will plan to have a similar series - comparably funded and produced - to present the opposing view - ie. the Christian view of God as Creator.
Why this fear to give the cogent case for Creation a fair hearing?
Philip Campbell:
The case for creation is one thing, the case for creation-ISM is quite another. The two are not the same. One can be a Christian and believe in creation while at the same time beliving that God created the world over billions of years and created human beings by means of evolution.
Creationists do not speak for Christians. This series is not obviously an attack on the idea of creation. The 主播大秀 would not make a natural history series attacking belief in God; that's ludicrous really. Instead, from Will's accounts here, it's clear that the programmes will examine the "600 million year" history of Ireland as an island. It seems to me that a Christian watching this series could agree with that. There is no conflict at all in saying, as a Christian, that the island of Ireland is millions of years old.
What exactly is your beef with science anyway, Philip? Are you feeling threatened by scientific accounts of history?
Will,
Pardon me for apparently repeating myself! Wasn't sure my comment had got through! (Worth hearing 3 times though!)
Helman,
No, Christians are not threatened by science (Though the broadcasters seem threatened by scientists who are also Bible - believing Christians!), but we are clear about the flaws in evolutionary theory and about the dishonest attempts to ignore or hide them.
Seems to many of us also that those who accept the evolutionary model need to face up to the philosophy and worldview it produces....No God; no accountability; no afterlife; no point or purpose to life. How's that for a philosophy of despair?
Hello Philip,
There's probably little point to going into the 'great evolution conspiracy' debate. But I would like to voice a different view with regard to the consequences that you attach to acceptance of evolution. You wrote
"Seems to many of us also that those who accept the evolutionary model need to face up to the philosophy and worldview it produces....No God; no accountability; no afterlife; no point or purpose to life. How's that for a philosophy of despair?"
First, acceptance of evolution doesn't require rejection of belief in god, afterlife etc to many. Most Catholics and plenty of Protestants (as well as believers in many other faiths) manage fine to accept science, including evolution, Big Bang etc, and believe at the same time.
I don't believe. I do think evolution and other science dispels religion. Or at least those religions that make any specific claims that touch on our physical reality. Yet I'm not about to tie a mill stone around my neck and fling myself into the Lagan. And I do see a purpose to my life. Just not a god-given one. Most atheists or agnostics that I know can handle the reality of their godless life just fine, no hint of dispair.
For me personally, having grown up in a Catholic family, throwing off religion was the most mentally liberating thing I've experienced in my life sofar.
Third, even if you feel despair about a godless world (which I could understand if you always depended on that mental comfort blanket in your life sofar. While I was happy to to have lost faith, the process of losing it was difficult), that doesn't make your beliefs any more true. However pleasant they may seem.
Imagine a homeless person hungry, out in the cold. Just because his life is close to despair, doesn't mean that he can walk into a bank and expect there to be a fat account registered in his name from which he can buy himself warm shelter for the night. Reality can be despair.
greets,
Peter