Round or Flat?
Sep 20th, 2007 by Amanda
I watched my first clip of The View since Whoopi joined the cast. I love Whoopi! They were discussing evolution, and Sherri (the other new member), doesn’t believe in evolution. Whoopi asks Sherri, “Is the earth flat?” And Sherri… stumbles:
It’s quite amusing to watch. I felt so sorry for her, but I loved how everyone’s reactions were not condemning of her. If she had said that while Rosie had been on the show… I shudder to think what she would have said.
The readdressed the issue on a later show, and Sherri handled it very well.
I think her “excuse” is perfectly plausible, and I could have done the same thing!
Yeah, but clearly that response was scripted (could you say that off the top of your head without stuttering?). Looks like the producers wanted to try to make it look like that show is not totally discredited by hiring such a brainless wonder.
Actually it wasn’t that Sherri woman that was so revolting to me. They could have kept her on as the village idiot. It could have been funny… discuss something serious and then ask what the wingnut point of view is.
It was that blond woman who I found to be most revolting. Yes its OK to think for yourself and get answers and you should. No its not OK to know so little (the sphericity of the earth) and then ask to be taken seriously on that show - or anywhere. Why in the world would we waste time checking every scientific fact over and over again. You do that when data doesn’t match. Otherwise we would be sitting here with our sticks and loin cloths verifying over and over again that round objects do in fact roll.
Its not OK to try to question such fundamental, obviously proven things, for no reason except to question them. Things are questionable when there is data against it (or you truly dont know shit about it, which is what she should have said, instead of ‘i dont believe in it’). That is when you question your models. That is why quantum mechanical models are so fluid right now, we don’t have a good understanding of much of it, so our models change (same for weather, btw), its also why our relativistic models and newtonian (celestial) models dont change any more - they are less descriptive and there is no strong data against them. Is there data against the sphericity of the earth? Is there data against the heliocentric nature of the solar system? (apparently some people think so: http://www.fixedearth.com/) Gravitational forces? Lets question if red peppers are really red, or could they really be blue?…I’m gonna have to go check that out at the library.
I know there a many who think evolution is not at this level of understanding, that it is somehow “just a theory” (whoever says that is simply trying to colloquialize and equivocate the word ‘theory’, it doesn’t mean the same thing as ‘hypothesis’), even though there is not just evidence for it, but corroborating evidence for it from multiple sources, and no strong evidence against it (lack of evidence -gaps- is not evidence).
Its a sad state when our political,public, and media intense figures know so little and yet hold such large influence over the public. Carl Sagan’s “Demon Haunted World” should be required reading in high school (and given to anyone who appears on a news or topics show like that).
[cue in fundie with a bunch of links to creationist/ID sites]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!! Techie- you make me smile AND LMAO!
Well….here’s the thing. The View is supposed to connect with a wide audience, mostly female, many of them wives and mothers. It’s primary reason for being is to provide an alternative to the highly-competitive, male-dominated ‘talking heads’ on the other networks who usually talk past each other with scripted positions rather than listen. So far, so good.
But facts are fact. Evolution happened, and to say otherwise is to invite questions about basic matters of fact. If you aren’t prepared to address basic matters of fact, you shouldn’t expect to get a ‘do-over’ and hugs of support from the scientific community. Her ignorance on this topic is unsurprising, but the willingness of her fellow panelists and the program’s Viewership to accept ignorance as a matter of personal belief is insulting to those of us who actually care about science education.
Scott, well said. THAT was a far more eloquent way to describe the reason I disliked that blond woman so much, than I was able to deliver. She was the worst of them in the context you described. The fact that Barbara WaWa didn’t shut her up is amazing to me. (and the reddish haired woman seemed to be the only voice of reason on that panel)