Television programmes

They have to talk about really basic stuff because a good chunk of Americans think the world is 6000 years old.

The episode last night talked about the scope of the universe and earth's "cosmic address," the catholic church repressing freedom of thought (Giordano Bruno (who I hadn't heard of)), and looking at the life of the universe on the cosmic calendar.

The only thing I wasn't aware of was the story of Giordano Bruno, but I found the program quite enjoyable. I don't know why people are getting uppity about something aimed at adults and children who know very little about the universe or who haven't taken an astronomy class.

It's fucking Fox for fooks sake! What were they expecting? I'm surprised they even included that story that made the church look bad!

What the hell are they expecting? A lecture that they'd hear at MIT?

They have to talk about really basic stuff because a good chunk of Americans think the world is 6000 years old- Bungo

I enjoy poking fun at Americans as much as the next person (ask Eldo   ) frankly outside of America its a sort of global sport.
But I also always assumed it was one of those things that wasn't actually true. Please dont depress me like this by telling me it is true!  

There's this:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx

And this:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57618963-71/earth-revolves-around-the-sun-1-in-4-americans-say-nope/

This is the audience they had to keep in mind when creating the show.

I find this part most depressing-

"Americans with postgraduate education are most likely of all the educational groups to say humans evolved without God's guidance, and least likely to say God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years. The creationist viewpoint "wins" among Americans with less than a postgraduate education."

Even a thick twelve year old here could tell you there was the Big Bang, a lot of time then dinosaurs and then humans evolved.
Dont they teach this stuff in primary and secondary school in America? (sorry never sure what US equivalents are to those- primary is aged 5-12, secondary 12-18).
You couldn't get through our education system without gleaning at least that much from science classes.

It's a sad state of affairs, but Americans are indeed winning the stupid race.

PettyTyrant101 wrote:Dont they teach this stuff in primary and secondary school in America?

Not in primary school, they might teach it in high school.

No books on dinosaurs for the young ones?!   
Thats even more depressing, I loved reading about dinosaurs as a kid.

I remember loving dinosaurs as a kid, but I didn't learn about them in school. I had to do that at home.

Wow- we made paper mache dinosaurs in primary school, read about them and had plaster casts of real bones.
And of course went to visit Nessie! (Theres an interview with Karen Gillan, who is from Inverness, and she is asked if she has ever seen Nessie and completely casually replies, "Yeah, of course".   )

Weird thing I hear all this stuff about Americans, but the actual Americans I have known or those on here for example seem perfectly normal and just like anyone else. Hence my previous belief all this stuff about Americans was just a myth.

You wouldn't be allowed to teach creationism here as science. You could have it in religious studies as a comparative view, but not in a science class.

After watching that I am very glad that is the case.

Just finished season 2 of House of Cards. Pretty predictable ending. I figured it would either end in some sort of cliffhanger, or we would get the ending we got. And we got the ending we got.

Spoiler:

Now off to watch the BBC version.

I shall be very interested to see what you make off it Bungo.
If you have any technical questions regarding how the UK political system works do ask.

Oh and you have to shift your head a bit in time- House of Cards UK takes place immediately following the 15 years of Thatcher Conservative rule (when in reality John Major became the Tory PM).

Pettytyrant101 wrote: the actual Americans I have known or those on here for example seem perfectly normal and just like anyone else.

HEY! I resent that!  

Well think of it this way David, I am using myself as my comparative for normal    (although that might just be more cause for resentment)

A new television series called "I F-ing Love Science" will air on the Science Channel with Craig Ferguson as executive producer, the late-night star announced here Saturday night at the South by Southwest Interactive festival.
"If you know anything about me, you know I love science," Ferguson said. "And this show is going to explore the randomness of science. Think of it as a late night Google search that goes a hundred pages deep until things get weird and then you just keep going."
The series will combine live-action along with animations and recreations that show the random ways in which science exists in everything. Each hour-long episode will attempt to prove a "grand, outlandish thesis," exploring unexpected but related subjects and starring celebrities, scientists and everyday people who share a love of science.'

how do creationists explain dinosaurs?   do they think they are 6000 years old too? in which case what about carbon dating.

Mrs Figg wrote:how do creationists explain dinosaurs?   do they think they are 6000 years old too? in which case what about carbon dating.

Dinosaurs either lived at the same time as Adam and Eve before being wiped out by the flood, or the fossils are fake and were placed their by God (or the Devil) to test our faith.  It depends on who you ask.

Creationists tend to consider carbon dating unreliable (though for rather spurious reasons IMO).

we are rapidly going back to flat earthism

Well, according to Terry Pratchett they were put there by God as a joke to annoy paleontologists.  

Creationists tend to make up all sorts of shit which can conveniently be explained by god doing mysterious things beyond our comprehension.

Okay, question regarding UK parliament for House of Cards.

There are two sides in the parliament building. I'm assuming one is the majority (and that's the one with the prime minister on it) and the other is the minority. Who are the guys in the powdered wigs?

I'm assuming one is the majority (and that's the one with the prime minister on it) and the other is the minority. -Bungo

Yes that right. The Front Benches are the respective Cabinets of each party- the two parties who came first and second in the election. The party that came second is the Official Opposition. The Backbenchers on both sides therefore are the mass of the party MP's but who are not Ministers in the Upper echelons of the Party and are there mainly to cheer and boo at the right times and vote as told by the respective Party Whips.
Other parties- Lib-dems, Ulster Unionists, Greens, SNP or whoever are off to the side (at the time of H of C. At present the lib-dems share the Front benches with the Tories as part of the coalition).

"Who are the guys in the powdered wigs?"

The Speaker, lawyers, and Hansard.

The Speaker is the Chair of the House, he's the one occasionally shouts "Order!", the ones either side are legal clerks. Ones seated are Hansard, they record everything said in the House for the records in huge books known as Hansard.
Its slightly different now than then- its televised now and the wigs gone from the Speaker.



Lots of historic trivia about that place- among my favourite you might notice there are red lines painted on the floor on either side, those are there because the distance between them is slightly longer than an arms reach plus sword. You are not supposed to cross them or you could stab your opponent!

Thanks for answering, Petty.

one of the more popular historical insults to your parliamentary opposite is ''Yah Boo Sucks!'' I actually heard that when our school went to visit the Houses of parliament.