If it's Sunday, do they stop doing science?

[TimCallahan]

This Sunday, the Science Channel, rather than doing science, decided to pander to the religious with two programs, one on the supposed scientific basis of the miracles of Exodus and another asserting that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah actually were destroyed by fire from the skies, specifically the ejecta from an asteroid that exploded in an air burst over the Alps, precisely dated to 3123 BCE. The ejecta, blown back along the asteroid's flight path, rained down on and wiped out the cities of the plain near the Dead Sea, but apparently nowhere else.

Finding a scientific basis for the miracles of Exodus is an old game, but one that's fruitless, since neither history nor archaeology support the Exodus and conquest narratives.

As to Sodom and Gomorrah, the ejecta blown back from an air burst over the Alps would have spread out quite a bit by the time it reached the Dead Sea region. Thus, the destruction should have been spread over a much wider area. Yes, the cities of the plain could have been destroyed in such a fashion, assuming they actually did exist, which is by no means a given.

I e-mailed the Science Channel, accusing them of pandering to religion with these two shows. Below is the form letter response I got:


Dear Viewer:

Thank you for contacting The Science Channel. We appreciate your
correspondence and for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns
with us about our programming.

In an effort to ensure the highest quality programming, comments such as
these are taken very seriously. Each and every comment is forwarded on to
our programming executives for review and consideration. Maintaining the
integrity of all of our networks is our primary goal. It is these types of
comments that contribute to creating change and improving our programming.

Again, thank you for contacting The Science Channel.

Sincerely,

Viewer Relations
The Science Channel

 

[SonOfLaertes]

Yeah, I was thouroughly disheartened by the "history channel" programming that the science channel has put on recently. I had noticed some shows before Sunday night that were more of the same.

I guess the ratings book has finally caught up to the Science Channel. It used to be that you could rely on them for shows that were either pure science, or dealt with controversial topics in a balanced way.

 

[TimCallahan]

Yeah, I was thouroughly disheartened by the "history channel" programming that the science channel has put on recently. I had noticed some shows before Sunday night that were more of the same.

I guess the ratings book has finally caught up to the Science Channel. It used to be that you could rely on them for shows that were either pure science, or dealt with controversial topics in a balanced way.

Now here's something really weird. On the History Channel, along with the crap, they've been doing such programs as "How the Earth was Made" and the "The Universe," both of which are fairly well done and both of which should rightly be on the Science Channel. They seem to be fairly popular, too. Go figure.

 

[TimCallahan]

Well, after receiving the form letter thanking me for my input, I wrote the Science Channel again pointing out that I wanted more than just a form letter. I have not heard back from them.