National Geographic, eu tu??

[Loren Pechtel]

http://boingboing.net/2015/09/09/rupert-murdoch-just-bought-nat.html

Sold out to the great deniers.

 

[ronburgundy]

http://boingboing.net/2015/09/09/rupert-murdoch-just-bought-nat.html

Sold out to the great deniers.

Hilarious. My father, a climate change and evolution denying conservative, gave me a subscription to Nat Geo last Xmas. I thought, "Well, that is a surprisingly out of character gift from him." Little did I know he was psychic and saw this coming 10 months ago.

More seriously, the Nat Geo channel has been promoting the Bible as fact and History for years, so this won't be a complete 180 from their already questionable status as a "science" promoting organization.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

More seriously, the Nat Geo channel has been promoting the Bible as fact and History for years, so this won't be a complete 180 from their already questionable status as a "science" promoting organization.

There is a lot of fact and history in the Bible. That does nothing to prove that the religious component is also real, though, any more than any work of fiction set in a real backdrop is. (For example, consider Tom Clancy's The Hunt for Red October. Plenty of accurate depictions of the world in there--do we conclude a boomer defected??)

 

[Keith&Co.]

More seriously, the Nat Geo channel has been promoting the Bible as fact and History for years, so this won't be a complete 180 from their already questionable status as a "science" promoting organization.

There is a lot of fact and history in the Bible. That does nothing to prove that the religious component is also real, though, any more than any work of fiction set in a real backdrop is. (For example, consider Tom Clancy's The Hunt for Red October. Plenty of accurate depictions of the world in there--do we conclude a boomer defected??)

Yes, i read Hunt For Red October and recognized many factual descriptions. Thing is, though, those things i know about submarines, submariners and submergings do not come from HFRO. I have to have other sources of information to determine which parts are factual and which parts are more than likely fictional.
There are also many factual components in "Gray Lady Down" and "Down Periscope." But i wouldn't suggest either of those for a place to start learning about the submarine fleet.

I wouldn't trust anyone promoting 'the Books as fact,' in much the same way. Rather, i'd maybe see trying to promote it as 'having factual parts,' and that we know some parts are factual by '(insert reference material here).'

 

[GenesisNemesis]

R.I.P NatGeo.

 

[Bacillus anthracis]

NatGeo was a great magazine--when people still read magazines. It's channel was pretty good--until it had to start competing with Honey Booboo and the rest of the brain cell killing programming that's so prevalent.

Besides, nature documentaries are so depressing now. There is no animal or ecosystem that isn't being wiped from the face of the earth right now and usually half the show is devoted to how fucked we are. Maybe that's why Honey Booboo was such a hit.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Interesting. Will he use Nat Geo like he made the LA Times more conservative? Will Nat Geo start telling "both sides of the story" regarding whatever issue is out there?

 

[PyramidHead]

Murdoch owns a lot of outlets. Not all of them are deniers. Harper Collins, for example, is quite open about their efforts to combat it: http://corporate.harpercollins.com/about-us/harpergreen

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

NatGeo was a great magazine--when people still read magazines. It's channel was pretty good--until it had to start competing with Honey Booboo and the rest of the brain cell killing programming that's so prevalent.

Besides, nature documentaries are so depressing now. There is no animal or ecosystem that isn't being wiped from the face of the earth right now and usually half the show is devoted to how fucked we are. Maybe that's why Honey Booboo was such a hit.

So true.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There is a lot of fact and history in the Bible. That does nothing to prove that the religious component is also real, though, any more than any work of fiction set in a real backdrop is. (For example, consider Tom Clancy's The Hunt for Red October. Plenty of accurate depictions of the world in there--do we conclude a boomer defected??)

Yes, i read Hunt For Red October and recognized many factual descriptions. Thing is, though, those things i know about submarines, submariners and submergings do not come from HFRO. I have to have other sources of information to determine which parts are factual and which parts are more than likely fictional.
There are also many factual components in "Gray Lady Down" and "Down Periscope." But i wouldn't suggest either of those for a place to start learning about the submarine fleet.

I wouldn't trust anyone promoting 'the Books as fact,' in much the same way. Rather, i'd maybe see trying to promote it as 'having factual parts,' and that we know some parts are factual by '(insert reference material here).'

If they are using the fact that it's in the Bible as evidence of it being true then I agree with you. I have no problems with an investigation of whether <x> in the Bible is true, though. They have made archaeological finds using the Bible as an indication of where to look. I would expect all the historical backdrop (minus the religious aspects) in the Bible to be basically true.

 

[Axulus]

I don't think it matters. 21st Century Fox produced the Cosmos reboot with Niel DeGrasse Tyson, which had an episode discussing the scientific view on climate change.

Murdoch doesn't personally manage what goes on at these various companies.