Atheists & Agnostics
Related: About this forumRupert Murdoch’s National Geographic celebrates the Virgin Mary
Now its entirely possible that this article was written well before Murdoch took over, as theres a lag time in the process (some of the incidents reported by author Maureen Orth were from last December), so I cant be sure that the new regime is responsible for a piece thats pretty much of a travesty. Nevertheless, I cant be sure, either, whether the new ownership didnt approve the final article as well as this cover and the execrable video embedded in the online version (see below):
...
The only notes of doubt are the one-sentence claim by a physicist that the spinning suns associated with visions of Mary could be caused by sunlight reflected through charged ice crystals, and the warning that we cant be certain that the Bible gives us correct details of Marys life because it was written a few decades after the fact. But theres also no caveat that Mary (and Jesus) might not have been real, and no skepticism that these miracles could either reflect false reporting (as in the case that led to the beatification of Mother Teresa) or are rare spontaneous remissions. As many doubters have noted, none of the miracles involve regrowing limbs or eyesthings that never under any circumstances, religious or not.
Its telling that the three-minute video that accompanies the online article features researcher Michael ONeill, who just happens to run the website The Miracle Hunter, a site that seems to buy those miracles vetted by the Catholic church. ONeill also has an apparently Christian-oriented radio show. In the video below, ONeill (who I bet is a Catholic) seems overly credulous in accepting the reality of miracles that are officially approved by the Catholic Church. Get a load of it, and remember that its in National Geographic:
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2015/11/29/rupert-murdochs-national-geographic-celebrates-the-virgin-mary/
Skimming through, it does seem extremely credulous. NatGeo should be a fact-based publication, but, as Jerry Coyne says, "its a reprehensible osculation of faith by a formerly reputable magazine".
valerief
(53,235 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)mountain grammy
(27,358 posts)Murdoch's mission. Will he ever die?
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)My dad was a subscriber and kept all the issues. I learned a lot from them. Very sad to see it go.
Response to NastyRiffraff (Reply #4)
Pacifist Patriot This message was self-deleted by its author.
Binkie The Clown
(7,911 posts)It's time for all thinking people to simply walk away from the travesty that Murdoch has wrought.
onager
(9,356 posts)Let the bottom-feeding commence! A friend subscribes to the NG offshoot magazine "History" and she's passing them along to me. I like that mag and haven't seen any obvious religious glurge in it yet. But will now brace myself...
Speaking of bottom-feeding, Murdoch did do ONE good thing that I know of. When O.J. Simpson "wrote" his "book" (If) I Did It, it was originally a project of a Murdoch publishing house. His employee Maureen Regan put the deal together.
The book was seen as a huge slap in the face to the Brown/Goldman families. Simpson not only pretty much confessed to the murders, he stood to make a huge pot of money off the book deal.
Murdoch stopped the publication and fired Regan. A court case later awarded all book rights and subsequent profits to the Browns and Goldmans.