here has been some howling coming from the talibangelicals about the lack of their beliefs being given time on a scientific program.
Ok, fine I say; but only when:
1] They can produce repeatable data and the methodology used.
2] These can be peer reviewed by the scientific community.
Otherwise they should stick to religious and philosophical debates.
You have to be able to subject any hypothesis to scientific methodology the argument "I believe" does not hold much water without substantial and repeatable data sets.
When creationists provide data that is verifiable and measurable by the scientific community then sure they can present their findings on Cosmos. I for one would find such data fascinating, imagine being able to prove creationism, but the rub is which creationist story would be verified because as we all know the Christians do not have a monopoly on the creationist storyline. Imagine if the Taoist belief was found to be supportable by the data set:
'Let it be told of a time when there was nothing but chaos, and that chaos was like a mist and full of emptiness. Suddenly, into the midst of this mist came a great colourful light and from this light all things that exist came to be. The mist shook and separated, that which was light rose up to form heaven and that which was heavy sank. Became solid and formed the earth.
Now from heaven and earth came forth strong forces and these two forces combined to produce yin and yang. Picture this yang like a dragon - hot, fiery, male, full of energy. Imagine this yin as a cloud - moist, cool, female, drifting slowly. Each of these forces is full of great power. Left alone they would destroy the world with their might and chaos would return. Together they balance each other and keep the world in harmony.
Would our Christian creationists admit the error of their ways and convert?
Really they wouldn't?
No Cosmos for you then.
PS The Taoist view is more along the lines of enthalpy and entropy than the spare rib bit.