|| This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: |
Please include the reason why this explanation is incomplete, like this:
If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.
This comic is a reference to Young Earth Creationism, which includes the belief that the earth has only existed for about 6,000 years. Young Earth Creationism is mainly based on literal interpretations of the Bible. The professor is originally not bothered by the fact that someone believes this, since the person believing it is a nut who can be easily forgotten about because they're denying obvious truths. Then she hears that the person in question is a US senator. The fact that someone with considerable influence (like a Senator) believes in Young Earth Creationism is unsettling because they're not someone powerless and on the fringe. They're someone who can spread their false, zany beliefs, and perhaps even be taken seriously due to their authority.
- [Megan and a professor stand together, with another figure in the distance.]
- Megan: Professor, that man claims the earth is 6,000 years old!
- Professor: So? Just use your head and don't concern yourself overmuch with what other people think.
- Megan: But he says the fossils in the mountains were put there in a flood!
- Professor: Well, evidence suggests that they were not.
- Megan: But he--
- [A mountain landscape.]
- Professor: A million people can call the mountains a fiction, yet it need not trouble you as you stand atop them.
- [Megan and professor again.]
- Megan: But he believes the silliest things!
- Professor: So?
- Professor: The universe doesn't care what you believe. The wonderful thing about science is that it doesn't ask for your faith, it just asks for your eyes.
- Megan: But he's a US Senator!
- Professor: Ah, then yes, we do have a bit of a situation.
add a comment! ⋅ add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ refresh comments!
Doesn't the girl have too long hair to be Megan? The official transcript just calls them 'girl' and 'professor'. –St.nerol (talk) 17:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- Actually she looks more like Danish to me. -- BruceJohnJennerLawso (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- They're just generic humans, stop trying to say "her hair is wrong for [character]". It's really dumb. -Pennpenn 22.214.171.124 04:27, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- The girls is definately not Danish. Danish has some special personality traits (being mean and clever and not caring a thing about other). The hair is just a small thing. Also children are neither Megan nor Cueball as these are adults. I have removed reference to Danish. Actually it is the professor that looks like Megan! --Kynde (talk) 11:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- Randall definitely uses a specific cast of characters, each of which repeat characteristic behaviors & are recognizable primarily by consistent depiction of individual hairstyles. I encourage everyone to continue attempting to identify & thereby more fully understand each character, based upon their relative hairstyles & attitudes. (... "~ how are they connected? Hairstyles & attitudes, how do they relate? How well do we use our freedom to choose, the illusions we create?" - Timbuk 3) 126.96.36.199 18:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Actually, my question is whether the girl on the left is Science Girl. Hdjensofjfnen (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
- Almost has to be Science Girl, or a prototype of her at least. Nitpicking (talk) 19:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
What needs to be pointed out more is that science is a system of working toward finding the truth, that requires its adherents to remember that they never actually know for certain. A lot of modern "scientists" follow the same bad methodology as adherents of the geocentric model and astrology once did. Cosmology and quantum mechanics are full of epicycles, deferents, positivism, and static projection. Einstein and Schrodinger were correct to be horrified by that. —Kazvorpal (talk) 14:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)