This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Devolution in Education

Devolution in Education - Comments

JemyM's Avatar Comment 1 by JemyM

Intelligent Design is an anti-Christian argument.

If ID is true, Genesis is wrong. That means that original sin is wrong. That means that there's nothing to be saved from and Jesus death/ressurection is pointless.

It also means that Cristianitys answer to suffering doesn't work.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:33:00 UTC | #231122

Ishruul's Avatar Comment 2 by Ishruul

Of course their history books aren't up-to-date, the Bible is 2,000 years behind schedule!

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:40:00 UTC | #231126

justaminute's Avatar Comment 4 by justaminute

The idea that divine guidance played a part in the creation of the world â€" the basis of "intelligent design" â€" "is a possibility, but we have no way of testing it," Fisher said.

Have we any way of testing the idea that only natural forces created the world?

I can't see that either idea is testable. How do we test one-off historical events?

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:47:00 UTC | #231129

Ed-words's Avatar Comment 3 by Ed-words

They pray on their Bible

As they prey on Science!

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:47:00 UTC | #231128

neander's Avatar Comment 5 by neander

Looks like Texas has genuinely built a time machine and is headed for the middle ages. Hang on folks, we're all being dragged down.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:48:00 UTC | #231131

NewEnglandBob's Avatar Comment 6 by NewEnglandBob

Maybe Texas should become its own third world country, then we could move on without being dragged down.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:54:00 UTC | #231135

Dhamma's Avatar Comment 7 by Dhamma

Excuse me for bringing the off-topic gossip, but I thought it was pretty "cool". Just read some Swedish news, and saw that Charles Simonyi(59) is apparently about to marry a Swedish 28-year old. Charles Simonyi is the billionaire that pays Dawkins chair at Oxford, if I've understood it correctly.

Congrats to the science contributor!

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:59:00 UTC | #231138

the way's Avatar Comment 8 by the way

Is it something in the oil?....It seems that everywhere there is an abundance of the black stuff, religious fundementalism abounds!

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:00:00 UTC | #231140

phasmagigas's Avatar Comment 9 by phasmagigas


Have we any way of testing the idea that only natural forces created the world?

I can't see that either idea is testable. How do we test one-off historical events?

by default we have to suppose 'natural' forces, adding extra supernatural ones isnt helpful, you could postulate some, i could, so could some african bushman, we could postulate some ancient aztec now extinct supernatural agencies, as you say in another post (words to the effect of) 'just becasue scientists assert that they are false doesnt mean they are all false' well thats right but the burden of proof is on the proponent of the idea. I dreamt last night that a giant iron powered by a star created the flat prairies of the USA 10,067 years ago, show me thats not true, just because i say its true doesnt mean it is and just because some say its false doesnt mean it isnt, i can say its a revelation, and the rollong hills of wisconsin are caused by giant invisible alien creatures hiding whilst they search for their spaceship telepathically.

you get the idea??

you are trying to come across as 'fair' by giving equal weight to both sides of the natural/supernatural creation but until a creaionist can throw some evidence my way im not even interested in those ideas, has religious belief not always been based on faith?? theres a good reason why 'faith' has always been the mainstay of religios belief, that reason is because it has NOTHING elese to go on, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA.

as for one off events, well if theres evidence somewhere for that event than its testable, eveything that happens is a one off historical event, you could say 'if i 'werent born' then i wouldnt be here but im here so that falsifies that idea that i werent born so i shall use that as evidence that i WAS born!

which historical even were you thinking of?

oh, so both natural and non natural events arent testable, tell that to spacecraft designers, brain surgeons and people working on powereing cities with electricity, they will simply laugh at you as you turn on your coffee machine.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:04:00 UTC | #231146

FatherNature's Avatar Comment 10 by FatherNature

This reminds me of the old line about democracy sometimes being like two wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for dinner.


EDIT: I just sent the following email to the TEA from their contact page at

I urge the TEA to implement a science curriculum that is free from all religious content especially creationism or intellegent design. Evolution is a scientific fact, supported by abundant evidence from mulitiple disciplines. ID is religion.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:08:00 UTC | #231148

phasmagigas's Avatar Comment 11 by phasmagigas



Can it do my shirts?

shirts are tricky for even magical irons.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:19:00 UTC | #231153

Zoonhollis's Avatar Comment 12 by Zoonhollis

"People who teach astronomy have already been verbally attacked in workshops discussing the Big Bang theory and the idea that the Earth is 14 million years old,"

Who teaches that the earth is 14 million years old?

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:22:00 UTC | #231154

EvidenceOnly's Avatar Comment 13 by EvidenceOnly

Christians should amend their 10 commandments with:

Thou shalt not lie, except for Jesus.

They could then lie in the various education boards across the country with a better conscience.

Have you noticed that conscience is only a "-" apart from "con-science"?

To con science is exactly what religious extremists are doing in school education boards.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:23:00 UTC | #231155

severalspeciesof's Avatar Comment 14 by severalspeciesof

4. Comment #244029 by justaminute

Have we any way of testing the idea that only natural forces created the world?

Well, for starters we CAN test how natural forces work today, and then work backwards from that. How does one work backwards from ID?

Wait...maybe one can, but which ID do you chose? For example... The one that created our imperfectly created eyes, or the one that created a better designed eye in the octopus?

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:36:00 UTC | #231161

Fanusi Khiyal's Avatar Comment 15 by Fanusi Khiyal

*claws out* Only disagree with one thing - so far - in this article but it needs to be said:

Who would want their kids learning [..] literature classes that cover only the works of dead white guys from Europe who wrote with lots of where-art-thou's?

Well, ME actually. Until some other group than those dismissed as 'dead white guys' starts producing anything that's worth a tenth of what they have produced, my future children will have their hands so full with Homer, Sophocles, Artistotle (literary theory), Xenophon, Virgil, Milton, Chaucer, Dante, Shakespeare, Victor Hugo, Dostoyevsky, Goethe, Schiller, Sienkiewicz, Proust, Keats, Longfellow, Wordsworth, Hemmingway, Byron, Shelly, etc. that they'll be too damn busy to read whatever p.c. screed you've managed to drag up.

Honestly, this makes me so angry. Also, you don't get to dismiss millennia of achievement in the first sentence, and then be shocked, shocked that other knuckledraggers want in on the action.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:47:00 UTC | #231165

Sciros's Avatar Comment 16 by Sciros

Fanusi said:

*claws out* Only disagree with one thing - so far - in this article but it needs to be said:

Who would want their kids learning [..] literature classes that cover only the works of dead white guys from Europe who wrote with lots of where-art-thou's?

Article also said:
the Earth is 14 million years old

This just in!! Fanusi agrees that the earth is four times younger than dinosaurs! Wahahah owned!

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:52:00 UTC | #231167

mixmastergaz's Avatar Comment 17 by mixmastergaz

Egobreed: You may joke about it, but one of my students from last year seriously proposed the view that there's a conspiracy of scientists hell bent on deceiving the world with this "evolution stuff". The same student, when I was explaining what was required from the fossil record to disprove evolution (rabbits in the pre-cambrian etc.) asked "can't we just fake some evidence?" He seemed genuinely surprised by my reaction to this. Despite his (partly excusable because of his youth) lack of integrity, he also seemed surprised when I told him about some fraudsters who had already tried what he proposed.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:55:00 UTC | #231168

Fanusi Khiyal's Avatar Comment 18 by Fanusi Khiyal

Sciros, droll - you may have noticed the 'so far' part of my comment. In other words, I was provoked to fury just by the opening sentences and didn't get as far as that line.

"Wahahah owned"? Just how old are you, exactly?

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:56:00 UTC | #231169

Sciros's Avatar Comment 20 by Sciros

Fanusi, don't assume I'm young just because I can complement an immaturely themed post with some immature phrases.

And for the record I agree with your post, as you might expect.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:00:00 UTC | #231173

justaminute's Avatar Comment 19 by justaminute

by default we have to suppose 'natural' forces, ading extra supernatural ones isnt helpful

Why do we have to suppose 'natural' forces? Is there a scientific test to show that this is the correct 'default' position. If not then what is the basis for the 'have to'?

You seem to have made a transition from science to philosophy.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:00:00 UTC | #231172

Fanusi Khiyal's Avatar Comment 21 by Fanusi Khiyal

Consider me suitably chastised. I'm currently trying to quit smoking, as my demeanor probably reveals. No hard feelings?

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:03:00 UTC | #231177

Sciros's Avatar Comment 22 by Sciros

None whatsoever ^_^

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:05:00 UTC | #231178

severalspeciesof's Avatar Comment 23 by severalspeciesof

22. Comment #244075 by justaminute

Why do we have to suppose 'natural' forces? Is there a scientific test to show that this is the correct 'default' position. If not then what is the basis for the 'have to'?

Show the other position (super-natural) and then maybe you'll have a point.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:11:00 UTC | #231180

severalspeciesof's Avatar Comment 24 by severalspeciesof

17. Comment #244067 by egobreed

Still, there might be a massive conspiracy of so-called 'scientists' to fake evidence to undermine god. Started by satan?

No faking required!
With regard to the state of this universe, that actually makes more sense than that of a benevolent god! (I'm assuming that you meant the universe was started by satan?)

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:17:00 UTC | #231183

wwarrants's Avatar Comment 25 by wwarrants

Living in Texas, with two kids 10 and 11, sadly our only solution was to leave the public school system behind and join in with a private international school. It's expensive, yes, but at least now they will have a fighting chance in the future, when they will have to compete with minds educated around the world; minds not caught up in this nonsense. Frankly I find the entire ID battle embarrassing, and frankly a little hopeless.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:18:00 UTC | #231184

Sciros's Avatar Comment 26 by Sciros

wwarrants, I think as long as you take care to tell your kids what is and isn't BS at home, they'll be fine in whatever school. Think about this: in the USSR there were loads of propaganda *in the schools* about how Communism is great, how all other countries suck, blah blah blah ad nauseam. FAR more rubbish than there is in any public school in the US, as far as I know. But that didn't mean everyone bought into the bullshit; far from it, in fact, and it really came down to parenting at home.

Teaching nonsense in school is terrible, but it's not so catastrophic that you need to pay expensive private schools to do what you can probably do yourself with much success ^_^

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:24:00 UTC | #231186

Stormkahn's Avatar Comment 27 by Stormkahn

Who supplies the so called "gaps" in the Theory of Evolution?

A Scientist, an expert in the field?....thought not.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 08:37:00 UTC | #231193

Agrajag's Avatar Comment 28 by Agrajag

"Don McLeroy, a Bryan dentist, is the current State Board of Education chairman... is also an evangelical Christian who rejects the theory of evolution. Quoted in The New York Times on June 4, McLeroy said his rejection of evolution; 'I just don't think it's true or it's ever happened'; is not based on religious grounds.

Once again, someone who shares my professional standing gets the "Fucktard of the Year" award. What an embarassment. Any dentist who doesn't understand and accept the "truth" of evolution and the "theory" of natural selection as its mechanism is nothing but a tooth carpenter.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 09:15:00 UTC | #231201

Rational_Skeptic's Avatar Comment 29 by Rational_Skeptic

Given the research that suggests children are more influenced by their extra-familial environment (peers) than their parents, I would suggest rational parents in Texas are well-advised to send their children to well-chosen private schools.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 09:56:00 UTC | #231213

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 30 by mordacious1


McLeroy has been spotted carrying a black bag containing a pair of rusty plyers, a chisel, a bottle of red-eye, and some laudanum.

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:06:00 UTC | #231222