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

← Top Scientists Tell Scottish Pupils: The Bible Is True

Top Scientists Tell Scottish Pupils: The Bible Is True - Comments

Stevehill's Avatar Comment 1 by Stevehill

"However, teaching unions and councils said they were aware of no formal guidance on the subject."

Send the unions a copy of the Dover v Kitzmiller judgement which tears ID to pieces and exposes it as a scam.

Do they have to wait for "formal guidance" before deciding it's OK to teach that the world is not flat?

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 09:32:48 UTC | #533811

epeeist's Avatar Comment 2 by epeeist

As was indicated in the thread on creationism in the EdExcel syllabus the main thing here is the specification and ratification of the syllabus. The unions should have no problem with "formal guidance", just follow the specification.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 09:36:41 UTC | #533815

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 3 by Tyler Durden

“We are definitely not targeting schools, but that doesn’t mean to say we may not produce resources that go to schools,” Dr Noble said, adding that he had already been asked to speak in Scottish schools, and agreed to do so.

So, he's lying - they are targeting schools.

Lying for Jebus, again.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 09:52:02 UTC | #533826

Roedy's Avatar Comment 4 by Roedy

What are the credentials of these "scientists". Doctors of theology?

I could hardly imagine anyone getting through his Masters or Doctor's thesis in geology or zoology without being able to substantiate his claims.

This reminds me of the "scientists" who for a fee testified that smoking is harmless. The same people are now shilling themselves out to claim global warming is harmless.

They had no credentials in either field.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:13:59 UTC | #533839

SaganTheCat's Avatar Comment 5 by SaganTheCat

They are among Scotland’s most eminent scientists

iof this is true then I'm sorry people of scotland but it seems you're not very clever

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:19:45 UTC | #533843

Roger J. Stanyard's Avatar Comment 6 by Roger J. Stanyard

C4ID is just a front for the same bunch of creationists who have, for years, have been trying to undermine science in the school classroom. C4ID is backed solely by evangelicals. It's a religious organisation. We've discussed it on our BCSE web site community forum. Two of the people involved are an unreconstructed YECers. They also worked with Truth in Science people and other creationists to lobby and undermine science.

Just take a look at who amongst the YEC activists messrs Noble and Nevin have associated themselves with in the last couple of years or so. Why are so many of them involved in Truth in Science?

They are trying to cover up their YEC roots. "No Siree Bob, ID is not religious at all and here we have Michael Behe and Steve Fuller in our November UK tour and they are not foaming at the mouth fundamentalists like the rest of us."

Strange isn't it that one of the Holy Joes behind it, Peter Loose, organised a joint UK tour of Phillip Johnson and Ken Ham in 2004. The new C4ID tour drops the YECer!

Draws breath through teeth - when am I going to find a creationist who is NOT involved in a scam?

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:22:23 UTC | #533845

Roger J. Stanyard's Avatar Comment 7 by Roger J. Stanyard

Tyler libels the creationists: "So, he's lying - they are targeting schools.

Lying for Jebus, again."

Lying? Who would have thought of that? There are all devout members of the Brethren, dear boy. Couldn't possibly lie, systematically, repeatedly and in public. Ex-school teacher and chief inspector of schools would never dream of using his connections to save souls of children. No Siree, Bob!

Draws breath through teeth, again.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:30:53 UTC | #533850

The Plc's Avatar Comment 8 by The Plc

headed by a Northern Irish professor of genetics, a vice-president of the Royal College of Physicians

What the hell? How did that happen? How embarrassing for Queens University and the Royal College. Just goes to show that there is no idea so wacky and stupid that they can't get at least a few Phds or academics to support them.

That's if they actually are deluded enough to accept this nonsense, which is unclear given their disgrace record of lying and subterfuge. We all can see what their real motivation is: to inoculate innocent children in a fundamentalist religion and ensuring they don't have the intellectual tools to escape it because their education in science and evidence based critical thinking will be totally undermined.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 10:55:54 UTC | #533867

jackarandarainbow's Avatar Comment 9 by jackarandarainbow

A powerful intellect is no defence against loss of self. All your degrees and high-ranking academic titles are so much bullshit in the face of lies. If your early relationships have pointed you to a need for the truth, you will challenge religious insolence without difficulty, but if you are a big brained boffin with a bullshit bellfry, your high rank and impressive qualifications are nothing but death-blows to truth. If Richard had failed to obtain a single qualification but retained his own self, he would still challenge lies and fasntasies.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:15:35 UTC | #533875

Louise43's Avatar Comment 10 by Louise43

I am so happy my daughter is no out of school and at college and made it through without having to endure such nonsense. Although she'd have given them a run for their money as she's the one who helped me get rid of any residual supersistions I had lurking in the back of my mind. She did have one teacher in primary school who, even though it was not a church school, used to 'preach' about what god thought and wanted. My daughter never liked her.

I asked her the other day what opinions on religion and god are at college and she said nobody really pays any attention to it and are mostly atheist or indifferent so lets hope things continue in that direction.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:45:40 UTC | #533889

CarolineMary's Avatar Comment 11 by CarolineMary

I have pre-school-age grandchildren.

This sort of thing makes me upset and ANGRY!

We should be threatening legal action.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:47:38 UTC | #533890

Frenger's Avatar Comment 12 by Frenger

Comment 11 by CarolineMary :

We should be threatening legal action.

We should be threatening kneecaps!

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:00:26 UTC | #533897

TrickyDicky's Avatar Comment 13 by TrickyDicky

I particularly liked the claim for the truth of Genesis, that it was mentioned in the New Testament 107 times and by Jebus 25 times!

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:36:31 UTC | #533920

sandman67's Avatar Comment 14 by sandman67

1) Write to the Teachers Unions and headmasters of the schools concerned and ask why they have chosen to ignore Council Of Europe Parliamentary Resolution 1580 of 2007, a full text of which is available here: http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta07/ERES1580.htm

2) Demand equal time for the presentation of science in assembly and a chance to explain why the men in dog collars tell lies, and that ID is a quack philosophy NOT science, as established in the Kitzmiller ruling, and that whether a scientist or a madman believes in it its still a lie.

3) Bring the matter up with your local education authority, Dept of Education, MP and MEP and demand an explaination as to why that CoE Resolution is being ignored. Demand a reply under Parliamentary rules requiring a substantive response to your letters.

4) Get the local press on board, other parents etc. Write response letters to the press flagging up Kitzmiller and the CoE Resolution. Do not let twaddle articles in the press go unadressed.

Get active NOW....slam the door in their faces or see the buggers thrive.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:48:58 UTC | #533924

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 15 by MarkOnTheRiver

Comment 13 by TrickyDicky :

I particularly liked the claim for the truth of Genesis, that it was mentioned in the New Testament 107 times and by Jebus 25 times!

Yes, that was great. How often do we hear xtian aplogists, edging discussions away from their embarassing old testament, and insisting that the true xtian message is only held in the new.

It's nice to see them standing up for their true beliefs.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:58:40 UTC | #533929

CarolineMary's Avatar Comment 16 by CarolineMary

Comment 12 by Frenger :

Comment 11 by CarolineMary :

We should be threatening legal action.

We should be threatening kneecaps!

Well - that's sort of a good idea...

After all - wouldn't an intelligent designer have made them a bit stronger?

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:52:22 UTC | #533964

Reasonable_Doubt's Avatar Comment 17 by Reasonable_Doubt

Exactly what "experiments" have these ID "scientists" done to conclude that the Bible is true?

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:27:09 UTC | #533978

DocWebster's Avatar Comment 18 by DocWebster

To depend on experiment is to deny faith, religidiot 101.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:29:43 UTC | #533982

TheRationalizer's Avatar Comment 19 by TheRationalizer

And their claims are obviously SO credible they must try to convince people when they are still children.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:38:47 UTC | #533987

sunbeamforjeebus's Avatar Comment 20 by sunbeamforjeebus

I walk with the lord Jesus everyday and wonder at the splendid world he has made for us.let Jesus into your life today! I have always wanted to write that line just to see how it feels and it feels absolutely fucking risible.How on earth can scientists,eminent or not, subscribe to this Enid Blyton shite and wish to inflict it on kids!!!???

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 15:14:25 UTC | #533994

BoltzmannBrain's Avatar Comment 21 by BoltzmannBrain

They are not among Scotland's most eminent scientists (or at least in any positive sense of the word "eminent"). For its small population, Scotland has been one of the most scientifically productive countries in history, and there's no indication that it's stopped doing world class science. (For instance, the University of Glasgow was recently rated the premier university for physics in the whole UK.)

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:14:06 UTC | #534046

InYourFaceNewYorker's Avatar Comment 22 by InYourFaceNewYorker

Remember when Richard interviewed this scientist (Dr. McIntosh; I forget his first name)and he was a professor of thermodynamics who said that evolution violated the second law of thermodynamics? And then McIntosh said it was his "conviction" that the Earth was 6000 years old? And then at one point Richard said something like, "Listen to yourself! You think the Earth is 6000 years old!"

Doublethink at its finest...

Julie

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:29:59 UTC | #534052

lilalindy's Avatar Comment 23 by lilalindy

Comment 22 by InYourFaceNewYorker

Remember when Richard interviewed this scientist (Dr. McIntosh; I forget his first name)and he was a professor of thermodynamics who said that evolution violated the second law of thermodynamics? And then McIntosh said it was his "conviction" that the Earth was 6000 years old? And then at one point Richard said something like, "Listen to yourself! You think the Earth is 6000 years old!"

One thing that stuck in my mind recently was the programme on religious schools. Richard had done the interview with the Muslim science class girls and the conversation went something like;

RD: So salt water doesn't mix with fresh water?

Girl: No.

RD: And you are the one that wants to be a doctor?

That and a number of other clips should be turned into an internet viral rap video or something - using a medium that the 'yute of tuday' are familiar with.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 20:48:41 UTC | #534103

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 24 by Neodarwinian

How could these people be Scotland's most eminent scientists? Hyperbole, perhaps?

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 21:54:00 UTC | #534122

InYourFaceNewYorker's Avatar Comment 25 by InYourFaceNewYorker

Yeah, I know! And I thought young earth creationists wanting to become doctors was a bad thing!

Comment 23 by lilalindy :

Comment 22 by InYourFaceNewYorker

Remember when Richard interviewed this scientist (Dr. McIntosh; I forget his first name)and he was a professor of thermodynamics who said that evolution violated the second law of thermodynamics? And then McIntosh said it was his "conviction" that the Earth was 6000 years old? And then at one point Richard said something like, "Listen to yourself! You think the Earth is 6000 years old!"

One thing that stuck in my mind recently was the programme on religious schools. Richard had done the interview with the Muslim science class girls and the conversation went something like;

RD: So salt water doesn't mix with fresh water?

Girl: No.

RD: And you are the one that wants to be a doctor?

That and a number of other clips should be turned into an internet viral rap video or something - using a medium that the 'yute of tuday' are familiar with.

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 22:32:48 UTC | #534140

J-P123's Avatar Comment 26 by J-P123

I live in Glasgow, this scares me...

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 23:38:37 UTC | #534156

simcal's Avatar Comment 27 by simcal

.How on earth can scientists,eminent or not, subscribe to this Enid Blyton shite and wish to inflict it on kids!!!???

i read a lot of Enid Blyton. God did not figure in her books. They were banned from kids libraries on grounds of political correctness. The same r eason my daughters science teacher was obliged to explain that there was an opposing theory to evolution, i.e Creationism! This was a secular grammer school, which makes it even more worrying.

Sat, 16 Oct 2010 01:05:12 UTC | #534170

besleybean's Avatar Comment 28 by besleybean

In Scottish primry schools, kids get shown films on both accounts and they debate them then give their own opinions.

Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:36:11 UTC | #534235

Roger J. Stanyard's Avatar Comment 29 by Roger J. Stanyard

jackarandarainbow claims "A powerful intellect is no defence against loss of self. All your degrees and high-ranking academic titles are so much bullshit in the face of lies. If your early relationships have pointed you to a need for the truth, you will challenge religious insolence without difficulty, but if you are a big brained boffin with a bullshit bellfry, your high rank and impressive qualifications are nothing but death-blows to truth. If Richard had failed to obtain a single qualification but retained his own self, he would still challenge lies and fasntasies."

A strange piece of anti-intellectualism. With few exceptions, people get intellectual skills and understanding through higher education. Qualifications really do matter when it comes to intellect. There are very few creationists with PhDs. Heck CID has managed to rake up precisely three across the whole of the UK. Notice that there is not one practising scientist in the UK in the key areas of evolutionary biology or geology who is a creationist.

Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:06:38 UTC | #534246

Arnott Bird's Avatar Comment 30 by Arnott Bird

The same r eason my daughters science teacher was obliged to explain that there was an opposing theory to evolution, i.e Creationism! This was a secular grammer school, which makes it even more worrying.

In Scottish primry schools, kids get shown films on both accounts and they debate them then give their own opinions.

Huh!!? But it isn't a scientific theory (isn't that what the Dover v Kitzmiller judgement was based upon?).

Here's a simple rule. If a 'scientific theory' is not purely evidence based, its not scientific theory. In terms of science, anything which discusses 'God' is out. Science does not say anything about 'God'. Surely its that simple?

There are all sorts of alternative 'theories' regarding physics out there; like strange 'inny-outy waves', or 'spirals' etc. (I'm sure you've all seen them). Science doesn't have any obligation to even mention these, so why should it have to mention this clap-trap? Especially in a secular school.

Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:19:32 UTC | #534247