No funding for schools that teach creationism as scientific fact - UK

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jan/15/free-schools-creationism-intelligent-design?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038

State run UK schools must follow the national curriculum which doesn't teach creationism anyway, but "Free schools"

"Free schools, which are state-funded and run by local people or organisations, do not need to follow the national curriculum. Scientific groups have expressed concerns that their spread will see a reduction in the teaching of evolution in the classroom."

After several creationist groups expressed interest in setting up these school the government has written it into the regulations for these schools that they cannot teach creationism as scientific fact or theory, in other words creationism and intelligent design cannot be taught in science classes, they can only be taught as belief in religious studies classes.

Personally this is a great victory for common sense and reason and helps eliminate the grave threat of religious fundamentalism gaining a grip here in the UK, the notion of groups of children being taught such dangerous nonsense in schools terrifies me, as it enables the widespread the promotion of such views that could one day take us towards American politics where religious fundamentalists actually get taken seriously in politics.

Good...why should the government pay for kids being taught any old garbage?

This actually eases a few of my worries about "free schools" (although for the record I still think they are a terrible idea.)

thaluikhain:
Good...why should the government pay for kids being taught any old garbage?

yes, because its npt your faith its "old garbage". Its not my faith either but i'm not here calling whatever it is you believe in garbage, even if you're an athiest and the only reason you're here is because you're a cosmic mistake.

Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

ShadowKatt:

thaluikhain:
Good...why should the government pay for kids being taught any old garbage?

yes, because its npt your faith its "old garbage". Its not my faith either but i'm not here calling whatever it is you believe in garbage, even if you're an athiest and the only reason you're here is because you're a cosmic mistake.

Faith in God isn't garbage, it's just a different philosophical opinion to my own. But creationism is garbage, and to teach children otherwise is wrong.

Something good out the Tories, colour me surprised.

You may be very limp on politics in other areas, but it's for stuff like this that i'm proud of you, UK.

ShadowKatt:

thaluikhain:
Good...why should the government pay for kids being taught any old garbage?

yes, because its npt your faith its "old garbage". Its not my faith either but i'm not here calling whatever it is you believe in garbage, even if you're an athiest and the only reason you're here is because you're a cosmic mistake.

I think he was refering to creationism specifically, not religion in general. Creationism has been completely disproved and has no place in science in any shape or form and should be relegated to the pages of history.

Sabiancym:
Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

A rare example of the UK government putting common sense before the unreasonable demands of shouty religious types? Well, blow me. Perhaps getting Labour out of power wasn't so bad after all.

keiskay:

Sabiancym:
Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

Ever been to Texas? It may or may not be already happening, but it's not as far away as you'd think.

Marmooset:

keiskay:

Sabiancym:
Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

Ever been to Texas? It may or may not be already happening, but it's not as far away as you'd think.

yeah I've been to Texas and they did not teach creationism in the schools and this was in a town with at least 45 baptist churches for no good reason. some of the preachers preached it but it was not taught in school.

keiskay:

Sabiancym:
Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

As far as i know, it's local councils which decide which text books and curriculum are included in schools. As since many councils have creationists on them, you'll get nut jobs putting pro-creationist books in the hands of willing teachers. And no, the creationists you see all over the internet and churches are ones who have been TAUGHT this crap.

Nergy:

keiskay:

Sabiancym:
Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

As far as i know, it's local councils which decide which text books and curriculum are included in schools. As since many councils have creationists on them, you'll get nut jobs putting pro-creationist books in the hands of willing teachers. And no, the creationists you see all over the internet and churches are ones who have been TAUGHT this crap.

except no since its a national law and not a federal law. if any local or state government allows it in school they are breaking national law and can get into deep shit over it. a texas educational leader tried to make the grounds to be neutral but many proffesors and teachers were against the idea. july 2011 TEA did not approve anti-evolutionism to be taught in school, it was not taught before but was considered. they learned it from their parents and from their preachers.

Good, it's very important not to pour public funding into religious favoritism and bad education.

Seems quite strange. If you're uncomfortable about the free schools then don't have them. Otherwise you're just going to go through a tedious and expensive process of creating a law for every suggestion that you dislike about the free schools.

keiskay:

Nergy:

keiskay:

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

As far as i know, it's local councils which decide which text books and curriculum are included in schools. As since many councils have creationists on them, you'll get nut jobs putting pro-creationist books in the hands of willing teachers. And no, the creationists you see all over the internet and churches are ones who have been TAUGHT this crap.

except no since its a national law and not a federal law. if any local or state government allows it in school they are breaking national law and can get into deep shit over it. a texas educational leader tried to make the grounds to be neutral but many proffesors and teachers were against the idea. july 2011 TEA did not approve anti-evolutionism to be taught in school, it was not taught before but was considered. they learned it from their parents and from their preachers.

About 13 percent of biology teachers "explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design by spending at least one hour of class time presenting it in a positive light." Creationists do not believe in Darwin's theory of evolution.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/science/study-most-high-school-biology.html
It isn't explicitly taught, but it sure is endorsed a lot.

Doitpow:
This actually eases a few of my worries about "free schools" (although for the record I still think they are a terrible idea.)

I was about to clone this post. My thoughts exactly!

Istvan:
Seems quite strange. If you're uncomfortable about the free schools then don't have them. Otherwise you're just going to go through a tedious and expensive process of creating a law for every suggestion that you dislike about the free schools.

They're only amending the criteria on which government funding for free schools is based. If one of these schools gets enough private support, I don't think it can be stopped from teaching any kind of bullshit it wants.

Could be wrong though. I've not read the law.

ShadowKatt:

thaluikhain:
Good...why should the government pay for kids being taught any old garbage?

yes, because its npt your faith its "old garbage". Its not my faith either but i'm not here calling whatever it is you believe in garbage, even if you're an athiest and the only reason you're here is because you're a cosmic mistake.

Erm, "mistake" implies agency/intent where none exists, so it would be a pretty stupid position for an atheist to take, considering pretty much the only requirement for being an atheist is the lack of belief in a divine agency.

And creationism is, categorically, garbage, doubly-so in a science class. Why on earth should the government be paying for religious whackadoodles to teach, as a scientific fact, a "theory" which meets none of the definitions required for that term, and which is contra to every science known to man. That's not even hyperbole, creationism can't mesh with ANY science, because it is by its very nature anti-science.

Indeed, were I in power, I would go further than this government, and ban the teaching of creationism as science period - I don't care if your school is state, public(privately run, we're odd in the UK), or in a tree house down the end of your garden; the education system should not be used as a vehicle by unscrupulous religious people to indoctrinate children. The UK has a Religious and Philosophical Education class as part of the national curriculum, which covers all the major world religions and in many schools several major philosophical schools of thought as well, and that's in addition to the religious topics covered in History. Religion already has more influence in our schools than is sane, they shall have no bloody more.

ShadowKatt:

thaluikhain:
Good...why should the government pay for kids being taught any old garbage?

yes, because its npt your faith its "old garbage". Its not my faith either but i'm not here calling whatever it is you believe in garbage, even if you're an athiest and the only reason you're here is because you're a cosmic mistake.

ShadowKatt, do you understand the meaning of a "Science Class"? Or "Scientific Fact"? I kinda wonder if you do, because if you do, and you still think that Creationism qualifies as the latter, or is anything other than garbage in the former, then you have a lot of remedial geology, biology, and cosmology lessons to catch up on. Faith is nice, but teaching it as absolute fact, or worse, scientific fact, is absolutely bollocks.

Also, nice snipe at Atheists. Glad to see that we're all not above a little bit of ridiculous hate-mongering. ^_^

Magichead:

And creationism is, categorically, garbage, doubly-so in a science class. Why on earth should the government be paying for religious whackadoodles to teach, as a scientific fact, a "theory" which meets none of the definitions required for that term, and which is contra to every science known to man. That's not even hyperbole, creationism can't mesh with ANY science, because it is by its very nature anti-science.

Lots of this.

If people want to teach kids creationism, sure. Just whip out an entire;y new curriculum for it and don't stick it anywhere near science classes. If there's not enough in creationism to flesh out an entire term, then stick some astrology and alchemy in there as well to round it out. That's all cool, but keep it the hell away from science class.

Nice to see a country not falling under pressure from """""creationist science""""". I use the multiple " to point out the fallacy of calling creationism science. They have an idea, but no evidence. It's a thyeory that bases it's whole reason on "you can't proove me wrong!" which is, to quote Russell's teapot, Wikipedia -

Russell's teapot, [...] is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) to illustrate the idea that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion. Russell wrote that if he claimed that a teapot were orbiting the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it would be nonsensical for him to expect others not to doubt him on the grounds that they could not prove him wrong.

Same principal, no proof, just can't proove them wrong. I say this in the voice of Gandalf: Don't be fooled by this!

Good, I agree 100%. I don't mind religion but when you start trying to say things are fact when they clearly are not then that's crossing the line. Science has proven the world is alot older than any religion.

As for the creator rubbish, well sure it works to say one super being created everything but then you're back to square one because who created the creator? doesn't answer anything. Hmm Perhaps we should call in Richard Dawkins.

I don't think anyone can make a rational argument that this is a bad thing. High-five for science!

ShadowKatt:

thaluikhain:
Good...why should the government pay for kids being taught any old garbage?

yes, because its npt your faith its "old garbage". Its not my faith either but i'm not here calling whatever it is you believe in garbage, even if you're an athiest and the only reason you're here is because you're a cosmic mistake.

I know I'm the guy here who gets labelled as the knee-jerk defender of all things religious, but I've got no problem with this ruling.

thaluikhain didn't express himself too well, but really, passing off religious beliefs as science is adequately described as "old garbage." I'm not too fussed about people believing in literal creationism (though I'm rather suspicious about how rigorously they have studied their theology), but the moment they pass off what they believe as though it was a scientific theory, I'm sorry, they are simply wrong. Religion is not, nor will it ever be science. Science follows rules. You can't just decide something is science just because you want it to be[1]

[1] or so you can win arguments on the internet.

Marmooset:

keiskay:

Sabiancym:
Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

Ever been to Texas? It may or may not be already happening, but it's not as far away as you'd think.

My entire extended family is from one of the most staunchly Christian regions of Texas, where they've been for generations. None of them share my agnostic viewpoint and a few still try to talk me out of it from time to time, but every last one of them joins me in laughing at the fanatical creationists.

The general consensus is that if their understanding of god doesn't meet the facts, then it must be their understanding that is flawed or incomplete, not necessarily either god or "men's understanding of God's physical laws" as my grandfather likes to describe science. Furthermore, the sentiment is not as rare as you seem to believe in that region. Texans tend to be rather practical people as a group, the fanatics, as always, are simply the loudest idiots in the room.

Yay! A win for rationalism and real life!

Frankly, I hope this spreads to the USA soon.

That's too much to hope for. Don't be silly.

EDIT: Captcha was terms eafries
Could it be trying to say terms ear fries, and then with a bit of moving about - terms fry ears?
*gasp* What could it mean?

Good call, hope they actually enforce it. Might be easier said than done.

I approve of this message, presenting something as wrong as creationism as "science" is just lying and the government shouldn't subsidize lies.

Marmooset:

keiskay:

Sabiancym:
Yet another European country making the U.S. look like a big bag of crap.

Good job U.K. This needs to be done everywhere.

except you know its not allowed to teach creationism in school and has been that way for a long time in the US. most creationist are creationist of their own actions not cause they were taught so.

Ever been to Texas? It may or may not be already happening, but it's not as far away as you'd think.

Yeah, I grew up in a tiny Texas town. I don't remember the creationist curriculum, but I do remember evolution in the various science classes.

Regarding the Texas comments: I think the intention of the poster wasn't to imply that Texas was actively teaching creationism, but to refer to creationists recent attempts at trying to convince the Texas Board of Education to accept creationist amendments to science textbooks, including this little ditty:

"students should go home with the understanding that a new paradigm of explaining life's origins is emerging from the failed attempts of naturalistic scenarios. This new way of thinking is predicated upon the hypothesis that intelligent input is necessary for life's origins."

To the state's credit, however, they've not exactly been fooled into buying into it.

Why are wasting time teaching evolution anyway? What percentage of people will need to understand the concept at any point in their lives?

If you wanna teach basic genetics, that's a good and helpful scientific exercise. Teach the concept of adaptation of species, that's perfectly good biology.

But here we are fighting about teaching kids evolution as some perfect scientific concept; we are teaching them that the most important science is extrapolating millions of years of natural history from a few centuries of data.

I promise you that more of today's youth can accurately describe the theory of evolution than can do so for the scientific method, and that is sad.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked