Creationism to be taught on GCSE science syllabus (you can't keep a good idea down)

The Times of London ^ | 10 March 2006 | Tony Halpin

[Greg o the Navy]

AN EXAMINATIONS board is including references to “creationism” in a new GCSE science course for schools.

[js1138]

Perhaps Hollywood could develop a new sitcom based on Noah's family. The romantic implications are a hoot.

[ahayes]

Hear, hear.

[tallhappy]

You provided zero reference at all to this picture.

You can make up anything you want, draw any pictures you want. No one will ake you seriously (except buffoons) if you can't support every statement you make.

You might want to start with the origin of the picture.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

*What??!! ME anti-evolution??!!!* Placemarker

[Coyoteman]

Try my post #64, above.

An inaccurate response to my post was made in #512.

Ichneumon corrected the inaccuracy in #539.

[Elsie]

Sorry, no, that doesn't help answer the question, unless you can figure out how to manage to produce the wide diversity of dog breeds from an original breeding population as small as five dogs, with the attendant lack of genetic diversity.

Ok, I probably could answer your question, if you can tell me just how many WOLVES did they start with?

[ahayes]

Here, I spent 30 s getting the picture source for you:

http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=38

[Elsie]

Oh look, another post by an anti-evolutionist dishonestly twisting the meaning....

Feel free to untwist the LIES then.

Sorry, but EVERY Evolutionary line is THOUGHT to have evolved such-and-such a way; is it not??

[King Prout]

the "E side" usually does make quite clear the provisional nature of their findings - such limiting modifiers as "...seems to..." and "...has .xxx probability..." and "...from the data set available..." and so on and so forth.

odd... the "C side" usually pitches a screaming fit about such modifiers, if they notice them at all.

once and for all: *all science* is PROVISIONAL.

[Elsie]

...then I'll just add child abuse to the list of evil things creationists erroneously think evolution leads to, ...

Sound like simple logic to me:

1. These bad (oops; sorry. This would imply an Absolute Standard) things exist in the world...
2. We have evolved...
3. therefore, Evolution CAUSES these bad things.

---

1. OTOH, God created all these things...
These bad things exist in the world...
3. Therefore it's God's fault!

---

Pick one!

[jennyp]

Your thought exercise is basically what I had in mind. I just didn't want to make the post too long. Of course God would know that the Bible is going to be read mainly by people of very limited education, even if they can read. But I believe that He gave the information as accurately as possible, in a way that most people could understand, in as few words as possible and yet be true.

That's a valid point, but I've been wondering: Didn't God know that the Bible would also be read by people of our time, whose understanding of the natural world is light-years ahead of the original audience? Why does so much of Genesis not hold up, even allowing for the simplistic bits?

[Elsie]

It's easy to find the source: Merely place your cursor on the pix and then.....

[Coyoteman]

Glad you folks like these.

Here's another:

---

Fossil: Taung Child

Site: Buxton Limeworks, Taung, South Africa (1)

Discovered By: M. de Bruyn, 1924 (1)

Estimated Age of Fossil: 2.3 mya * determined by Faunal & geomorphological data (1, 4, 5)

Species Name: Australopithecus africanus (1, 3, 7, 8)

Gender: Unknown (1)

Cranial Capacity: 405 (440 as adult) cc (1, 3)

Information: First early hominid fossil found in Africa (7, 8)

Interpretation:

• Juvenile (3 years old based on deciduous teeth, first permanent molars) (1, 3, 4, 7)
• Bipedal hominid (based on position of foramen magnum, brain endocast, small canines) (1, 3, 4, 7)
  
• Killed possibly by bird of prey (based on fractures and puncture marks on skull) (1, 10)

See original source for notes:
http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=27

[Elsie]

the "E side" usually does make quite clear...

But NOT the FR ones!

THEY say that E is a slam dunk, cut/dried, no way to dispute it's a FACT! statements CONTINUALLY!

They have great faith that each fossil they arrange in some kind of order, do, in fact, lead to the next, when in fact, they have NO proof that it does.

FAITH: period

[Elsie]

Didn't God know that the Bible would also be read by people of our time, whose understanding of the natural world is light-years ahead of the original audience?

Sure He did!!

Likewise...

Didn't God know that the Bible would also be read by people of our time, whose understanding of the SPIRITUAL world is light-years BEHIND of the original audience!

[Elsie]

Nice looking monkey!

Estimated Age of Fossil: 2.3 mya * determined by Faunal & geomorphological data (1, 4, 5)

How does we know how old the fawns and the Morphs were?

[From many - one.]

It's a little hard to say since there is still a degree of backcrossing going on.

[Coyoteman]

Monkey ?!?!?

Well take this:

---

Herto skulls (Homo sapiens idaltu)

Some new fossils from Herto in Ethiopia, are the oldest known modern human fossils, at 160,000 yrs. The discoverers have assigned them to a new subspecies, Homo sapiens idaltu, and say that they are anatomically and chronologically intermediate between older archaic humans and more recent fully modern humans. Their age and anatomy is cited as strong evidence for the emergence of modern humans from Africa, and against the multiregional theory which argues that modern humans evolved in many places around the world.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/herto.html

[From many - one.]

More information, but not a walk in the park to read unless you have some background:

Molecular evolution of the dog family
http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/wayne2.htm