Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Storm over Teaching Creationism
The Indepedent ^ | 15 March 2002

Posted on 03/15/2002 1:31:37 PM PST by JediGirl

The Bishop of Durham indicated yesterday that a school where fundamentalist Christian teachers stand accused of undermining the scientific teaching of biology should subject itself to further examination by inspectors.

The Rt Rev Michael Turnbull joined the growing debate about Emmanuel College in Gateshead, Tyne and Wear, where there is evidence to suggest Christian teachers are emphasising a creationist interpretation of biology over Darwinian science.

Bishop Turnbull refused to criticise the city technology college – designated a beacon school by the Labour government and defended by Tony Blair in the House of Commons – but backed calls for re-inspection, by independent scientists who did not have a Darwinian axe to grind. "It is possible to put to children a variety of views of creation," said Bishop Turnbull. "The good academic results of this school suggest not that pupils are being brainwashed but being taught to think."

The college – built with £2m of sponsorship from Sir Peter Vardy, the multimillionaire envangelical Christian entrepreneur who runs the Reg Vardy car dealerships – hosted a creationist conference last weekend. A series of lectures by its senior staff have included tips for teachers on techniques that can be used to cast doubt on the theory of evolution.

Professor Richard Dawkins, an Oxford University scientist, joined a growing group of concerned scientists yesterday, criticising the "ludicrous falsehoods" being taught and demanding a re-inspection: "I can only think that the inspectors overlooked or were not shown what was going on in science teaching."

But the college's glowing Oftsed report in January 2001 rules out reinspection unless Estelle Morris, the Secretary of State for Education, intervenes. Ofsted indicated yesterday it had received a letter from Professor Dawkins but said the one-year period during which inspectors' work could be challenged had passed without a single complaint from parents. Only in "extreme circumstances" – such as when a school is out of control – were unscheduled inspections held.

The Ofsted report makes no reference to science teaching but, in a list of characteristics that "please parents and carers most", it places "Christian values and beliefs" at the top.

Within the national curriculum, schools must teach evolution but can teach creationism as well, leaving Emmanuel's teachers free to present evolution as a "theory" no different from the idea that the world was made in six days. The school's prospectus states "Christian Truth must play a vital part in any genuine attempt to educate young people, not to force belief on people but to ensure proper consideration is given to the Bible and its claims."

Nigel McQuoid, the headteacher, accused Professor Dawkins, and Liberal Democrat MP Jenny Tonge, who raised the issue in the Commons, of attempting to stifle debate. "This....is what happens sometimes when liberalism takes over The national curriculum insists children are confronted with the controversial issues of evolution. I am not interested in blinding children to any one side by showing them the other.

"I want the science to be examined and for science to speak for itself. I want those to have a face, to ask themselves 'Does my faith have any scientic evidence?'. In our science lessons at the moment we give more weight to evolution because that has been in the national curriculum for years. But we have assemblies and RE lessons so children are confronted by biblical stories. This is controversial, I agree, but it is not damaging for pupils to be involved in controversy."

His position does not entirely tally with the one that emerged in a lecture to an adult audience given at the college last year by the vice-principal, Gary Wiecek, who stated: "As Christian teachers it is essential we are able to counter the anti-creationist position ... It must be our duty ... to counter these false doctrines with well-founded insights."

At the school gates, parents appeared convinced by Mr McQuoid yesterday. "We are not a religious family, we do not go to church," said one. "My daughter has come home at times and said that she has been concerned by the amount of emphasis on religion but that has been during assemblies and such like, not during lessons. The school's record on science speaks for itself; the results have been excellent for years."


TOPICS: Philosophy
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-186 next last
Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: Da_Shrimp
Evolution is not a religion. It simply fits the evidence better than Creationism.

Evolution is worse than a religion---manmade ideology--hoax-false-alien-stealth-fantasy some whacks call science!

22 posted on 03/15/2002 2:02:46 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
You totally missed---jumped over the reformation--American revolution and landed in the socialist quagmire---evolution!

Evolution isn't socialist either: it's a scientific theory. Some socialists hijacked some ideas from their warped view of evolution, which is no reflection on Darwin or his original ideas.

Christianity's usual defence against accusations about the inquisition etc is to say 'they weren't really Christians, they took ideas from the bible and twisted them.'

This can happen in science, too.

23 posted on 03/15/2002 2:03:18 PM PST by Da_Shrimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: arepublicifyoucankeepit
Both Creation and Evolution require faith. Neither can be proven beyond doubt. Therefore "both views are religious". Either teach both or neither. There's plenty of science to fill the curriculum without taking a position on how the universe came to be.

Evolution does not require faith to believe in. Creation junk science does. Even scientific laws like gravity have been questions in recent years with hard research. With the idea behind it being that the theory/law did not cover every single little aspect. Would you like to test how true it is? Jump out a window and see what happens :).
25 posted on 03/15/2002 2:04:34 PM PST by Libertarian_4_eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Evolution is worse than a religion---manmade ideology--hoax-false-alien-stealth-fantasy some whacks call science!

But it is science. It fits observations made in the real world better than the Creation/Flood theory. What more would you require from science?

26 posted on 03/15/2002 2:04:42 PM PST by Da_Shrimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Da_Shrimp
So without God, what makes one set of morals "better" than some other differing set of morals?
27 posted on 03/15/2002 2:06:45 PM PST by Binghamton_native
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Binghamton_native
So without God, what makes one set of morals "better" than some other differing set of morals?

You mean you don't know? Amazing.

28 posted on 03/15/2002 2:10:04 PM PST by Da_Shrimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: one_particular_harbour
Years of experience has taught me: scratch a loudmouth, know-nothing skeptic, and you find someone with a moral problem.

So, what little hobby or cherished notion would you have to give up if the Bible were as it claims?

Dan

29 posted on 03/15/2002 2:10:16 PM PST by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Da_Shrimp
A science is what separates fact-truth-reality from make believe-nonsense...

Evolution/science are antithetical--opposed--opposites!

30 posted on 03/15/2002 2:11:16 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: Da_Shrimp
There are things in the geological column that cannot be explained by a strict reading of creation/flood theory, it's as simple as that.

The same geological record is no great apologist for evolutionary theory either.

33 posted on 03/15/2002 2:16:59 PM PST by scottiewottie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Binghamton_native
So without God, what makes one set of morals "better" than some other differing set of morals?

Let's start with self-consistency. Entity A believes in self-defense against aggressors. He makes mutual arrangements with others who hold the same view. Therefore their mutual defense pact engages when someone attempts to murder, assault, rape, or rob one of them.

Amazing how you can derive every legitimate function of government from a simple concept like self-defense against aggression. Didn't need a deity anywhere in sight.

34 posted on 03/15/2002 2:18:26 PM PST by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Da_Shrimp
If two babies are switched at birth---no matter what you call them they will always be some one else' children...

even if they are legally adopted---

biology doesn't change...names--words--labels do change continuously---serial theft---evolution!

35 posted on 03/15/2002 2:18:38 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Tanngrisnir
Intelligent design theory does have the horse in front of the cart, and says something is here that cannot be denied or at least for now, explained.
36 posted on 03/15/2002 2:24:29 PM PST by scottiewottie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
"... where there is evidence to suggest Christian teachers are emphasising a creationist interpretation of biology over Darwinian science."

I think Creationism belongs in theology classes; it is definitely not a scientific theory. And if you want to present it, you shouldn't emphasize it over evolution as science.
37 posted on 03/15/2002 2:24:57 PM PST by moderation_is_not_a_bad_thing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
You never answered my question...

what would you do---if you found out you parents were murdered and you were being raised by a pack of liars--wolves?

38 posted on 03/15/2002 2:26:15 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moderation_is_not_a_bad_thing
Intelligent design?
39 posted on 03/15/2002 2:29:27 PM PST by scottiewottie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
I think you miss the point. Let's get it down to everyday human interactions. Group A says murder is wrong, Group B says murder is right. Let's say you're a member of Group B, and this matter is put to a vote. Group B's position prevails. What would be the basis for your appeal if a member of Group B told you that tomorrow at noon he was going to murder you?
40 posted on 03/15/2002 2:31:01 PM PST by Binghamton_native
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-186 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson