Slashdot Mirror
Royal Society and Creationism In Science Classes
An anonymous reader writes "The Reverend Professor Michael Reiss, a biologist and Anglican priest, is the education director for the Royal Society, the venerable British science institution. He recently called for creationism to be discussed in science classes, not just in religion or philosophy classes. Science journals reacted with a world of 'WTF' and the Royal Society backpedaled furiously. Now Nobel laureates are gathering to get him fired: 'The thing the Royal Society does not appreciate is the true nature of the forces arrayed against it and the Enlightenment for which the Royal Society should be the last champion.' The blogs, of course, are loving it."
Eat my shorts slashdot !!
Honestly, why NOT teach both? Look, depending on which way your beliefs slant, you have a little bit of evidence and a lot of faith that it happened that way. Nobody has conclusive proof of either one, so why not teach both major theories?
10 FILL MUG WITH COFFEE
20 DRINK COFFEE
30 GOTO 10
It should be taught in a way to show how it isn't science, and requires no evidence (it's belief based), and is specific to the judeochristian religion. Many other religions believe that the universe was created in a different way.
First, many scientific theories are based on no evidence (string theory) and at this time we don't even know when they can be proven, if ever, but yet I'm sure many people can cite cases where universities are teaching string theory. Many theories are also based on assumptions that, given the human tendency to act holier-than-though, we think must be right or otherwise, God forbid, our theory might end up being wrong.
Second, many religions have a concept of a Creation. The exact details are unknown which is why, unfortunately, scientists don't believe it because they seek hard facts which are not discussed in the respective religions' holy books. The various Creations though have at least two things in common: there was a beginning and it didn't happen by accident. If you stick to those general premises then you don't run into the typical separate of church and state issue that *only* arises when people want to insert topics specific to Christianity. If you make the reasoning for insertion and the actual discussion generic then those who complain of church and state go away because you can use the same excuse everyone who tries to insert Islam into the school system uses (and get away with it unfortunately): it's a history lesson. In this case, it's a scientific one.
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
so let's get this straight.
A scientist / clergyman argues that creation should be discussed in science class and 'scientists' want him fired or this?
WTF?
What ever happened to letting the facts prove themselves?
What ever happened to the notion that your scientific theories are better because they match the available evidence more closely than anything else available?
Now we have scientists trying to silence a dissenting opinion? You guys are starting to sound like the geniuses who after proving that the Earth was flat set out to imprison and torture those heretics who argued otherwise.
This attitude makes me more weary of Evolution than of any other scientific theory. no matter how may ways people try to argue ague against gravity or electricity, they are simply confronted with the evidence or simply ignored.
Only Biologists try to get heretics fired or simply silenced in defense of the sacred Evolution dogma.
This is wrong!
You should all be ashamed of yourselves for not seeing why.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
That's what really bothers me.
Dawkins gets beat up because he's too harsh and divisive, while creationists get lenience because... why?
Because they're the poor deluded non-thinkers? That's exactly what Dawkins says!
Because being religious is somehow better than being atheist? Why?
Because religious people are "better" than atheists? Yeah right.
May I point out that the major political problems we're having worldwide are at least in part caused by religious differences - from Israel and the Palestinians to Christian soldiers in Mekka, to Christians (or economic interests of a mostly Christian country, or a Christian leader going nuts over terrists, whatever) vs Muslims in Iraq, to Iran feeling threatened by the US and viewing that as a fundie Christian threat (which it probably is to a small degree.)
Just listen to Bush and Palin making dangerous statements that the Iraq war was commanded by God. Sheesh. Cut out this nonsense and 90% of the fighting in the world would stop.
This article hits the nail right on the head. It's being criticized for being over the top, but I can only think "Imagine".
thegodmovie.com - watch it
It's Muslims - a substantial number of them do believe that rubbish. We're developing a population sector which believes in the literal truth of its holy book
It should be mandatory to show Muslim children a picture of Mohammad wearing a bomb turban, with strips of bacon hanging out of his mouth, while fucking a pig.