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."

Comments

Re:Misleading summary

[db32]

What? You expect a group of militant atheists to be any better behaved than a bunch of religious fundamentalists? They are basically the same thing, and rely on unbelievably literalist or warped interpretations of various religious texts to attempt to maintain their relevance.

I am just as disgusted by the militant atheist blathering on about Science proves there is no God as I am the religious fundy trying to pass of creationism as Science. The only way the militant atheist can even begin to pretend to "disprove God" is to rely on bizarre interpretations of God in the most literal sense from the most wackaloon fundy.

I suspect that if somehow we could destroy one of these polar forces the other would follow and we would finally wind up with a balanced world wehre Science can do Science and Religion can do Religion and neither one will have penis envy over the other and we can all move on.