|
|
Post by westender on Oct 15, 2010 13:41:20 GMT -1
Oh HELL no! Get tae feck ya buncha stupid fuckwits. www.heraldscotland.com/news/education/would-you-adam-and-eve-it-top-scientists-tell-scottish-pupils-the-bible-is-true-1.1060545"A new creationist group that preaches the “scientific” theory of intelligent design has set up in Glasgow with the stated aim of promoting its beliefs to schools and colleges. The C4ID, as it calls itself online, insists its views are purely scientific, but critics have pointed to the leaders’ fundamentalist Christian backgrounds and the leaps of faith inherent in their logic. Its president, Professor Norman Nevin OBE – a geneticist at Queen’s University in Belfast – told a meeting in the city earlier this year he believed Adam was “a real historical person”. " This unadulterated shite, getting into OUR schools?? No No NO. Absolutely fuming, here. I hope they get run out of town. |
|
|
|
Post by bormes on Oct 15, 2010 15:40:47 GMT -1
Very worrying, as bad as religous schools, madrassas etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by notanimby on Oct 16, 2010 9:54:30 GMT -1
So then the reason is
A big god done it and ran away
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2010 16:38:35 GMT -1
Personally, I would have thought a wide base curriculum would be welcome in Scottish schools, encompassing the Arts, Sciences, Religions, Politics as well as the traditional 3 'R's...
|
|
|
|
Post by westender on Oct 16, 2010 17:52:58 GMT -1
Personally, I would have thought a wide base curriculum would be welcome in Scottish schools, encompassing the Arts, Sciences, Religions, Politics as well as the traditional 3 'R's... A wide base curriculum of subjects in our educative system is an excellent idea, so long as the curricular content is actually educational. There is nothing educative about religion in any form, because it is all unproven and unprovable twaddle, and creationism in particular is one of the most stupid incarnations of religion that has ever existed in the history of the subject. None of it has any place in schools. In my book, the indoctrination of weans with this rubbish is child abuse. Kids should surely be taught to ask for evidence; to be sceptical, open-minded; to become critical thinkers. That is what a proper education is supposed to do. Jes' ma opinion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2010 18:13:49 GMT -1
Personally, I would have thought a wide base curriculum would be welcome in Scottish schools, encompassing the Arts, Sciences, Religions, Politics as well as the traditional 3 'R's... A wide base curriculum of subjects in our educative system is an excellent idea, so long as the curricular content is actually educational. There is nothing educative about religion in any form, because it is all unproven and unprovable twaddle, and creationism in particular is one of the most stupid incarnations of religion that has ever existed in the history of the subject. None of it has any place in schools. In my book, the indoctrination of weans with this rubbish is child abuse. Kids should surely be taught to ask for evidence; to be sceptical, open-minded; to become critical thinkers. That is what a proper education is supposed to do. Jes' ma opinion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2010 18:16:18 GMT -1
Personally, I would have thought a wide base curriculum would be welcome in Scottish schools, encompassing the Arts, Sciences, Religions, Politics as well as the traditional 3 'R's... A wide base curriculum of subjects in our educative system is an excellent idea, so long as the curricular content is actually educational. There is nothing educative about religion in any form, because it is all unproven and unprovable twaddle, and creationism in particular is one of the most stupid incarnations of religion that has ever existed in the history of the subject. None of it has any place in schools. In my book, the indoctrination of weans with this rubbish is child abuse. Kids should surely be taught to ask for evidence; to be sceptical, open-minded; to become critical thinkers. That is what a proper education is supposed to do. Jes' ma opinion. Yes that's all very well, but surely you have to give a total balanced view and just because you don't believe in religion or religious education, does that mean we hide it or dismiss it all together? Surely an education on the basics of religions (all world religions) is more about exposing the child to various views and allowing them to come to a decision as you clearly have. To banish them from the classroom runs a risk in my view of creating something more sinister... |
|
|
|
Post by westender on Oct 16, 2010 19:01:21 GMT -1
Yes that's all very well, but surely you have to give a total balanced view and just because you don't believe in religion or religious education, does that mean we hide it or dismiss it all together? Surely an education on the basics of religions (all world religions) is more about exposing the child to various views and allowing them to come to a decision as you clearly have. To banish them from the classroom runs a risk in my view of creating something more sinister... Given the facts of the matter, there is no 'decision' to come to with regards to religion; given the choice between reality and delusion, surely it is better to live life grounded in reality. If religion has a place in schools, it can surely only be as an incidental part of a history curriculum... like e.g. the crusades, or nazism, or the reformation should be. It should not be part of the core of the school curriculum, with time devoted to indoctrinating the weans in it. |
|
|
|
Post by westender on Oct 16, 2010 19:02:54 GMT -1
Yes that's all very well, but surely you have to give a total balanced view Um. Are you advocating creationism getting into schools? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2010 8:32:35 GMT -1
Yes that's all very well, but surely you have to give a total balanced view Um. Are you advocating creationism getting into schools? In that respect and from your perspective, yes would be my answer. You can teach it, you can educate on all the philosophies but put them into a context, you don't need to indoctrinate but you can do it through academia. |
|
|
|
Post by westender on Oct 17, 2010 9:45:13 GMT -1
Um. Are you advocating creationism getting into schools? In that respect and from your perspective, yes would be my answer. Then we disagree on a very fundamental level. Creationism is easily dismissed unadulterated rubbish; a thoroughgoing insult to the intelligence. It has as much place in schools as theories stating that the moon is made of cheese. 'Creationism' and 'academia' do not belong in the same sentence. ... Grrr. Creationism in schools. Get a grip! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2010 17:38:42 GMT -1
Oops seem to have touched a nerve there, obvious you don't like anyone who disagrees with your view. If only the world was as black and white as you appear to see it.
For the very reasons of the above - that's why I endorse the 'unadulterated rubbish' so that people can make an informed decision. In many ways your total dismissal of this, is akin to returning to the dark ages, ignorance is obviously so much better. In fact, if we went by your theory, we would be as guilty as the religious apologist, doing their best to spread their message. You're only doing this in reverse, in my view as I grip onto my Pc.
|
|
|
|
Post by westender on Oct 17, 2010 19:03:36 GMT -1
Oops seem to have touched a nerve there, obvious you don't like anyone who disagrees with your view. I don't like anyone who has the temerity to suggest that creationism is a legitimate subject for the school curriculum. With regards to creationism, there is no grey. It is complete and utter anti scientific nonsense, promulgated by proven ignorant charlatans with sinister motives. Yes or no? It should not be put in front of kids, any more than the theory that the sun moves round the earth should be put seriously to kids. There's as much evidence for both theories, ie none whatsoever. Yes or no? People should only be asked to spend their time making informed decisions about legitimate questions; stuff of importance. Creationism is nothing other than pernicious nonsense dreamt up by religious nutters who seek to dismiss the hard facts of science. Weans in schools should not be getting subjected to such. There is nothing in creationism that should be given the benefit of any intelligent person's doubt, therefore there is no 'informed decision' to be made. Nice try, not. Ignorance - the dismissal of scientific fact - is exactly what creationism seeks to foster. Yes or no? My 'theory'? Ooh, come on then - what's my theory?  |
|
|
|
Post by howardbeale on Oct 17, 2010 19:26:30 GMT -1
Creationism has no more place in education than alchemy or astrology. It certainly has no place in the science class, where to even mention it is to waste valuable time. It may have a place in a historical 'this is what we used to believe before we learned better' sense, but no more. It has no basis in science and, as a 'theory' (in the loosest sense of the word), was discredited quite some time ago. The fact that some idiots still believe it is no more relevant than the fact that there are primitive tribes who believe that sex does not lead to child birth (although at least in their case the ignorance can be excused to some degree).
|
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Oct 17, 2010 20:20:38 GMT -1
We had a history master at school who used the Old Testament as a basis of ancient history starting with the flood ( frequent flooding of Euphrates/Tigris basin) through all the trials and tribulations of the Israelites which corresponded with the rise and fall of the great empires of the time eg Babylonian, Persian etc. He described the Old Testament as the "The history, myths & legends of a minor semi-nomadic tribe in the Middle East" He must have been a good teacher coz I still remember it  |
|
