SITE NOTICE | MORE..Android Version 2.1 Update! We've already released our first update to the Android app which includes auto-retry of playback after network interruption, maps support in tablets, stability fixes, and more! .. click for more info!
Dozens of schools are using creationist teaching materials condemned by the government as "not appropriate to support the science curriculum", the Guardian has learned.
The packs promote the creationist alternative to Darwinian evolution called intelligent design and the group behind them said 59 schools are using the information as "a useful classroom resource".
A teacher at one of the schools said it intended to use the DVDs to present intelligent design as an alternative to Darwinism. Nick Cowan, head of chemistry at Bluecoat school, in Liverpool, said: "Just because it takes a negative look at Darwinism doesn't mean it is not science. I think to critique Darwinism is quite appropriate."...
Faithful, yes and thanks again! And dark ages? Cool! My Hobby is medieval reinactment. There was nothing dark about the dark ages except that the people of the Reinassance period thought themselves superrior. It actually brought on many advances in culture, politics, metalurgy, etc.
What board is it? I use to be on one but my mundane job barred me for spending too much time there and not working! lol
Don't know what this is worth, however here it goes. When the apostle Paul reasoned with his audience, he was heading somewhere, i.e. he didn't stop at the end of the first sentence. Regarding I.D. I persoanlly believe it is fine as a starting point as long as you follow through with the implications of I.D. If we look at Romans Chapter 1 and run it in reverse, we might find how a reprobate mind might be renewed. "Their foolish hearts were darkened": If we can, by God's grace, help to get even a chink of light into a foolish heart, then possibly it might help to eliminate vain imaginations, at which point the Creator might be glorified, then they ultimately might come to know God. One thing's for sure, if a Creator isn't believed in, He most definitely won't be glorified by the unbeliever / athiest / evolutionist. Regards
Arthur-NoRead, Good to see you are a fan of true Creation thought(I think I commended you for that before after visiting your site). I came across an evolution discussion board(the webmaster was saying Christians of the literal Bible will basically return the world to the Dark Ages)...so I chipped in to prove him wrong: since I had Christian education, believe in a literal Bible, yet graduated from college, did well with computers and chemistry...good grades, now have a good job. Hey, if this is the Dark Ages, bring it on!
Mike, Indeed it is a big step. But the step between an accidental universe and recognition of POSSIBLE intelligence behind it is not near as great a leap as then accepting Christ as your Lord and Saviour. In comparison, the step towards ID is small because it alone saves no one. but it is a step in the right direction.
My passion is teaching Creation and a literal Bible because I believe it is the key to opening up countless hearts (mine was once one). I just don't want it to ever come close to sounding near the importance of the Salvation message is all.
The step between an accidental universe, and recognition of intelligence behind it is a major one, not at all small. Why do you suppose there is so much opposition to ID? Because if it gains credibility, it will lead to the necessity of determining who that intelligence is. The opposers cannot afford to have their naturalist fairy tale threatened, not even by possibility.
"Intelligent design" is not catholic, its not even christian. Answers in genesis is adamantly opposed to ID. Why, because ALL it does is point to A designer. It looks at the evidence and at the impossibility of the naturalistic explanation and in turn, shows where the thing had to be created.
It doesn't expouse the RCC god, the Christian God, Jewish god, Babalonian god, pagan god, Greek gods, Roman gods, Egyptian gods, Budda, Allah, Baal, etc. Heck, it doesn't even eliminate the possibilities of this being the creation of aliens or beings from A Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy. It simply shows why there must have been a creator of some sort.
Its a very, very small step in the right direction. But honestly, all I want taken in the schools.
"Intelligent design" comes from the old Catholic "teleological argument" for the existence of God. Hate to break it to you all, but it is fallacious & is therefore of no apologetic value. An informed atheist will tear it apart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=26 (plz note: Robbins is not against Biblical Creationism, but only "Scientific" Creationism)
Some of the foolish leaders in Britain are flabbergasted that even the following is espoused in the material,
"We are not attacking the teaching of Darwinian theory," said Richard Buggs, a member of Truth in Science. "We are just saying that criticisms of Darwin's theory should also be taught."
'"Intelligent design looks at empirical evidence in the natural world and says, 'this is evidence for a designer'. If you go any further the argument does become religious and intelligent design does have religious implications," added Dr Buggs.'
I wish we had more people in this country that were willing to go as far as some of the educators in Britain have.
"Wonder why the Government is in such a panic about all this.?"
Nope. Its harder to control people that think for themselves. Its much easier to control those that only think what they are told. "(The government, TV, scientists, teacher, etc) says its true so it must be true. Right?"
""I am flabbergasted that any head of science would give credence to this creationist theory and be prepared to put it alongside Darwinism," he said. "Treating it as an alternative centralist theory alongside Darwinism in science lessons is deeply worrying.""
It had to be a LIBERAL MP who made an ignorant statement like this.
2] "The government has made it clear the Truth in Science materials should not be used in science lessons"
Wonder why the Government is in such a panic about all this.?