creationism

You are currently browsing articles tagged creationism.

The very excellent website of the British Centre for Science Education has continued their coverage of their reports that Truth in Science are distributing the creationist text Explore Evolution to UK schools (Truth in Science – Letter to all UK schools › British Centre for Science Education).  There’s not much to add to the BCSE’s article.  Though I wonder how Truth in Science can have the gall to call themselves that.

The TiS letter that accompanies the book is signed by Professor Andy McIntosh, who is (according to BCSE) at the University of Leeds.  He is profiled at Answers in Genesis – as you can see, his academic qualifications don’t appear to stretch as far as the biological sciences.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

Here’s an amusing Wikileak: Young-earth creationist Kent Hovind’s doctoral dissertation.  Kent Hovind is an American young earth creationist who’s current residence is listed in his Wikipedia entry as “currently housed in the Federal Correctional Institution, Edgefield (South Carolina)”.  Also from Wikipedia:

young  earth creationist Kent Hovind (image from Wkikipedia)

young earth creationist Kent Hovind (image from Wkikipedia)

Kent E. Hovind (born January 15, 1953) is an American Young Earth creationist and conspiracy theorist famous for his creation science seminars that aim to convince listeners to reject modern theories of evolution, geophysics, and cosmology in favor of biblical creation. Hovind’s views are criticized by the scientific community at large and even some fellow Young Earth creationist organizations like Answers in Genesis.

Hovind established the Creation Science Evangelism ministry in 1989 and frequently argued for Young Earth creationism and made other controversial remarks in his talks at private schools and churches, at debates, and on radio and television broadcasts.

Since November 2006 Hovind is serving a ten-year prison sentence in the Federal Correctional Institution, Edgefield in Edgefield, South Carolina, after being convicted of 58 federal counts, including twelve tax offenses, one count of obstructing federal agents and forty-five counts of structuring cash transactions.

Front view of Patriot University (image from Wkikipedia)

Front view of Patriot University (image from Wkikipedia)

Hovind has a PhD from Patriot University. Hovind’s doctoral thesis appears to be a rambling rendition of misrepresentation, coming across as some kind of pulpit-speech. Most bizarre. It begins:

“Hello, my name is Kent Hovind. I am a creation/science evangelist. I
live in Pensacola, Florida. I have been a high school science teacher
since 1976. I’ve been very active in the creation/evolution controversy
for quite some time.”

I have to say that having skimmed through the leaked pdf file, the man has to get some kind of award for sustaining the drivel for 110 or so pages.  Perhaps prison?

Powered by ScribeFire.

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

The British Centre for Science Education reports that Truth in Science (?) Issue Creationist Text Book to UK Schools.

Interestingly, one of the authors of this book, Explore Evolution,  is the same Stephen Meyer who’s book Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design was so enthusiastically reviewed by Alastair Noble, proponent of Intelligent Design.  The three authors are all Discovery Institute members; the book itself is published by the creationist run Hill House Publishers, who describe it as follows:

The purpose of Explore Evolution, is to examine the scientific controversy about Darwin’s theory, and in particular, the contemporary version of the theory known as neo-Darwinism. Whether you are a teacher, a student, or a parent, this book will help you understand what Darwin’s theory of evolution is, why many scientists find it persuasive, and why other scientists question the theory or some key aspects of it.

Sometimes, scientists find that the same evidence can be explained in more than one way. When there are competing theories, reasonable people can (and do) disagree about which theory best explains the evidence. Furthermore, in the historical sciences, neither side can directly verify its claims about past events. Fortunately, even though we can’t directly verify these claims, we can test them. How? First, we gather as much evidence as possible and look at it carefully. Then, we compare the competing theories in light of how well they explain the evidence.

Looking at the evidence and comparing the competing explanations will provide the most reliable path to discovering which theory, if any, gives the best account of the evidence at hand. In science, it is ultimately the evidence—and all of the evidence—that should tell us which theory offers the best explanation. This book will help you explore that evidence, and we hope it will stimulate your interest in these questions as you weigh the competing arguments.

Let’s be clear, there is no scientific controversy about whether evolution is true.  The dunderheads at creationist lobby organisations such as the Discovery Institute push this line of “it’s only a theory” without understanding (wilfully or not) the nature of the scientific process and the equally idiotic “teach the controversy” – there is no scientific controversy.  Sneaking these books into school libraries is deceitful, particularly given the language in the quotation above.

Read more at the BCSE page linked above.

From the Wikipedia page (Explore Evolution) – and this is a highly informative page that is well worth reading:

Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism is a supplementary or enrichment biology text book written by a group of intelligent design supporters and published in 2007.
Its promoters describe it as aimed at helping educators and students to
discuss “the controversial aspects of evolutionary theory that are
discussed openly in scientific books and journals but which are not
widely reported in textbooks.” As one of the Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns to “teach the controversy” it aims to provide a “lawsuit-proof” way of attacking evolution and implying creationism / intelligent design without being explicit.

The book is co-authored by three Discovery Institute members, Stephen C. Meyer, Scott Minnich and Paul A. Nelson, as well as illustrator and creationist author Jonathan Moneymaker and Kansas evolution hearings participant Ralph Seelke.Hill House Publishers Pty. Ltd. ( Melbourne and London), headed by creationist and butterfly photographer Bernard d’Abrera, is the publisher of Explore Evolution.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , ,

Alastair Noble has a comment piece in the Guardian (Response: Intelligent design should not excluded from the study of origins) in which he argues that Intelligent Design should be included in UK science lessons. It’s in response tot the news a few weeks ago that evolution was back on the national curriculum for primary school science lessons – in this context, he insists that ID should be afforded the status as science.  In his comment article he says:

As a former science teacher and schools inspector, I am disturbed that proposals for science education are based on near-complete ignorance of intelligent design.

This statement is a little economical with the truth for, as his brief bio on the article says:

Dr Alastair Noble is an educational consultant and lay preacher, and a former teacher and research chemist. (my emphasis)

So, no bias there.  Alastair, ID is not a science, makes no testable predictions and is a pathetic attempt at an explanation of the diversity of life that relies on the existence of a designer – in other words a supernatural force or creator.  It’s religious belief with a fake veneer of science.  What exactly are your biological research qualifications?

It is an all too common error to confuse intelligent design with religious belief. While creationism draws its conclusions primarily from religious sources, intelligent design argues from observations of the natural world. And it has a good pedigree. A universe intelligible by design principles was the conclusion of many of the great pioneers of modern science.

It is easily overlooked that the origin of life, the integrated complexity of biological systems and the vast information content of DNA have not been adequately explained by purely materialistic or neo-Darwinian processes. Indeed it is hard to see how they ever will.

Alistair, it’s not a confusion to confuse ID with religious belief.  ID is part of a wedge strategy to deflect teaching away from evidence based science towards an unsubstantiated belief in a “designer” – it argues from a position of ignorance of biological processes and from a failure to understand.  Furthermore its pedigree is not good – to cite the great pioneers of science is to ignore that they were probably working in an era in which a true understanding of evolutionary biology had not been reached.  Evolutionary biology does not explain the origins of life (other branches of science seek to do that, and I believe that the integrated complexity of biological systems have beenn and are being explained by the evidence-based process of scientific enquiry – which includes evolutionary biology, but not the intellectually inadequate “Intelligent Design”.

Noble goes on to suggest that evolution is not observable.  I say go and read “Why Evolution is True” by Jerry Coyne: he gives a hugely eloquent exposition of how evolutionary processes are not only supported by a huge quantity of evidence, but that it make testable predictions.  And that all these predictions, when tested, support evolution.  And in this it is complete contrast to the vacuous ideas of Intelligent Design.

Teach ID in religious education classes.  That’s where it belongs, not in science education.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , ,

The link to this rather wonderful video clip was forwarded to me by Grumpy Art Vanderlay, my erstwhile cycling team-mate.  It features astonishingly dumb phone-ins from dimwits trying to outclass Austin atheists.  I think this is the perfect alternative to the Skeptic’s rather serious guide to debating creationists (previous blog articles).  It even features Ray Comfort’s ludicrous banana story…

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

The Skeptic Society’s e-newsletter, e-Skeptic, has made an interesting document available for temporary download: How to Debate a Creationist. Looks to be a very useful document.

Hat tip: British Centre for Science Education

Share on Facebook

Tags: , ,

One of the great stories about American cinema is that in credits for the 1929 Pickford-Fairbanks film version of “The Taming of the Shrew” was the line “With Additional Dialog by Sam Taylor”. Most unfortunately, it would seem that this just isn’t so, and it’s an urban legend. So, why is this turning up in my atheism blog?

The (unfortunately) well-known creationist Ray Comfort, who runs a number of websites aimed at discrediting evolution and/or atheism has re-published Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species”. Rather cheekily, this seems to be credited at amazon.co.uk as being written by Charles Darwin and Ray Comfort (it has to be said, in the interests of truth, that the cover image provided by Amazon.co.uk – pictured right – makes no mention of Ray banana man Comfort). Furthermore, judging from the reviews of this edition at amazon.co.uk, the initial listing conflated reviews of this version (bowdlerised not only by inclusion of Comfort’s crass creationist introduction but also by excision of key material) mixed with reviews of more acceptable editions. It would seem that the resounding raspberry of the seven reviews to date are now specifically associated with this version.

There has been an ongoing debate over this edition of Origins over at the US News website, beginning with NCSE Director Eugenie Scott’s piece (How Creationist ‘Origin’ Distorts Darwin) and Comfort’s attempts at justification. Scott pointed out Comfort’s evisceration of Origins:

Unfortunately, it will be hard to thoroughly read the version that Comfort will be distributing on college campuses in November. The copy his publisher sent me is missing no fewer than four crucial chapters, as well as Darwin’s introduction. Two of the omitted chapters, Chapters 11 and 12, showcase biogeography, some of Darwin’s strongest evidence for evolution. Which is a better explanation for the distribution of plants and animals around the planet: common ancestry or special creation? Which better explains why island species are more similar to species on the mainland closest to them, rather than to more distant species that share a similar environment? The answer clearly is common ancestry. Today, scientists continue to develop the science of biogeography, confirming, refining, and extending Darwin’s conclusions.

Likewise missing from Comfort’s bowdlerized version of the Origin is Chapter 13, where Darwin explained how evolution makes sense of classification, morphology, and embryology. To take a simple example, why do all land vertebrates (amphibians, mammals, and reptiles and birds) have four limbs? Not because four limbs are necessarily a superior design for land locomotion: insects have six, arachnids have eight, and millipedes have, well, lots. It’s because all land vertebrates descended with modification from a four-legged (“tetrapod”) ancestor. Since Darwin’s era, scientists have repeatedly confirmed that the more recently two species have shared a common ancestor, the more similar are their anatomy, their biochemistry, their embryology, and their genetics.

The blogosphere has been full of protests about this edition of Origins – I can’t list all articles, but here are two links to PZ Myers’ Pharyngula: Ray Comfort is a parasite (in relation to which, I note that Comfort’s bowdlerised version no longer tops the list in the search results at amazon.com) and Ray Comfort Replies to Eugenie Scott.

(This post was composed offline and submitted via Bilbo Blogger, now sadly renamed Blogilo. Let’s see how well it works!)

=-=-=-=-=
Powered by Bilbo Blogger

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

At last, some good news regarding the teaching of evolution in UK schools.  The Guardian reports (Scientists win place for evolution in primary schools) that

The government is ready to put evolution on the primary curriculum for the first time after years of lobbying by senior scientists.

The schools minister, Diana Johnson, has confirmed the plans will be included in a blueprint for a new curriculum to be published in the next few weeks.

It follows a letter signed by scientists and science educators calling on the government to make the change after draft versions of the new curriculum failed to mention evolution explicitly.

This seems pretty good news for rational thought, particularly given the unfortunate MORI poll recently, which appeared to show public support for teaching creationism in science lessons.  The campaign for inclusion of evolution in the curriculum was coordinated by the British Humanist Association.

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

The creationist Noah’s Ark zoo, featured in this and other blogs in recent weeks has apparently been suspended by the British and Irish Association of Zoos (BIAZA), according to the New Humanist blog (Creationist zoo suspended from British zoo association).  Amusingly, I suspect this has more to do with the inappropriate disposal of a dead tiger than any inappropriate mis-education they have indulged in.

It turns out that in addition to accusations they have been breeding animals for circuses (kind of frowned upon these days), The New Humanist reports that:

…it was discovered that the body of a tiger which died during childbirth at the zoo was disposed of in a way that contravenes animal disposal regulations – its paws, head and skin were removed, the carcass was buried on owner Anthony Bush’s land, and the head was revealed to have been kept in a freezer at the zoo.

Mmm…gruesome.

Share on Facebook

Tags:

PZ Myers at Pharyngula has pointed out this video over at YouTube.  Watch this and see how many mis-statements and downright distortions you can spot in this “museum”.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Sometimes I shudder to think how those who believe in divine creation miss out on the true beauty and wonder of life and its origins.  The owners of the museum appear to have taken after some of Harun Yahya’s more repetitive tomes.

Share on Facebook

Tags:

« Older entries

Content recommendations from Evri