education

You are currently browsing articles tagged education.

Truth in Science pushing Discovery Institute creationist textbook in UK schools

December 15, 2009 in creationism by GrumpyBob | No comments

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: ,

Creationist Kent Hovind’s PhD

December 10, 2009 in creationism, delusions by GrumpyBob | 1 comment

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: ,

Discovery Institute takes the wedge strategy to UK schools

December 9, 2009 in atheism by GrumpyBob | No comments

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, proponent of Intelligent Design

December 4, 2009 in creationism, intelligent design by GrumpyBob | 2 comments

Alastair Noble recently wrote a risible (at least in my view, and that of many who left comments)  comment article in The Guardian (Intelligent design should not be excluded from the study of origins), on which I and other have commented in the blogosphere (and indeed as I write, it seems to have attained 1669 comments, mostly rather critical).  In the article, Noble presented his qualifications as

a former science teacher and schools inspector

However, as I pointed out earlier, his brief Guardian bio says this:

Dr Alastair Noble is an educational consultant and lay preacher, and a former teacher and research chemist

Aside from this, I wondered what else he does, what his PhD is in and so forth.  A quick Google search revealed another brief biography at the Misson Scotland website (actually the Google result lists this as Mission Scotland : Dr Alastair Noble – The Wise One!)  Here we find the biography:

Alastair has been a high school chemistry teacher, adviser, schools
inspector and educational administrator.  He has also worked on
educational programmes within the BBC, the CBI and the Health Service.
He currently works as the Field Officer of The Headteachers’
Association of Scotland and an Educational Consultant with CARE in
Scotland – a Christian charity which works across a range of public
policy issues.  He is married to [xxxx], has two grown up children, is a
lay preacher, an elder at Cartsbridge Evangelical Church, Busby, and
lives in Eaglesham.

So our former science teacher and schools inspector is an elder at an Evangelical Church.  He also has his finger in a number of pies.  The same Google search turned up a 5-star review of Stephen Meyer’s book on Intelligent Design, which earned a robust comment.  (Interestingly, this comment revealed that Noble is a signatory to the Discovery Institute’s PR statement A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism (that’s a link to a realistically critical Wikipedia page – you can see the list of signatories here – pdf). In turn, this states Alastair Noble as holding a PhD in Chemistry from Glasgow University.  None of the top Google hits related to chemistry.)  The Discovery Institute view Intelligent Design as a Wedge Strategy – a strategy to get religiously motivated anti-evolutionary teaching into American schools.

I can well believe that Dr Noble is a compassionate man with a real social conscience, who works in many capacities to help communities…but (and I think it’s a big but) I don’t think a man with his background should be intervening in the content of science classes, at least where evolutionary biology is concerned.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

Intelligent Design is not science, and should not be taught in science lessons

December 1, 2009 in intelligent design by GrumpyBob | 4 comments

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: , ,

Evolution in 120 seconds

November 9, 2009 in evolution by admin | No comments

Discover magazine ran a competition for videos which explained evolution in two minutes (The Winner: Evolution in Two Minutes, or less).  PZ Myers (Pharyngula) appears to have been involved in judging the entries (and you can see him in a video there).  The video below isn’t the winner, but it’s the “Peoples’ Choice”, and the one I like.

Evolution on 120 seconds

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

Evolution to be taught in UK primary schools

November 9, 2009 in creationism by admin | 3 comments

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: ,

Creationist zoo causes dismay in the ranks of the humanists

August 27, 2009 in Darwinism, creationism by admin | 1 comment

I’ve always thought of zoological gardens with larger establishments in mind – such as the Zoological Society of London’s Regents Park Zoo, or the Edinburgh Zoo, and expected these respectable zoos to act as sources of information about animals from around the world.  Of course there’s plenty of scope for rather more specialised zoos, such as those focussing on conservation.  Unfortunately it would seem there are also zoos with the purpose of misinforming the public.

I imagine the name of the Noah’s Ark zoo in North Somerset is something of a giveaway.  It is a small, privately run zoo which clearly espouses a creationist agenda.  Now the British Humanist Association has pointed this out, and it’s hit the media (Bristol Evening Post – Zoo attacked over Creationist beliefs; BBC News – ‘Creationist’ zoo causes dismay).  The Bristol Evening Post quotes Noah’s Ark research assistant Jon Woodwood as saying:

“To say that we are not upfront with our beliefs is unfounded – the name Noah’s Ark is the first indicator.  Our education policy is purely based around the National Curriculum.  We are offering our visitors the chance to look at the evolution/creation debate. As it is a free country, that is within our right. Contrary to a small minority of people’s claims we do not teach false science.  This is clearly shown within the zoo, with one exhibition talking about Darwin and another offering another point of view.

“We are slightly different from popular Creationism and hold a view that the natural world around us is the product of both God and evolution.  Although technically Creationists, we do not hold the stereotypical Creationist views that the world was created 6,000 years ago and there is no evolution.”

Woodward went o to say that the number of complaints on this subject was very small (10 in 120,000 visitors).  Interestingly, BBC page has an image of one of the signs at the zoo, with the text:

It also shows how three great people groups are descended from the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
[and in smaller font] (who could have become the three races of humans alive today, that we knwo as the Semitic, the Negroid/Mongoloid and the White Caucasian).

Rather worryingly, the Evening News article quotes a Visit England spokesman as saying “Noah’s Ark adheres to the Visitor Attraction Quality Assurance Service criteria. We do not comment on the content of any attraction.”  It does seem to me that the content of an “attraction” is rather important when assessing its quality!

Looking through the educational links from the Noah’s Ark website takes you through a variety of relatively inoffensive topics, occasionally written in a curious style.  Unfortunately, a prominent item on the main tool bar menu is Creation Research.

Here it’s clear the owners of the zoo have their own take on creationism in which the fossil record reflects recolonisation after the Noachian flood.  The page goes on to spread the usual creationist canards…

Palaeontologists have struggled for more than a century to find transitional fossils to confirm the predictions of Darwinism. But, with some exceptions, these have not been found. See Darwinist steps of faith – the many missing links (at the time of writing this blog article, this link was to a page still to be written). Radioisotope dating has been used to show that the fossil record unfolded over billions of years. We suggest that while the method is not itself invalid, the dates produced by it are not supported by the primary evidence of the rocks and fossils themselves. See An Earth billions of years old?

There appears to be a mixed message here.  On the one hand, brief outlines of educational material, backed with larger expositions of an unfounded creationist agenda.  Noah’s Ark seems to push an identity as an attraction that can offer an range of educational activity, but on the evidence of its website, this seems to be a cover for a significant creationist agenda.  And I don’t think this can be purely based on the National Curriculum – after all people presumably don’t go to a zoo for RE!

I have to conclude that the BHA has a point, and that Visit England really ought to reflect on the meaning of “quality”.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , ,

ICCE – Nessie, evolution and creationism in British schools

July 31, 2009 in evolution, religion by admin | 3 comments

So here’s an interesting story (Creationist exams comparable to international A-levels, says Naric).  I’ve never heard of Naric before – it’s the National Recognition Information Centre, and is tasked with advising universities and employers on the rigour of lesser-known qualifications. Unfortunately it’s pronounced on the International Certificate of Christian Education (ICCE). One might have had alarm bells ringing at the mere title of that “qualification”, and really those alarm bells would be justified.

Naric has ruled that the ICCE is comparable to courses such as international A-levels. Unfortunately, one of the ICCE textbooks says:

“Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

“Could a fish have developed into a dinosaur? As astonishing as it may seem, many evolutionists theorize that fish evolved into amphibians and amphibians into reptiles. This gradual change from fish to reptiles has no scientific basis. No transitional fossils have been or ever will be discovered because God created each type of fish, amphibian, and reptile as separate, unique animals. Any similarities that exist among them are due to the fact that one Master Craftsmen fashioned them all.”

To anyone with a modicum of understanding, this is just appalling, and the fact that in 2009 we have schools teaching this rubbish to children is nothing short of scandalous. Oh, and did you know that apartheid was helpful to communities in South Africa because it “made it possible for each group to maintain and pass on their culture and heritage to their children”?

Appalling. And to think that there are 50 christian schools peddling this stuff.

Naric is funded by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Mandelson’s empire, and the Department that oversees Universities) – but a Naric spokesman is quoted in the Guardian as saying that its remit did not cover the curriculum’s content. Which makes me wonder what sort of advice regarding the rigour of qualifications they are capable of providing.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , ,

The Telegraph, the Christian Institute and misrepresenting the AHS

April 27, 2009 in atheism, religion by admin | No comments

The Atheist Blogger complains (Telegraph Caught Lying For Jesus) that The Telegraph has been somewhat lax with the truth in an article about the National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies (AHS). The Telegraph article (Atheists target UK schools) appears to be suggesting that:

The federation aims to encourage students to lobby their schools and local authorities over what is taught in RE lessons and to call for daily acts of collective worship to be scrapped. It wants the societies to hold talks and educational events to persuade students not to believe in God.

While I’d actually support such activities, it would appear that this isn’t what the AHS are up to.  In actual fact, the AHS are working to encourage open thinking among students – as The Atheist Blogger writes:

What the AHS actually wants to do is encourage interfaith discussion through a variety of events, focusing on both scientific and religious education, as well as supporting charity work. The aims of the current initiative are outlined in brief here:

  • To teach students how to debate and create dialogue between school faith groups.
  • Provide the school with fun and educational events and activities, including two student-led courses: ‘Perspectives’ in which a speaker from a faith group gives a talk followed by Q&A, and our ‘One Life’ course, which considers moral and ethical issues without god. Many events will also support the scientific curriculum.
  • Encourage charity volunteering.
  • Give students the experience of running a group and managing events.
  • Show students that it’s ok not to believe in god and encourage critical thinking.
  • Bring out issues concerning religious privilege in schools such as collective worship and incomplete or biased religious education.

Of course, the Telegraph isn’t the most liberal of newspapers, and it appears to have been on the receiving end of a communique from The Christian Institute. who’s Mission is presented on their web page:

The Christian Institute exists for “the furtherance and promotion of the Christian religion in the United Kingdom” and “the advancement of education”.

The Christian Institute is a nondenominational Christian charity committed to upholding the truths of the Bible. We are supported by individuals and churches throughout the UK.

We believe that the Bible is the supreme authority for all of life and we hold to the inerrancy of Scripture. We are committed to upholding the sanctity of life from conception.

So that’s OK then.  Well, perhaps not.  The Christian Institute sounds like it’s at the forefront of the “Christians as Victims” school of thought.  As they say in a news report about the Equality Bill:

Christian groups are concerned that the Bill will reopen many of the discrimination issues which have left Christians bottom of the pile when it comes to ‘equality and diversity’.

Actually, one might argue that the AHS are actually seeking equality for all, including those of no faith.  According to the AHS website,

The AHS will be seeking corrections from the Sunday Telegraph after the paper misrepresented the AHS’ new schools initiative, which encompasses fostering interfaith events, scientific and religious educational activities and charity work.

Bet they don’t get a correction.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , ,

« Older entries

Content recommendations from Evri