Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Saturday, December 15, 2007 | Science : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document Creation college seeks state's OK to train teachers

by Dallas News

Reposted from: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/healthscience/stories/121507dnmetcreation.2b0d011.html

Creation college seeks state's OK to train teachers

Dallas school plans master's in science education, fueling debate over teaching evolution

Texas' debate over teaching evolution is going to college.

The nonprofit Institute for Creation Research in Dallas wants to train future science teachers in Texas and elsewhere using an online curriculum. A state advisory group gave its approval Friday; now the final say rests with the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, which will consider the request next month.

The institute's proposal comes amid a fierce debate over how to teach evolution – the theory that humans and other species evolved from lower forms of life – in Texas public schools.

Some advocacy groups are attacking the creation institute's plan, saying it's an attempt to undermine the teaching of science in public schools.

"They teach distorted science," said Eugenie Scott, executive director of the California-based National Center for Science Education, which opposes teaching creationism in public schools. "Any student coming out from the ICR with a degree in science would not be competent to teach in Texas public schools."

The institute was created in 1970 by the late Henry M. Morris, a Dallas native known as the father of "creation science," the view that science – not just religion – indicates that a divine being created the Earth and all living things.

Patricia Nason, chairwoman of the institute's science education department, said that, despite the institute's name, students learn evolution along with creationism.

"Our students are given both sides," said Dr. Nason, who has a doctorate in curriculum and instruction from Texas A&M University. "They need to know both sides, and they can draw their own conclusion."

The institute, through its graduate school, wants to offer an online master's degree in science education.

According to the school's Web site, it offers typical education classes, teaching such fundamentals as how to use lab equipment, the Internet and PowerPoint in the classroom. But it also offers a class called "Advanced studies in creationism."

And the course Web page for "Curriculum design in science" gives this scenario: "The school board has asked you to serve on a committee that is examining grades 6-12 science goals. ... Both evolutionist and creationist teachers serve on the curriculum committee. How will you convince them to include creation science as well as evolution in the new scope and sequence?"

The school has offered science degrees in California for years. It offered its first graduate courses in 1981, and its first online courses about two years ago.

The institute began moving its headquarters from the San Diego area to Dallas last year, making it necessary to get approval from the state of Texas to offer degrees here.

The school now has more than 50 students taking online classes all over the world, school officials say.

Private schools

Most graduates have gone on to teach in private schools, Dr. Nason said, though some may want to teach in public schools.

That's what scares people like Dan Quinn of the Texas Freedom Network, which also opposes teaching creationism in public schools.

"It just seems odd to license an organization to offer a degree in science when they're not teaching science," Mr. Quinn said.

"What we're seeing here is another example of how Texas is becoming the central state in efforts by creationists to undermine science education, especially the teaching of evolution."

A group of educators and officials from the state Coordinating Board visited the campus in November and met with faculty members. The group found that the institute offered a standard science education curriculum that would prepare them to take state licensure exams, said Glenda Barron, an associate commissioner of the board.

Dr. Barron said the program was held to the same standards that any other college would have to meet.

"The master's in science education, we see those frequently," she said. "What's different – and what's got everybody's attention – is the name of the institution."

The advisory group that approved the plan Friday includes professors and administrators from six colleges – two public and four affiliated with religious institutions.

One member of the team that visited the school has a background in math and science education. But no one on the team or the panel that gave approval Friday has a background in pure science, records show.

That's a problem, said Dr. Scott of the National Center for Science Education.

"It sounds like the committee may have just taken at face value what the ICR claims," she said.

In California, the institute is recognized by the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools, a group that Dr. Morris helped form.

But Texas doesn't recognize that accrediting agency. So the institute needs state approval to offer degrees while it pursues accreditation from a recognized agency, most likely the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools.

Dr. Scott predicts that won't be easy.

"There's a huge gulf between what the ICR is doing and what they're doing at legitimate institutions like ... [the University of Texas] or Baylor," she said.

The institute says the purpose of its graduate school is to prepare science teachers "to understand the universe within the integrating framework of Biblical creationism using proven scientific data."

In 1988, California education officials tried to remove the institute's authority to grant master's of science degrees, arguing that the program didn't pass academic muster. The institute sued the state, arguing that the decision violated its constitutional rights. The school received $225,000 in a 1992 settlement. By then, a new state panel was in charge of evaluating such private schools.

Time zone considered

The institute's founder, Dr. Morris, who was an engineer by training, died last year. His son Henry Morris III is the institute's chief executive officer. He told The Dallas Morning News last year that the institute moved to Dallas because "it's in the Central time zone, with a good airport." But he also noted that Dallas is a "strong Christian center" that would support teaching from a creationist perspective.

The institute's search for approval in Texas comes just weeks after the science director of the Texas Education Agency resigned under pressure over allegations that she had inappropriately endorsed evolution. She had forwarded an e-mail about a talk in Austin by a professor and author who opposes teaching creationism in public schools.

The state Board of Education is set to revise its science curriculum in the coming year. Current regulations require the teaching of evolution, but many conservatives in Texas want teachers to address what they see as weaknesses of evolution. Some scientists say, for instance, that cells are so complicated they can't be fully explained by evolution.

Dr. Nason said the institute wants to help schoolchildren perform better in science, and to encourage them to go into math and science fields.

Dr. Scott sees other motives. Institute officials, she said, "very much want to get these views in the public schools. They believe that evolution is an evil idea that students should reject because they believe if students learn and accept evolution, they'll give up their faith."


The School and it's beliefs


INSTITUTE FOR CREATION RESEARCH

Offices: In Dallas and Santee, Calif.

Annual budget: $7 million

Faculty members: four full time

Students: more than 50

Degrees: master of science degree in science education with minors in astro/geophysics, biology, geology and general science.

School: The institute runs its own graduate school that offers master's of science education degrees. Its stated mission: to "research, educate and communicate Truth involving the study and promotion of scientific creationism, Biblical creationism, and related fields."

The Institute for Creation Research Graduate School sets out its educational philosophy and beliefs on its Web site, www.icr.org.

On its philosophy: The institute says its administration and faculty are "committed to the tenets of both scientific creationism and Biblical creationism." It says the two "are compatible ... and all genuine facts of science support the Bible."

On public schools: The institute "maintains that scientific creationism should be taught along with the scientific aspects of evolutionism in tax-supported institutions."

SOME TENETS OF SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISM

•The physical universe "was supernaturally created by a transcendent personal Creator who alone has existed from eternity."

•Life "was specially and supernaturally created by the Creator."

•All plants and animals were "created functionally complete from the beginning and did not evolve from some other kind of organism."

•Evolution since creation is "limited to 'horizontal' changes (variations) within the kinds, or 'downward' changes (e.g., harmful mutations, extinctions).

•Humans "were specially created in fully human form from the start."

SOME TENETS OF BIBLICAL CREATIONISM

•The creator of the universe is a triune God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

•The universe was created "in the six literal days of the Creation Week" described in Genesis.

•All human beings descended from Adam and Eve.

Comments 1 - 50 of 67 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #99029 by BigJohn on December 15, 2007 at 9:25 am

 avatarOh, no, here we go again...I'm so proud to live in Texas.

Other Comments by BigJohn

2. Comment #99031 by will young on December 15, 2007 at 9:37 am

 avatarWhat Texas does will eventually crawl up my way to Oklahoma, not that the yahoos around here need any help being ignorant…they practically have a patent on it.

Other Comments by will young

3. Comment #99039 by a tree with roots on December 15, 2007 at 10:02 am

 avatar"Our students are given both sides," said Dr. Nason, who has a doctorate in curriculum and instruction from Texas A&M University. "They need to know both sides, and they can draw their own conclusion."

I am SO tired of hearing this. The two sides are NOT equally viable. One is an entirely useless crackpot superstition which no scientist in any good standing takes seriously, the other is a remarkably well supported, frequently updated scientific theory. Even if there were another potential theory to replace evolution, it would NOT be ID and CERTAINLY not CREATIONISM! Get over it! Augh!

But what's the use in ranting. You folks on this site know what I'm talking about.

PS I @#!$ing forgot how to quote properly.

Other Comments by a tree with roots

4. Comment #99043 by PJG on December 15, 2007 at 10:27 am

 avatarI suddenly feel incredibly tired.

I expect the bad astronomy and bad archaeology will be taught as alternative "theories" too.

I only hope that the UK will have the sense to prevent any of these "teachers" from coming to work here. Maybe if they are banned from teaching anywhere except in the USA (preferably anywhere EXCEPT Texas) the US will get the message and stop this nonsense and see what a laughing stock they are becoming to the scientifically sophisticated world.

Other Comments by PJG

5. Comment #99046 by notsobad on December 15, 2007 at 10:34 am

 avatarThey just want to cut on costs. Creationism Lesson 1 - god did it, end of lesson and course.

Other Comments by notsobad

6. Comment #99047 by Roger Stanyard on December 15, 2007 at 10:39 am

Yep, Texas looks to be the big next battleground between science and creationists.

Well, it still remains illegal to teach creationism in state schools in the USA so let's see how the Institute for Creation Research intends to go about it.

My own view is that a court case in Texas could be a very good thing indeed because it will show to the public just how utterly stupid, deceptive and dishonest creationists are. As did the Kansas Kangaroo Court and the Dover court case.

I suspect many in this group will have noticed that Bill Dembski has now, at last, admitted that the "designer" in Intelligent Design is (in his words) the Chistian God. This is after he raked in some US$20,000 for written testiminay to be put before the Dover court where his pals from the Discovery Institute claimed just the opposite.

There is not a shred of integrity in the man whatsoever.

Basically what the bigots are arguing is that all scientists who are not Bible-believing literalist fundamentalists are bogus. Fortunately science doesn't give a stuff what anyone's religious opinions are, whether they be you, me, the Pope or Richard Dawkins.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

7. Comment #99050 by gkkalai on December 15, 2007 at 10:53 am

I am so sick and tired of these intellectual midgets...

Other Comments by gkkalai

8. Comment #99057 by Styrer- on December 15, 2007 at 11:31 am

Good to see the superb and indefatigable Eugenie Scott on the case.

Yet another example of the snake-like manoeuvering of the duplicitous creationists - if they can't get 'em young directly, train up some made-to-order 'teachers' to get 'em young instead.

Perhaps it's a self-defeating exercise, in the final analysis - 'graduate teachers' from such a programme should prove to be essentially unemployable in teaching science, with schools simply boycotting the recruitment of graduate teachers from this institution. Hopefully this will create a satisfying loop, with applicants realising the harm such a programme would do to their teaching careers and choosing alternative and reputable institutions.

Still needs Eugenie et al. to pull all the stops out as usual, of course.

Best,
Styrer

Other Comments by Styrer-

9. Comment #99059 by tybowen on December 15, 2007 at 11:32 am

 avatarI almost vomited at the term "scientific creationism"

Other Comments by tybowen

10. Comment #99063 by Jon_Sociologist on December 15, 2007 at 11:49 am

 avatarThat link to their website www.icr.org provides some quality comic relief. Here's a quote from one of their articles:
Did you ever wonder what kind of plants the dinosaurs tromped around on? The answer may surprise you. Some of these unfamiliar animals wandered around among some very familiar plants: oak, willow, magnolia, sassafras, palms, and other such common flowering plants.

Now the orchid can be added to Parker's list, according to a fossil analysis by Harvard University biologists that was published August 30, 2007, in Nature.

The scientists found a mass of orchid pollen (Meliorchis caribea) on the back of a stingless bee (Proplebeia dominicana) preserved in an amber encasement from approximately "15 million to 20 million years ago."


I'm curious how evidence that orchids were around "15 million to 20 million years ago" demonstrates that dinosaurs tromped around on them before they died out 65 million years ago.

The article goes on to say:
Discoveries such as this fit the creation model perfectly because the Bible states that God created plants and animals "after their kind." We would not expect to find any incontrovertible transitions between one kind and another kind, either for plants or animals.


Hmmm... I'm also not sure how evidence of events taking place "15 million to 20 million years ago" is evidence that the world was created 6 thousand years ago.

If this is what passes for scientific "thinking" at this institution...

Other Comments by Jon_Sociologist

11. Comment #99066 by GodlessHeathen on December 15, 2007 at 12:23 pm

 avatarRemember the argument isn't over science but rather emotional response and morality. We know they aren't concerned in the least with "teaching the controversy" or teaching anything that is rational or considered, they just want to remove what they view as a threat to a moral society (the idea that if we "came from monkeys" was accepted, we'd all fail to have reason for ethics or morals).

Other Comments by GodlessHeathen

12. Comment #99069 by artemisa on December 15, 2007 at 12:33 pm

I've always wanted s masters in astrology with a minor in alchemy. I'm movin to texas.

Other Comments by artemisa

13. Comment #99070 by Kris Verburgh on December 15, 2007 at 12:35 pm

Not again!!! They really don't know when to stop. They have lost and they don't realize it. Creation is a myth and science proves it by millions of observations.

Other Comments by Kris Verburgh

14. Comment #99071 by jimbob on December 15, 2007 at 12:36 pm

Graffiti scratched into the staff toilet cubicle wall at Creation College:

Here I sit, my cheeks a flex'n,
Trying to graduate another Tex'n!


;-)

Other Comments by jimbob

15. Comment #99082 by PJG on December 15, 2007 at 1:07 pm

 avatar.
http://www.icr.org./article/3268/199/

is a really good one. I haven't laughed so much for ages!!!

She finds these trees with the incredible infrared detector/feelers God has given her. Secular scientists state these feelers are just "modified mechano-sensors," but the creation scientist would say these are tools created for the job.

Frank Sherwin, M.A.*

*Frank Sherwin is a zoologist and seminar speaker for ICR.


Wonderful!

Other Comments by PJG

16. Comment #99083 by quill on December 15, 2007 at 1:11 pm

 avatarIt seems these people haven't gotten the memo and are still using terms like "creationism" and "creation science" to identify their programs, rather than the more nuanced (and insidious) euphemisms that the Discovery Institute has adopted. Since Federal courts have already ruled that "creation science" is neither valid science, nor appropriate material for science curricula, this should be an open-and-shut case. The only accrediting body that even acknowledges them in California is the one Morris created himself.

Actually, I'm rather pleased with the timing - California judges are currently deliberating over Newdow's case, and news such as we've had recently (including the recent House resolution) is certain to influence their decision in favor of secularism.

That said, I tend to feel that the decision to annex Texas from Mexico may have been a grave mistake in the history of my country. Having Texas as part of the United States seems to do nothing but drag the national averages down in every category. They have the highest crime, the highest unemployment, and by far the stupidest population in the entire Union. Nothing good comes from that state. We really should just give it back.

Other Comments by quill

17. Comment #99089 by Arcturus on December 15, 2007 at 1:31 pm

 avatarPZ Myers has the only sensible response for these people:"they are demented fuckwits".

Didn't some courts already settle the issue of the teaching of creationism in public schools? There's nothing stoping them to train those teachers, but they will certainly not find a job. Unless some private fuckwit pays for this dementia to go on.


This is so frustrating ... I just cannot understand how they can persist in this delusion. They are an insult to the human race and its whole history.

How stupid would it be to have a "research" center for each creation myth that has been invented throught history? I'm waiting for the Aztec Creation Science Center ...

Other Comments by Arcturus

18. Comment #99095 by Duff on December 15, 2007 at 2:02 pm

They moved the school to Dallas not because of the good airport, but because Texas has an inexhaustible supply of simple people.

Other Comments by Duff

19. Comment #99096 by Matt7895 on December 15, 2007 at 2:13 pm

 avatar
This is so frustrating ... I just cannot understand how they can persist in this delusion. They are an insult to the human race and its whole history.


I agree.

Other Comments by Matt7895

20. Comment #99101 by GodlessHeathen on December 15, 2007 at 2:58 pm

 avatarhttp://jillswift.home.comcast.net/~jillswift/Credulity.jpg

I think it sums it up.

Other Comments by GodlessHeathen

21. Comment #99114 by robotaholic on December 15, 2007 at 4:00 pm

 avatargetting one of their masters is like paying to go to church- ha! now that's a scam-

Other Comments by robotaholic

22. Comment #99116 by USA_Limey on December 15, 2007 at 4:15 pm

 avatarDON'T PANIC!

The catholic church accepts evolution.

So... when Mexico takes back Texas - PROBLEM SOLVED.

I hope I've put all your minds at ease.

Other Comments by USA_Limey

23. Comment #99117 by communsensetoldme on December 15, 2007 at 4:21 pm

 avatarlooooool, im Mexican , thats soooo funny!


you should be sacared O.o tho..

Other Comments by communsensetoldme

24. Comment #99121 by treeman17 on December 15, 2007 at 4:46 pm

 avatarGoddidit! Where's my degree?

Other Comments by treeman17

25. Comment #99130 by steveroot on December 15, 2007 at 5:23 pm

 avatar
SOME TENETS OF BIBLICAL CREATIONISM

•All human beings descended from Adam and Eve.

This still bothers me a little. Doesn't this mean there was some... how shall I put it?... consanguineous breeding at the beginning?

Eeeeeyyywww!
Steve

Other Comments by steveroot

26. Comment #99134 by kraut on December 15, 2007 at 5:41 pm

"All human beings descended from Adam and Eve."

And the rest sprung from incest. Nice bible, nice...

Other Comments by kraut

27. Comment #99145 by mdowe on December 15, 2007 at 6:19 pm

 avatarHey, maybe these people are fairly recent descendants of a single breeding pair -- has anyone checked? It would sure explain alot.

Other Comments by mdowe

28. Comment #99180 by Double Bass Atheist on December 15, 2007 at 8:23 pm

 avatarWhy would a god who supposedly punishes incest as a sin with eternal hellfire intentionally create not one but TWO blatantly incestuous situations… Adam and Eve, and then Noah and his family.

This creationist, ID, (or whatever else they choose to call their beliefs this week) is NOT science. Every one of their "Tenets" can easily be shown to be laughably incorrect. Unfortunately, that would take time, intelligence, and an attention span of more then 5 minutes. Most IDiots I've ever met have none of the above. They just have their bible.

It's stories like this that continue to make me embarrassed to be an American. We truly are becoming a laughing stock.

Other Comments by Double Bass Atheist

29. Comment #99181 by huxley_leopard on December 15, 2007 at 8:33 pm

I found this paragraph particularly scary:

The institute's search for approval in Texas comes just weeks after the science director of the Texas Education Agency resigned under pressure over allegations that she had inappropriately endorsed evolution. She had forwarded an e-mail about a talk in Austin by a professor and author who opposes teaching creationism in public schools.


WTF???

Also, is the "professor and author who opposes teaching creationism in public schools" someone we know?

Other Comments by huxley_leopard

30. Comment #99185 by Augustus Osari on December 15, 2007 at 9:01 pm

Texans are all bad, huh?

Good job making yourselves just as filthy as all of the other dogmatists.

Other Comments by Augustus Osari

31. Comment #99190 by RamziD on December 15, 2007 at 9:12 pm

Nice way to alienate all the Texans who are staunchly opposed to this, Quill. Not what I would expect from a rational thinker. As we all know, there are ignorant, self-deluded people all across the United States that are bringing this country down.

Other Comments by RamziD

32. Comment #99193 by obscured by clouds on December 15, 2007 at 9:16 pm

 avatarPosted from http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/12/are_we_tired_of_texas_inanity.php




Are we tired of Texas inanity yet?

Many people have been sending me this story about Texas considering accrediting the Institute of Creation Research for training teachers, and I've just been reluctant to mention it because poor Texas has been getting walloped over creationism lately, and I was feeling a terrible sympathy for the place. It's as if the whole state has fallen into a pit of suck.

The ICR wants to offer Masters degrees in science education, of all things; they claim they'd be offering instruction in evolution alongside their science curriculum, but we know that is a lie, since the people at ICR aren't competent to offer kindergarten level courses in pretty, pretty baby animals, let alone real biology. A state advisory board, in a fit of ignorance and insanity, has approved this plan, but it next has to go before the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board for final approval.

I hope Texas scientists can slap that Board into wakeful reality before that meeting, because if this goes through, the trust I can give Texas-trained teachers is getting flushed right down the sewer. And if Texans can't fix this, the rest of the country has to step up and deny certification to anyone trained in Texas — their diplomas and degrees will be worth about as much as Monopoly money.

Sorry, Texas. It's just getting to be a bit much.


Other Comments by obscured by clouds

33. Comment #99196 by monkey2 on December 15, 2007 at 9:45 pm

 avatar
But it also offers a class called "Advanced studies in creationism

This class can last up to one hour. Students will be asked to colour in the picture of 'Noah and The Velocorapter' that they were given in their "Basic studies in creationism". Marks will be awarded for neatness.

Other Comments by monkey2

34. Comment #99211 by Flagellant on December 15, 2007 at 11:59 pm

 avatarIn the UK, we shouldn't laugh too much at this sort of thing. There are moves afoot to bring us our very own Creation Theme Park. See here: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2228201,00.html Aaargh!



Religion - an activity for consenting adults in private.

Other Comments by Flagellant

35. Comment #99212 by Diacanu on December 16, 2007 at 12:05 am

 avatarQuill-

Now, now, that's a bit harsh to our southern cousins.

Nothing good comes out of Texas?

Really?

Come on now.

The FOOD man!!

The FOOD!

We cant blow up Texas yet, we don't have all their recipes yet!!

Think, man, THINK!!!

Other Comments by Diacanu

36. Comment #99213 by Diacanu on December 16, 2007 at 12:10 am

 avatarOh, don't anyone whine at me, it's a friggin' joke.

Other Comments by Diacanu

37. Comment #99228 by PJG on December 16, 2007 at 1:43 am

 avatar
In the UK, we shouldn't laugh too much at this sort of thing. There are moves afoot to bring us our very own Creation Theme Park.See here: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2228201,00.html Aaargh!


God help us!

Other Comments by PJG

38. Comment #99229 by Will in Aus on December 16, 2007 at 1:43 am

 avatarThis really needs to stop! I really hope someone is doing something about this. These "educational institutions" should be made to pass strict requirements prior to being able to award any degrees. It just makes a mockery of those people who have received a real degree.

Other Comments by Will in Aus

39. Comment #99242 by Geoff on December 16, 2007 at 3:30 am

 avatar
In the UK, we shouldn't laugh too much at this sort of thing. There are moves afoot to bring us our very own Creation Theme Park. See here: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2228201,00.html Aaargh!


As a Wiganer, I was heartened by the last sentence.

"'Wigan council slammed the door in our faces. You mention the C [Christian] word, and people don't want to know,' Jones said."

I'd heard nothing about this until now, and I live just half a mile from the "site of an old B&Q store" that they mention - which is now a camping supplies store.

Other Comments by Geoff

40. Comment #99247 by PJG on December 16, 2007 at 4:57 am

 avatarYes, Geoff, it is heartening that Wigan Council slammed the door.

The people on Wigan Council's Planning Committee may have some integrity and intelligence.... but money talks. Some councillor or MP somewhere, from some run-down area, will probably use the same argument that they did for the super-casinos... regeneration!

Also, once bankers (spelling mistake, sorry!) get involved... anything can happen.

Other Comments by PJG

41. Comment #99253 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 5:43 am

 avatarthe whole creation movement is a strange animal.

As far as i can tell many proponents knowingly deliver falsehoods, anything from twisting evidence to down right lies and then ideas like 'teach both sides' are insidiously added to make them seem reasonable. At the end of the day no matter how weak their position is through real science showing that their beliefs are not compatible with evidence they will still tell knowing lies.

Why? because they know enough people will believe them to aid them with their poisonous endeavour. At the end of the day the proponents of creation want it there so it makes them feel better about themselves and it always boils down to that, its about status and power, dembski (for eg) isnt interested in truth, hes interested in showing his world view is right, that it gives him an elevated position here and now and that it elevates his 'cosmic status' as it puts man in a priveleged position. I wonder why such individuals have such insecurities??

its all rather like a perversion, these self loving, bloated creationists swamp themselves in technology and the excesses of selective breeding and genetic manipulation (food) and yet deny the foundation that has allowed that to happen.

Its incredible that the greatest flasehood from religion is willingly being inserted into schools. In many ways being in america is no different from being in the middle east, people just own more junk here. edit:well not quite but one wonders what could happen in the next century or so.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

42. Comment #99256 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 5:50 am

 avatar
In the UK, we shouldn't laugh too much at this sort of thing. There are moves afoot to bring us our very own Creation Theme Park. See here: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2228201,00.html Aaargh!



that artice, the quotes are so full of non sequiters and falsehoods as to almost comical, seems kids in the UK binge drink because theres too much sex and violence on TV. Hopefully such a theme park in the UK will fail dismally. as i said earlier, it doesnt matter how many lies are told, poeple will believe that shit, people cannot differentiate shit at the best of times, many watch pop idol at weekends!!

Other Comments by phasmagigas

43. Comment #99259 by PJG on December 16, 2007 at 6:10 am

 avatarA quote from the Creationist Theme park article:


Peter Jones, one of the Lancashire theme park's trustees, said the emphasis would be on multimedia rather than the costume re-enactments of famous biblical scenes favoured at Holy Land. 'It will be a halfway house for youngsters,' Jones said. 'Today all they do is binge drink. We will be able to offer them an alternative.'


Is he saying that the theme park will be an alternative to binge drinking - an expensive pastime that dulls the senses, makes people do irrational, stupid and dangerous things and ends up with them vomiting?

Other Comments by PJG

44. Comment #99260 by Matt7895 on December 16, 2007 at 6:14 am

 avatarThat article a few posts above almost made me scream in anguish until I forced myself to remember that fundamentalist Christianity does not have a grip on the UK like it has on America. Creationism will not gain a foothold here. That theme park will fail.

Other Comments by Matt7895

45. Comment #99263 by Double Bass Atheist on December 16, 2007 at 6:28 am

 avatarphasmagigas- Your comment #41 above regarding the whole creationist movement is excellent (no need to quote the whole thing!) However, I would add and/or clarify one thing… it's been my experience that these creationist types do not "knowingly" disseminate lies are falsehoods. That implies that they actually know the truth/reality and are deliberately BS-ing people. However, all the IDiots I've ever met (I know, not a scientific sample) are very honest people who very passionately believe their creationist views. They just have sooooo many misunderstandings of science, it's impossible to straighten them all out…. "Evolution is only a theory," "It takes more faith to believe in evolution then it does to believe in god," "Science can't explain it all; we're too complex," and on and on…

Here's something I've posted here before, but I think it's worth repeating. Look at what this deluded fool did to his car! How much more passionately misguided can one get?!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/amywatts/103235388/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/amywatts/103235342/

Other Comments by Double Bass Atheist

46. Comment #99265 by Corylus on December 16, 2007 at 6:32 am

 avatarWow - A quote from the article on a British Creation Park,
While the plans for the park are still in their infancy, the trust has big ambitions. A business plan available to prospective investors suggests the park could bring in £4.8m a year - apparently 10 times its estimated overhead costs.

Follow the money.

Makes you wonder how much the American Parks are raking in.

One other quote gave me a snigger though
'Wigan council slammed the door in our faces. You mention the C [Christian] word, and people don't want to know,' Jones said.

I had no idea Wigan council were so prudish ;-)

Other Comments by Corylus

47. Comment #99270 by STLstrike3 on December 16, 2007 at 7:16 am

 avatar"Advanced Creation Studies"? Um.... perhaps I missed something, but doesn't "God did it," pretty much sum up their entire curriculum?

At least it's only "50 students from all over the world" who have signed up to be fed this B.S. I would LOVE to see a map with the geographic distibution of their customers (Texas, Florida, South Carolina, Saudi Arabia).

What needs to happen when these crackpots come up with new ways to distort science is for employers to *immediately* respond, "Teach what you want, but we will not hire anyone who isn't taught real science."

Other Comments by STLstrike3

48. Comment #99272 by rod-the-farmer on December 16, 2007 at 7:38 am

 avatar"Basic studies in creationism" = Goddidit.
"Advanced studies in creationism" = Goddidit in six days.

So when do I get my degree ? And no copying my notes, people, if you were planning on taking the same course. You have to do your own research.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

49. Comment #99279 by hopeful on December 16, 2007 at 8:43 am

Actually there are lot of different topics covered in their "advanced" courses:
- How to build a strawman in 6 days
- Misunderstanding Evolution
- Denial I
- Denial II
- How to Protect yourself from Logic
- Ten Logical Fallacies You can Use in Everyday Life
The list goes on.

Other Comments by hopeful

50. Comment #99351 by phasmagigas on December 16, 2007 at 12:16 pm

 avatardouble bass.

for sure many do wholeheartedly believe what they say but in many cases i simply refuse to believe that people can be so deluded, eg believing that the grand canyon is from noahs flood despite evidence through the stratigraphic column that suggests anything but, i just cannot understand the mentality so i prefer to imagine they are knowingly lying (maybe im deluding myself!). It must be like being a closet homosexual masturbating frantically to male images and thinking 'im not gay' 'im not gay' 'im not gay' rather than 'i dont want to be gay....'

Other Comments by phasmagigas
Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 | Next | Last

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: