Thursday, August 28, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

Museum in censorship row over Darwin sign

by Northampton Chronocle

Thanks to daniel for the link.

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Museum-in-censorship-row-over.4434982.jp?af746e90

Museum in censorship row over Darwin sign

Censorship of an exhibition on evolution at a Northampton museum has led to claims organisers are pandering to Christian fundamentalist sensibilities.

An information sign, which is part of Abington Park Museum's display about Charles Darwin and fossils, was covered up after a visitor's complaint.

Two parts of the sign, concerning 'Changing Attitudes to Evolution', are obscured with black paper, but only four lines of text are actually covered over.

It details how Charles Darwin used the study of fossils to help formulate his theory of evolution, set out in On the Origin of Species, which angered fundamental Christians and Creationists.

But following a complaint to the museum, part of the sign was covered over to avoid giving offence and to conceal the poor prose.

The Chronicle & Echo was contacted by the Chapman family after a bank holiday visit to the museum, run by Northampton Borough Council.
Andy Chapman, of Ecton Brook, said: "The text was obscured without any explanation as to why.

"Our suspicions were confirmed by staff, who told us that following a complaint from a single religious fundamentalist, the museum had been instructed to cover up the offending statement.

"By this action the council would appear to be endorsing the views of a religious minority, and denying the right of the rest of us to see the results of rational and scientific thought.

"Evolution is not an extreme view not to be mentioned in respectable
ociety, it is part of mainstream science.

"It's particularly sad that in the 21st century we appear to have a council with 19th-century attitudes.

"I'd be interested to hear how the council justifies this censorship, and who ordered the cover up.

"Preferably, they should reinstate the complete panel immediately.

If they haven't got the courage to do this they should at least put up a statement telling all that they have a policy of allowing censorship by religious minorities."

A spokesman for Northampton Borough Council said the sign was covered up due to the original complaint and also because of its poor syntax.

"Our museum team covered part of a display board following a complaint about a small section of the wording.

"The team agreed the wording was poorly worded and could cause offence. We took the decision to obscure part of it rather than spend tax payers' money on a replacement."

Third paragraph that is causing all the fuss

It is the third paragraph which Northampton Borough Council says could cause offence, and so it was covered over.

'In early Victorian times, most geologists still accepted the biblical view of evolution. They saw the different layers of fossil-rich rocks as telling the story of successive waves of creation, each one being obliterated by a deluge.

'The young scientist Charles Darwin (right) was already beginning to question this view, but it was another 30 years before he had painstakingly put together the vast assemblage of facts and observations that enabled him to write On the Origin of Species.

'He used the same layers of fossils that had supported the Genesis view of evolution to show the slow changes that are taking place over the millennia of earth history, each small change enabling a species to the rigours of it's (sic) environment — the struggle for survival through natural selection leading to the survival of the fittest.

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Thursday, August 28, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 114 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #238599 by DarwinsChihuahua on August 28, 2008 at 12:01 pm

"The team agreed the wording was poorly worded and could cause offence."

I would like to register a complaint about the poorly worded wording in that sentence.

Word!

DC

Other Comments by DarwinsChihuahua

2. Comment #238607 by tmason1987 on August 28, 2008 at 12:09 pm

Bullshit: they are obscuring the fact that they have given into to creationist propaganda that claims evolution to be part of a 'controversy'.

Tom

Other Comments by tmason1987

3. Comment #238613 by Nails on August 28, 2008 at 12:15 pm

* hangs his head in shame *

I can't believe that in a civilised society we should have to pander to the opinions and over-sensitivities of the crackpots.

One wonders if this is the same council that advocates 'Muslim only' swimming sessions so they don't have to endure our semi-naked women and we don't get a glimpse at theirs.

Losers.

# edit - maybe they should have written something blasphemous instead, it no longer being a crime and all.... #

Other Comments by Nails

4. Comment #238618 by Shaden on August 28, 2008 at 12:19 pm

While you're at it, can you cover up the rest of the museum? Reality offends me.

Other Comments by Shaden

5. Comment #238619 by Keinen_Gott on August 28, 2008 at 12:19 pm

"Grow a pair" is the proper phrase to use in this situation, yes?

Other Comments by Keinen_Gott

6. Comment #238627 by justwondering on August 28, 2008 at 12:28 pm

And I was worried about the Islamification of Europe until I read this. One bully can express malcontent over truth, at a museum of science no less, and the administration of the museum makes the decision to cover the sign? Oh this is terribly disturbing.

Other Comments by justwondering

7. Comment #238633 by InfuriatedSciTeacher on August 28, 2008 at 12:32 pm

5. I've always preferred "Nut up", but either way. People seem to neglect to remember that they have no right not to be offended.

Other Comments by InfuriatedSciTeacher

8. Comment #238639 by NormanDoering on August 28, 2008 at 12:36 pm

Nails wrote:

I can't believe that in a civilised society we should have to pander to the opinions and over-sensitivities of the crackpots.

You think that's pandering? When I was growing up our local planetarium used to have special "Star of Bethlehem" shows just to rake in the cash from the tickets.

Other Comments by NormanDoering

9. Comment #238646 by Nails on August 28, 2008 at 12:42 pm

You think that's pandering? When I was growing up our local planetarium used to have special "Star of Bethlehem" shows just to rake in the cash from the tickets.

* shakes his head some more *

No way, that's got to be in the good ol' US of A, right?

But hey, we've all seen how stupid religious people are with their money.
Creationist museums, giving to Jesus etc.

Other Comments by Nails

10. Comment #238648 by NormanDoering on August 28, 2008 at 12:46 pm

Keinen_Gott wrote:

"Grow a pair" is the proper phrase to use in this situation, yes?

Yes. In fact, they ought to get a new exhibit that demonstrates the abysmal levels of ignorance that creationists have about evolution:

http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/08/dealing-with-abysmal-ignorance.html

Other Comments by NormanDoering

11. Comment #238651 by NormanDoering on August 28, 2008 at 12:49 pm

Nails asked:

No way, that's got to be in the good ol' US of A, right?

Yes. The "Star of Bethlehem" shows were in America.

Did they never do this in other countries?

Other Comments by NormanDoering

12. Comment #238659 by Jesus was a zombie on August 28, 2008 at 12:55 pm

commment 7 "they have no right not to be offended."

Exactly. They were in a science museum for crying out loud, what the hell did they expect? As one quote in the article above states, evolution is not an extreme veiw, it is accepted science so don't be surprised when it shows up in a science museum of all places!

Other Comments by Jesus was a zombie

13. Comment #238661 by Ai Deng on August 28, 2008 at 12:57 pm

I'm sorry, if that was the 3rd paragraph in its entirety, I can't see where the offence was taken, which leads me to agree with the accusations that this is pandering.

Other Comments by Ai Deng

14. Comment #238674 by 4horsefins on August 28, 2008 at 1:11 pm

Who in the hell are running these facilities. When that display was put forward about Darwin, didn't the facilities manager and staff know about the controversy surrounding the issue. Behind closed doors did they think, "if even one person complains, we are going to have to sensor this display" I say fire the facility manager and grow a pair. The proper response would have been...In a free market society of ideas, the most popular rise to the top, I am sorry if this differs from your beliefs, but we feel it is important to the integrity of the facility to maintain the cutting edge in scientific theory.

Other Comments by 4horsefins

15. Comment #238676 by Diacanu on August 28, 2008 at 1:14 pm

4horsefins-

The proper response would have been...

...."go fuck yourself, and your horrible desert death cult religion! This is a SCIENCE museum, Fucktardio!!".

Other Comments by Diacanu

16. Comment #238677 by Diacanu on August 28, 2008 at 1:17 pm

4horsefins-

D'oh! He edited! Dude, why did you let it hang?
Complete a thought!

Other Comments by Diacanu

17. Comment #238680 by irate_atheist on August 28, 2008 at 1:18 pm

The rise of the idiots continues.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

18. Comment #238681 by 4horsefins on August 28, 2008 at 1:20 pm

Diacanu,

How's that?

Other Comments by 4horsefins

19. Comment #238683 by Diacanu on August 28, 2008 at 1:22 pm

4horsefins-

Well, that's what I meant.
Why didn't you complete it THEN?

You left it open for my post 15, but now it just looks stupid, and I have to take it down.

Other Comments by Diacanu

20. Comment #238685 by 4horsefins on August 28, 2008 at 1:23 pm

Sorry, I thought I was about to be timed out.

Other Comments by 4horsefins

21. Comment #238687 by Diacanu on August 28, 2008 at 1:25 pm

4horesfins-

No, no, I understand.

You've just ruined my whole life going back to my birth is all.

You didn't mean to, I forgive you.

I'll...get by...somehow...

Other Comments by Diacanu

22. Comment #238689 by Szymanowski on August 28, 2008 at 1:26 pm

'He used the same layers of fossils that had supported the Genesis view of evolution to show the slow changes that are taking place over the millennia of earth history, each small change enabling a species to the rigours of it's (sic) environment �" the struggle for survival through natural selection leading to the survival of the fittest.

Well, that IS poorly worded...

Other Comments by Szymanowski

23. Comment #238693 by Stormkahn on August 28, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Hang on a second, if some goomba can walk into a museum quite obviously displaying evolutionary material and complain he doesn't like it, thus getting it covered up does that mean I can walk into, say, a cathedral and get the torture scene with all the blood covered?

Other Comments by Stormkahn

24. Comment #238701 by Mike O'Risal on August 28, 2008 at 1:36 pm

I am deeply offended by museums displays of Jesus that don't include urine. According to my religious beliefs, Jesus was constantly bathed in urine trickled down upon him from Heaven. Any museum display that neglects to include this is committing a hate crime against we Sacred Micturians.

I hereby demand that every museum in the world properly piss on all depictions of Jesus or, I swear upon the Divine Dribbles, I will hold my breath until I turn blue.

I mean it!

Other Comments by Mike O'Risal

25. Comment #238703 by Linda on August 28, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Here is a link with email addresses for the curatorial staff:
http://www.northampton.gov.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?categoryID=1482&documentID=477

Write away ...

Other Comments by Linda

26. Comment #238705 by Stormkahn on August 28, 2008 at 1:39 pm

24. Spagetti sauce surely?

Other Comments by Stormkahn

27. Comment #238709 by bilge242 on August 28, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Improper confusion of 'its' and 'it's'! Damn evilutionists mutating our language!

Other Comments by bilge242

28. Comment #238714 by Mike O'Risal on August 28, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Stormkahn:

Some of it might be used spaghetti sauce...

Other Comments by Mike O'Risal

29. Comment #238715 by OhioLen on August 28, 2008 at 1:46 pm

{'He used the same layers of fossils that had supported the Genesis view of evolution to show the slow changes that are taking place over the millennia of earth history, each small change enabling a species to the rigours of it's (sic) environment" the struggle for survival through natural selection leading to the survival of the fittest.}

FAIL.

Not only is it an absolutely terrible attempt at explanation, it's poorly written to boot. That rambling drivel should have been proofread before it got dropped off at the sign-maker's shop.

If I had seen that mess posted in a museum, I would have bitched about it myself.

Other Comments by OhioLen

30. Comment #238716 by Stormkahn on August 28, 2008 at 1:48 pm

27. Shall we have a whip round for some tipex since they can't afford a replacement sign just to handle an errant "'"!?

Other Comments by Stormkahn

31. Comment #238718 by fsm1965 on August 28, 2008 at 1:57 pm

so they wipe out a paragraph rather than fixing the one word?

kneeling before the god-botherers will lead to the closing of museums, so don't start...

Other Comments by fsm1965

32. Comment #238722 by Ivan The Not So Bad on August 28, 2008 at 2:02 pm

Perhaps Professor Dawkins could volunteer to rewrite a new sign for them. And a few of us could each chuck in a couple of quid to pay for it. What a wind-up that would be.....

Other Comments by Ivan The Not So Bad

33. Comment #238724 by Stormkahn on August 28, 2008 at 2:04 pm

32. Brilliant idea!

Other Comments by Stormkahn

34. Comment #238731 by Quine on August 28, 2008 at 2:10 pm

Helping natural science museums resist censorship would be a good RD Foundation cause, in general.

Other Comments by Quine

35. Comment #238737 by larhule on August 28, 2008 at 2:19 pm

There's a funny Monty Python sketch where an ape is being interviewed for a job as head librarian. The interviewers are very pleased when they discover that he would not choose to censor any book upon complaint. Turns out he's just a man in an ape suit trying to get the job because the library wants to be accepting of applicants of any species. The interviewers are very displeased and tell him to leave. Exit man in ape suit, enter real dog. What the hell is happening to your country, you limey bastards?!?! :)

Other Comments by larhule

36. Comment #238742 by Steven Mading on August 28, 2008 at 2:27 pm

"The team agreed the wording was poorly worded and could cause offence."

Yah, that must have been it. They were offended by the grammar. Suurrreee. I believe that.

Other Comments by Steven Mading

37. Comment #238756 by Sage on August 28, 2008 at 2:39 pm

WHAT!

"single religious fundamentalist"

ONE!! Am I reading this correctly!?
A single vistor complains about a single information sign, and it gets taken down. Thus depriving everyone else of course.

How utterly spineless and oversensitive of the Northampton Borough Council.

Other Comments by Sage

38. Comment #238781 by Roger Stanyard on August 28, 2008 at 3:10 pm

The British Centre for Science Education is aware of the promotion of creationism by fundamentalists in Northampton. It is long standing and involves a leading creationist organisation as well as a number of tiny local churches.

If anyone, such as a local journalist or concerned citizen, would like to follow this up, please contact me at stanyardroger@yahoo.co.uk.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education. (www.bcseweb.org.uk)

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

39. Comment #238794 by critica on August 28, 2008 at 3:30 pm

The apostrophe police could have closed the place down, but even they know when to quit. You know, as an Australian, I continue to think of (Christian) creationism as a uniquely US thing. My mind is changing - when will Oxford have its first (Ken Ham) Professor for the Public Understanding of Creationism?

Other Comments by critica

40. Comment #238800 by shemp333 on August 28, 2008 at 3:36 pm

InfuriatedSciTeacher;

I like to tell people, "You have the right to be offended, but you do not have the right to silence me even if you are offended."

They can go cry under their bedsheets if they like. That is their right. The law allows for that.

Other Comments by shemp333

41. Comment #238803 by critica on August 28, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Onya shemp. Since when have we had a right to not be offended?

Other Comments by critica

42. Comment #238807 by Ian H Spedding FCD on August 28, 2008 at 3:45 pm

I wonder whether there is any possibility of a legal challenge, perhaps under the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights?

Other Comments by Ian H Spedding FCD

43. Comment #238808 by InfuriatedSciTeacher on August 28, 2008 at 3:45 pm

Shemp> works for me... I'm going through one of my "Why do we feel like we have to cater to people who whine about being offended" phases... too many inservices before the start of school that spout the perversions of decent ideas. Administraton espousing that each and every one of our students should attend a university... My degree will make great toilet paper if that one succeeds.

Other Comments by InfuriatedSciTeacher

44. Comment #238813 by J Mac on August 28, 2008 at 3:54 pm

Can someone tell all the church bishops that their faces offend me. It would only be just and right for them to staple a piece of black paper over their faces before they go out in public.

Other Comments by J Mac

45. Comment #238842 by NJS on August 28, 2008 at 4:31 pm

They should "borrow" the exhibit from The Simpsons which Flanders asked for to show the biblical viewpoint - "What a fool believes".

Other Comments by NJS

46. Comment #238863 by GordonYKWong on August 28, 2008 at 4:50 pm

The bible and Quran offend me. If you want to know why just read the books.

Other Comments by GordonYKWong

47. Comment #238895 by SmilingAtheist on August 28, 2008 at 5:44 pm

Pandering to stupid people is all we do these days. The amount of stupid people is increasing (thanks to religious ideals) so therefore we have to pander to more and more people. Liability my friends, liability. These people are dumb, they're easily offended. They sue. What more is there to say? Really pisses me off though. One person. Fucktard.

Other Comments by SmilingAtheist

48. Comment #238896 by mdowe on August 28, 2008 at 5:45 pm

Re: 10. Comment #238648 by NormanDoering

I tried to go to your blog at the link you provided and a got an 'adult content warning' from your blog provider. Did I miss the hidden porn link? C'mon, where is it? Don't hold out on us! Surely they wouldn't give an adult content warning merely for a critical discussion of religion...

Other Comments by mdowe

49. Comment #238901 by Diacanu on August 28, 2008 at 5:50 pm

SmilingAtheist-

Pandering to stupid people is all we do these days.

Well, the owners of the country figured out pretty quick that pandering to enlightened people capable of critical thinking is a damned near impossibility, so they formally instituted a massive program to churn out stupid people round about the dawn of the industrial revolution.

That's why America's chief domestic product is bullshit.

Other Comments by Diacanu

50. Comment #238902 by Border Collie on August 28, 2008 at 5:50 pm

I'm not the brightest light on this site, but I failed to see the 'offending statement'. Maybe one of you guys could point it out to me. Damn, how can one cretinist complaint do this?!

Other Comments by Border Collie

Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 | Next | Last