1001
oeditor
Re: New Campaign
24/06/2006 17:36:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Hearty" <psh@...> wrote:
>
> Folks, could I be really cheeky and ask an enormous favour of you
all. Would > you be willing to transfer this discussion to the
> http://www.notoacademies.org.uk/forum/bulletin board?
>
> I know this is a bit of a liberty, but I'm going to ask
secular_newsline to > do the same.
>
> The reason is that I want to try and get parents and pupils in the
areas affected to come and join us over there. Before I do that
though, I'd like > to get at least a few topics underway so that they
have something to see and > join in with.
>
I'm not at all sure, Peter. While it's a bad idea for opposition to
Vardy & Co to be spread too thinly, people are opposed to academies
for a variety of reasons - many nothing to do with
creationism/religion. Perhaps better to syphon the cream off your
group and pour it here and/or onto secular_newsline? (If they have time!)
Brian
1002
Marc Draco
Re: New Campaign
24/06/2006 17:46:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
I'm in.
And if Pete and Lenny think we don't need an umbrella organisation then
I'm fine with that.
We do need something to tie this common purpose together though. Ideas?
I might even be able to make Blythe; if anyone south of Middlesbrough
wants to car share from this stop, email me.
Marc
Peter Hearty wrote:
->
Folks, could I be really cheeky and ask an enormous favour of you
all. Would
you be willing to transfer this discussion to the
http://www.notoacademies.org.uk/forum/
bulletin board?
I know this is a bit of a liberty, but I'm going to ask
secular_newsline to
do the same.
The reason is that I want to try and get parents and pupils in the areas
affected to come and join us over there. Before I do that though, I'd
like
to get at least a few topics underway so that they have something to
see and
join in with.
I'll understand if you don't want to though.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: "ukantic" <ukantic@yahoo.co.uk>
To: <BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 12:19 PM
Subject: [BlackShadow] New Campaign
CAMPAIGN LAUNCHED AGAINST ACADEMY SCHOOLS
- LIES
- UNFIT SPONSORS
- NO CONSULTATION
Meeting - 6.30 pm, Thursday 29th June, Phoenix Theatre, Blyth
Northumberland Council's plans for Academy schools in Blyth and
Ashington are under fire as a campaign is launched to stop them
going ahead.
Campaigners accuse the Council of failing to consult parents and
unions - misrepresenting the degree of support - for handing over
schools to sponsors (the Duke of Northumberland, and the Emmanuel
Foundation) who are not fit or acceptable to run them - and putting
the long term future of neighbouring schools at risk.
The Government directly pays the building and running costs of
Academies - the building costs are £25 million plus and the sponsor
is expected to contribute £2 million. Northumberland Council claims
it has not got the money to build new schools and Academies are the
only way this can be achieved.
Vin Wynne, of the National Union of Teachers, accuses the Government
of blackmailing authorities "New Labour is obsessed with Academies
and to make sure it reaches its target of 200 Councils can't access
investment unless they agree to adopt them - it is pure blackmail."
The Council and Emmanuel Foundation are accused of misrepresenting
the degree of support for the Blyth Academy.
The governing body at Blyth Community College says "The Council and
Emmanuel Foundation claim the governors and Head of Blyth Community
College support the proposed Academy. This is a lie - we do not
support it, have not been properly consulted and believe it will
damage the College in the longer term." Campaigners say the support
was cited in a report to the Government seeking approval for the
Academy to go ahead.
Sponsors have control over Academies as they appoint the governing
body, employ staff and determine the ethos of the school. Those
opposing the proposals claim the sponsors for the Northumberland
Academies are not fit to run schools.
"What does the Duke of Northumberland know about education in
Ashington or the needs of young people in the town?" asked Vin Wynne.
Controversy surrounds the sponsor of the proposed Blyth Academy -
the Emmanuel Foundation headed by evangelical Christian Sir Peter
Vardy. The Foundation is accused of pushing an aggressive religious
agenda in its schools and imposing a strict regime.
Parents of children at an Emmanuel Foundation Academy school in
Doncaster are campaigning against Dickensian style discipline. 148
children have been excluded in the first 6 months. Parents claim
the school is operating a system of covert selection to get rid of
difficult to teach children.
Geoff Holmes, of the teachers union NASUWT, said "The Emmanuel
Foundation has a notorious reputation for pushing religion and the
particular views of its leader, Peter Vardy, we really do not want
the children of Blyth subject to such an approach to education."
Campaigners have organised a public meeting to be held at 6.30 pm,
Thursday 29th June, Phoenix Theatre, Blyth, and claim this will be
the launch of a campaign to keep the Emmanuel Foundation out of
Northumberland schools and to stop the imposition of an Academy in
Blyth.
1003
Roger Stanyard
Re: Scientific world unites - Warm Thanks to Tim Chase
24/06/2006 18:47:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
I think Timothy Chase deserves a very warm thanks in what he has done
in replying to the Scotsman article. His erudite approach basically
pulls the fundies there to pieces. Fortunately the Scotsman is the
newspaper of the educated Scottish establishment so he will get
listened to.
Andrew Neil has overall charge of the Scotsman. I have met him on
several occasions (way back in the late 80s early 90s). I don't think
Neil appreciates all this fundie nonsense.
Well done, Tim.
Roger Stanyard
> Scientific world unites over origins of life
> EBEN HARRELL - 22June 06
>
> THE world's leading scientists have issued a damning statement
against
> the teaching of creationism in schools, arguing that denying the
facts
> of evolution damages the development of children.
>
> The national science academies of 67 countries, including the Royal
> Society, issued a joint statement warning that scientific evidence
> about the origins of life was being "concealed, denied, or
confused"
> in many schools.
>
> http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=911332006
>
> Scroll down to the comments section - I see Timothy seems to have
got
> there first!
>
1004
Marc Draco
Secular -anti-academy- lyrics for "Another Brick in the Wall Pt. 2"
24/06/2006 20:35:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
I'm not sure what Roger Waters would make of these, but here's nothing.
The originals are on the web, and the tune is easy to find.
Feel free to modify these until everyone is happy and hopefully the
offer of a tribute band to perform them will materialise!
Pink
Floyd – Another Brick in the Wall Pt. 2.
Lyrics by (and apologies to) Roger Waters
(re-imagined
for a secular age by Marc Draco)
We
all need an education
We
don't need your thought control
Keep
your bible in your locker.
Hey!
Teacher! Leave that book at home.
All
in all it's just another book in the hall
All
of your ideas are just more cracks in our wall
We
need a good education
We need a teacher not a preacher
Keep
those feelings to yourself
Religion
don't belong in school, oh no!
All
in all it's just another book in the hall
All
your daft ideas are just more cracks in our wall
"Wrong!
Do it again!"
"If you don't say your prayers, you won't
get into heaven! How can you get into heaven if you don't say your
prayers?"
"You! Yes, you behind the bikesheds, kneel
down laddy!"
1005
Marc Draco
How run down is the King''s Academy catchment area?
24/06/2006 21:17:00
The idea of academies (arhum) was that they would revive poorly
performing schools and those in run down areas. The main reason for
planting one at Coulby is because it was a run down area.
Just so we can be clear on this, I've taken a few pictures of this
down-and-out estate where the chavs roam free and kids torch cars for
warmth. Then judge for yourself who is telling fibs.
http://www.notoacademies.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6
Pictures from the area around the failing Unity City Academy follow
shortly: if I don't get mugged in the attempt.
1006
Lenny Flank
Re: New Campaign
24/06/2006 21:17:00
>
> I'm in.
>
> And if Pete and Lenny think we don't need an umbrella organisation
> then I'm fine with that.
No, I think y'all DO need an umbrella organization.
And it should be an open organization, not one dominated by any
particular agenda (such as, oh, I dunno --- anti-religion, maybe?)
You need the widest possible coalition. The fundies have more money
than you will ever see in your entire lifetime. The only way to beat
them is with people-power, something they DON'T have.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1007
Roger Stanyard
Re: New Campaign
24/06/2006 23:27:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank" <lflank@...> wrote:
>
> >
Lenny's right. They are also extremely well organised in the UK,
We're not.
I might take the pee out of their nutty UK outfits but they have
them, we don't. They've got the academic contacts (see the 2002
letter to Estelle Morris, Nick Cowan and his misses), they've got the
ad hoc groups (same letter), they have political clout and contacts
(see Vardy's contacts with Blair), the full time staff (AiG, Mackay's
electrician, CSM, a home schooling operation, another bunch of
nutters in Rugby);
I am working like hell on this in Winchester, I've got one person
onside. The local fundies claim they have 200 people on side and they
have only been going for two years. They've got their promo stuff in
the local Anglican churches... They are in or have been in the two
local universities.
But they have a full time pastor. I don't.
We are not in a strong position (yet). None of us, either as groups
or individuals, have much clout. We're doing this part time off our
own backs. Jeez, AiG has an income of US$12m a year and I am pretty
certain that it is the lead creationist organisation in the UK.
The've got, to my knowledge, three TV channels aimed at the UK and,
almost certainly, more. They've got pamplets, books, DVDs, web sites
and heaven knows what as money raising scams. I've just been to see
the nutters' museum in Portsmouth and they as selling fossils and
minerals at several hundred pounds a shot.
It sometimes worries me that many in the UK see the exercise is out
arguing them on science. That is irrelevent. We've done that and won.
But it is not the issue and hasn't stopped them growing. They don't
give a stuff about science. That's for the foot soldiers. Vardy would
know a piece of snot from an elephant when it comes to biology.
Arguing science isn't going to stop him.
Roger Stanyard
>
> No, I think y'all DO need an umbrella organization.
>
> And it should be an open organization, not one dominated by any
> particular agenda (such as, oh, I dunno --- anti-religion, maybe?)
>
> You need the widest possible coalition. The fundies have more
money
> than you will ever see in your entire lifetime. The only way to
beat
> them is with people-power, something they DON'T have.
>
>
>
> ===================================
> Lenny Flank
> "There are no loose threads in the web of life"
>
> Creation "Science" Debunked
> http://www.geocities.com/lflank
>
> My Reptile Page
> http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
>
1008
MB
Re: Re: Scientific world unites - Warm Thanks to Tim Chase
25/06/2006 01:15:00
>
>
> I think Timothy Chase deserves a very warm thanks in what he has done
> in replying to the Scotsman article. His erudite approach basically
> pulls the fundies there to pieces. Fortunately the Scotsman is the
> newspaper of the educated Scottish establishment so he will get
> listened to.
>
Very nice, Timothy! I read it all, and I must say, it's a big pain to
argue with these people. You did a good job!
Regards,
MB
1009
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: Scientific world unites - Warm Thanks to Tim Chase
25/06/2006 06:07:00
On 24/06/06, Roger Stanyard <roger@dttconsulting.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
> >
>
> I think Timothy Chase deserves a very warm thanks in what he has done
> in replying to the Scotsman article. His erudite approach basically
> pulls the fundies there to pieces. Fortunately the Scotsman is the
> newspaper of the educated Scottish establishment so he will get
> listened to.
I didn't know. I like the newspaper, though.
> Andrew Neil has overall charge of the Scotsman. I have met him on
> several occasions (way back in the late 80s early 90s). I don't think
> Neil appreciates all this fundie nonsense.
It is good to know that have friends.
> Well done, Tim.
Glad you liked it. Incidentally, I put in a plug for your critique of
Stuart Burgess. As I have indicated, I think it is wonderful piece.
1010
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: Scientific world unites - Warm Thanks to Tim Chase
25/06/2006 06:19:00
On 24/06/06, MB <mbb386@main.nc.us> wrote:
>
> Very nice, Timothy! I read it all, and I must say, it's a big pain to
> argue with these people. You did a good job!
Glad you liked it. A bit less of a pain than arguing with Laurie
Appleton, though. Less repetitive.
Incidentally, the material about prebiotic chemistry was probably not
needed -- a bit of a lagniappe -- but I think it is time for people to
realize that these questions will be answered, and sooner rather than
later.
1011
Peter Hearty
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 08:50:00
Brian
You're right. I'm not specifically having a go at creationism on the
notoacademies site. Vardy just happens to be an example of what can happen
when publicly funded schools are unnaccountable to their local communities.
The notoacademies campaign is intended to be something quite different. It's
a political campaign to bring control of these schools back to the
communities that they serve, and who ultimately pay for them. It just so
happens to be started by us, but I'm hoping it will be much more broadly
based.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: "oeditor" <b-jordan@lineone.net>
To: <BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 5:36 PM
Subject: [BlackShadow] Re: New Campaign
I'm not at all sure, Peter. While it's a bad idea for opposition to
Vardy & Co to be spread too thinly, people are opposed to academies
for a variety of reasons - many nothing to do with
creationism/religion. Perhaps better to syphon the cream off your
group and pour it here and/or onto secular_newsline? (If they have time!)
Brian
1012
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 15:00:00
It's a political campaign to bring control of these schools
> back to the communities that they serve, and who ultimately pay for
> them.
Careful what you wish for --- you might get it.
Ever been to a school in Alabama?
;)
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1013
Marc Draco
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 15:13:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
Different way of doing things here. Until the academy programme started
the vast majority of schools were controlled by the Local Education
Authority (LEAs). These were under the government umbrella but
generally served the local communities.
Lenny Flank wrote:
->
It's a political campaign to bring control of these schools
> back to the communities that they serve, and who ultimately pay for
> them.
Careful what you wish for --- you might get it.
Ever been to a school in Alabama?
;)
1014
Peter Hearty
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 15:17:00
Good point. Generally speaking though, most people in the UK are
irreligious. It would take a concerted campaign by fundies to take control
of a school. As soon as they did so, they would get booted out again.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lenny Flank" <lflank@ij.net>
To: <BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [BlackShadow] Re: New Campaign
>
> It's a political campaign to bring control of these schools
> > back to the communities that they serve, and who ultimately pay for
> > them.
>
>
> Careful what you wish for --- you might get it.
>
> Ever been to a school in Alabama?
>
>
1015
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 15:39:00
> Good point. Generally speaking though, most people in the UK are
> irreligious. It would take a concerted campaign by fundies to take
> control of a school.
Like they are trying to do now . . .?
;>
As soon as they did so, they would get booted out
> again.
It *used* to be that way here too.
I'd not pin my hopes to that situation being permanent, were I you.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1016
Marc Draco
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 15:47:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
This is what the academy programme is doing for us. Letting fundies in
by the back door.
We want our schools back and we want them back NOW!
Lenny Flank wrote:
->
> Good point. Generally speaking though, most people in the UK are
> irreligious. It would take a concerted campaign by fundies to take
> control of a school.
Like they are trying to do now . . .?
;>
As soon as they did so, they would get booted out
> again.
It *used* to be that way here too.
I'd not pin my hopes to that situation being permanent, were I you.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1017
Roger Stanyard
Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 15:53:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Hearty" <psh@...> wrote:
>
> Good point. Generally speaking though, most people in the UK are
> irreligious. It would take a concerted campaign by fundies to take
control
> of a school. As soon as they did so, they would get booted out again.
>
> Pete
>
But they have done so and succeded. They are called the Vardy schools.
Roger Stanyard
1018
Roger Stanyard
Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 16:13:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank" <lflank@...> wrote:
>
>
> It's a political campaign to bring control of these schools
> > back to the communities that they serve, and who ultimately pay
for
> > them.
>
>
> Careful what you wish for --- you might get it.
>
> Ever been to a school in Alabama?
>
My own view is that, sooner or later, the fundies are going to move
on from the acadamy school issue. They already have in Northern
Ireland.
Methinks that it is conventional state schools that will be the next
target. Mackay has clearly been up to his trcks in Liverpool and
Millfield but he is a lightweight on the ground here. Randall Hardy,
his sidekick here, is an electrician.
Go back to the 2002 letter to Estelle Moriis and look at the names
there. That was a concerted attempt to get creationism into science
but they are moving on from that alleged ad hoc group. One of the
signatories, Monty White, is now head of AiG in the UK.
I know that I keep carping about the case of Winchester where I live
but we have name after name from that list or people associated with
it turning up to present at public fudamentalist meetings. That
follows the arrival here of an American-trained fundamentalist
pastor, Richard Turner.
He turned up in 2004; his church had been out of use for years, so
where has the money starting coming from?
I had a meeting a few weeks ago with a concerned local citizen and he
believes that their next step will be tryng to get congregation
members elected as governors of state schools. It's easy because
there is no competition.
Amongst those fundamentalists who have turned up are Stuart Burgess,
Andy McIntosh and Paul Garner and we have the delights of Phillip
Bell and Paul Taylor soon. The local church involved was tiny (I
doubt if ot seats more than 75) and these people would not turn up
unless there was a bigger, organised base of sympathisers. Taylor and
Bell get paid based on a minimum audience size (IIRC).
Likewise the two professors, from Bristol and Leeds, both of which
are far from local universities, would not turn up to make a
presentation to a couple of innocuous old ladies in a dusty church
hall. They are leading British educators.
Moreover, these are repeat visits by people largely associated with
AiG. They smell a chance of success.
One can get paranoid about this but these people are now seriously
well organised.
As Lenny has said in the past - follow the money.
Roger Stanyard
1019
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 16:23:00
On 25/06/06, Peter Hearty <psh@hearty.plus.com> wrote:
>
> Good point. Generally speaking though, most people in the UK are
> irreligious. It would take a concerted campaign by fundies to take control
> of a school. As soon as they did so, they would get booted out again.
A little over a year ago, before I got into debating creationists of
various stripes or even really started focusing on evolutionary
biology, I remember raising the subject of the resurgence of
creationism with Frank Ryan. While he was sympathetic, he stated,
"Fortunately we are not having that problem here."
As I understand it, there still tends to be something of a divide in
Great Britain between the more educated classes and those less-well
educated. They tend not to mix, or at least talk about religious
beliefs. Among the educated classes the subject of religious beliefs
wouldn't normally come up much at all.
Likewise, in the United States, I have noticed that creationism is
largely a rural phenomena although not strictly so. The more
urbanized areas, particularly in major cities along the coast, have
made their peace with modernity some time ago. I strongly suspect
that the same principle applies in various parts of Great Britain, and
even in England herself.
I don't have the benefit of being in England, and so I would of course
have difficulty estimating the degree of religiousity there. But if I
were in England, being who I am, I would undoubtedly be in London
where I would be at the center of the world, coming in contact with
the best that our civilization has to offer. But being in London, I
doubt that I would be in that great a position to estimate the degree
of religiousity which exists out in her hamlets or beautiful
countryside.
But I believe that even if I were, I would still be at something of a
disadvantage in estimating this sort of thing. Likewise, if I am
right about the inverse relationship between religiousity and
population density, I suspect that in many of the less urban school
districts religiousity is much higher, high enough that in many of
those districts the creationists will be at a distinct advantage. And
of course, North Ireland is an entirely different issue.
However, I do find some consolation in the fact that the Church of
England has chosen to side with evolutionary biology, or at least the
Archbishop of Cantebury. But to what extent his decision affects the
sermons in the countryside is hard to say. Likewise, if he is out of
touch with those who are less well educated, I would suspect that
there will be those will consider switching denominations, perhaps to
some of your more recent Pentacostal churches.
Another one of those American imports. My apologies.
1020
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 17:23:00
>>
> He turned up in 2004; his church had been out of use for years, so
> where has the money starting coming from?
"Follow the money" is always good advice in any political matter.
> I had a meeting a few weeks ago with a concerned local citizen and he
> believes that their next step will be tryng to get congregation
> members elected as governors of state schools. It's easy because there
> is no competition.
Indeed, that is precisely how fundies managed to take over local
school boards and state education committees, and start the whole
thing here. They are simply repeating the strategy in the UK that
worked so well for them here in the US.
You need to wake everyone up, keep a VERY close eye on anyone who is
running for such posts, and keep their ass out.
And keep in mind that creationists here utilized "stealth
candidates", who deliberately hid their fundie sympathies until
*after* they were elected and took office. The way to detect and
beat "stealth candidates" is to follow the money during the campaign -
--- inevitably, they have to get funding to run, and invariably, it
always comes from fundie church groups.
Once they get in, creationism in the curriculum inevitably follows as
night does day.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1021
Roger Stanyard
Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 18:09:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank" <lflank@...> wrote:
>
Lenny raises some other points here. How do you get to become a
school governor in the UK? Its not direct elections on the ballot box
but its not a secret selection system. Can anyone tell us?
I know that it is easy and doesn't cost any money to get appointed
but don't the parents have a say in it?
>
>
> Indeed, that is precisely how fundies managed to take over local
> school boards and state education committees, and start the whole
> thing here. They are simply repeating the strategy in the UK that
> worked so well for them here in the US.
>
Yep, and our Pastor Richard Turner was trained in the USA and is not
giving much away about himself. One wonders if he is just an AiG
front.
1022
Roger Stanyard
Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 18:02:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy Chase"
<timothychase@...> wrote:
>
> On 25/06/06, Peter Hearty <psh@...> wrote:
> >
> > Good point. Generally speaking though, most people in the UK are
> > irreligious. It would take a concerted campaign by fundies to
take control
> > of a school. As soon as they did so, they would get booted out
again.
>
> A little over a year ago, before I got into debating creationists of
> various stripes or even really started focusing on evolutionary
> biology, I remember raising the subject of the resurgence of
> creationism with Frank Ryan. While he was sympathetic, he stated,
> "Fortunately we are not having that problem here."
My view as probably the same as Frank Ryan until last year; I am
increasingly shocked to the extent to which creationism is seeping
into Britain. As I have posted elsewhere and in this group; it was
unknown in my home town until two years ago and now there appears to
be 200 members of a fundamentalist church headed by an American-
trained pastor. Until recently the local pain-in-the-necks were the
JWs and the Mormons.
> As I understand it, there still tends to be something of a divide in
> Great Britain between the more educated classes and those less-well
> educated. They tend not to mix, or at least talk about religious
> beliefs. Among the educated classes the subject of religious
beliefs
> wouldn't normally come up much at all.
Not really, Tim. I think the class system is largely dead. People in
the UK tend to socialise outside of the home, often in the pub. Pubs
are pretty classless places.
Your right though about people with education. They don't talk much
about religion. I just assume that everybody I meet of that ilk is
irreligious. It's rarely lets me down. It's different of course with
the Americans I meet over here. It's difficult to know what to make
of them. Most Americans I know I get on with very well but I assume
nowadays that many basically look down on Europeans and believe that
we are basically heathens, so it needs care.
In a sense, religion is a very private matter in the UK. The English,
in particular, are a very private people. My religious beliefs are my
business and someone else's religion is their business and if they
choose to proselytise, they get told to push off.
> Likewise, in the United States, I have noticed that creationism is
> largely a rural phenomena although not strictly so. The more
> urbanized areas, particularly in major cities along the coast, have
> made their peace with modernity some time ago. I strongly suspect
> that the same principle applies in various parts of Great Britain,
and
> even in England herself.
Yes, but two factors come into play here. The UK is one of the most
urbanised countries in the world - second only to the Netherlands and
excluding city states such as Singapore. It's been like this for 150
years or so. Don't forget, we were the 1st country to industralise.
The second factor is that everything is so close. People can work in
central London and live ioin the rural countryside. About 25% of the
population of the UK live in London or its surrounding sunurbs and
over half live with about a three hour drive of London. You can't go
far from anywhere in the UK. The furthest, for example, you can get
from the coast (as defined by salt water) is 77 miles.
As a result we don't really have the equivalent of rural fly-over
America. What we have you can cycle across in a day. The flyover bit
is the English Channel.
Rural England is never much far from a big town or city.
Seems to me that the creationist stuff in the UK is entirely centred
on the towns; the CoE was able to keep its "market share" of rural
and small town Britain during the industrial revolution but it failed
in the then new cities. That left the door open for the non-
conformist (more puritan) denominations. So, in a sense, in the
towns, the door is more open to new fundamentalist churches.
>
> I don't have the benefit of being in England, and so I would of
course
> have difficulty estimating the degree of religiousity there.
The churches are mostly empty, Tim, and it shows.
But if I
> were in England, being who I am, I would undoubtedly be in London
> where I would be at the center of the world, coming in contact with
> the best that our civilization has to offer. But being in London, I
> doubt that I would be in that great a position to estimate the
degree
> of religiousity which exists out in her hamlets or beautiful
> countryside.
Certainly in my part of the world it's the Cathedral towns that show
the religiousity. When you have a stunner of a mediaevel cathdral in
the town centre, it really does make a place. At christmas, the
services are packed - the cathedral is a major centre of music and
the carol services are standing room only.
However, in the other towns and villages religion doesn't mean much.
>
> But I believe that even if I were, I would still be at something of
a
> disadvantage in estimating this sort of thing. Likewise, if I am
> right about the inverse relationship between religiousity and
> population density, I suspect that in many of the less urban school
> districts religiousity is much higher, high enough that in many of
> those districts the creationists will be at a distinct advantage.
Probably not the case in the UK. There's not really the urban/rural
divide there is in the USA because distances are so short.
As a rough rule of thumb, each village in the UK is within sight of
the next by standing on the parish church tower and each village is
no more than about 10 miles from the nearest town. The church tower
is usually mediaeval. (You get this in much of France as well, btw.)
And
> of course, North Ireland is an entirely different issue.
Telling me Tim; it's on a different planet. Much of it is stuck in
the 17th century. It's the one place in the UK where there is an
affinity with that US rural fundamentalist attitude and I have long
suspected there is a clear reason for it.
>
> However, I do find some consolation in the fact that the Church of
> England has chosen to side with evolutionary biology, or at least
the
> Archbishop of Cantebury. But to what extent his decision affects
the
> sermons in the countryside is hard to say.
The Church does not have much control over its bishops and the
bishops, likewise over the vicars. It's not a very rational outfit in
terms of its organisation. The Rev Michael Roberts on SJS amd in
Panda's Thumb, reckons about 10% of the CofE clergy are creationist
but I think that this may be an exaggeration because, somewhere, I
have seen estimates that are much lower.
Likewise, if he is out of
> touch with those who are less well educated, I would suspect that
> there will be those will consider switching denominations, perhaps
to
> some of your more recent Pentacostal churches.
>
> Another one of those American imports.
Don't apologise about Pentecostal Churches; they were imported by a
Welshman from Ireland. They've been around for a long time here but
many of them are Elim Pentecostal which is a British invention.
In fact, it seems to me that much of the recent creationism is an
import from Australia, not the USA. AiG is, of course, headed by an
Australian and much of the trouble earlier this year was about John
Mackay, another Australian.
A couple of other points: I would say that traditionally, the CoE
attracted the middle classes; the non-confirmists the rest and the
Roman Catholic church people from Ireland and their offsprings. This
model did not apply to Scotland, though.
It's not really like that anymore. Ireland is now a very prosperous
country, indeed, so Irish people don't come to the UK so much; as an
EU member state many of them work and live on the mainland of Europe.
The Irish have also over the last generation become much more easy
going about religion.
About a third of the population of greater London are immigrants or
the descendents of immigrants from abroad. Its a real mixture and it
is difficult to be precise about such an eclectic mix. Perhaps Peter
or others who live in London might want to comment.
I think I discussed this about six months ago in debunkcreation but
there is a different attitude towards religion in the UK than the
USA. Americans feel happy with the term puritan. The English don't
because we had a civil war about it. Every schoolboy or girl knows
how the puritans cocked up when they got power and how they were
ditched, after which we never looked back and went on the build a big
empire (whatever its faults) and creat the industrial revolution and
the modern world (my plug for the UK over for today).
Best Regards
Roger Stanyard
1023
Ian Lowe
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 18:27:00
> As I understand it, there still tends to be something of a divide in Great
Britain between the more educated classes and those less-well educated.
They tend not to mix, or at least talk about religious beliefs. Among the
educated classes the subject of religious beliefs wouldn't normally come up
much at all.
Except in the case of fundamnetalists. They have a rather good rate of
attracting the less educated, and relying on the better educated (hence,
usually better off financially) members to fund the big stuff. Whilst your
typical "state" church (the Church of England, or Church of Scotland) is
well used to fund raising to repair old buildings etc, the fundamentalist
churches are awash with money - and it's not American funds sloshing around
- these people truly believe in the whole "tithing 10%" thing.
> Likewise, if he is out of touch with those who are less well educated, I
would suspect that there will be those will consider switching
denominations, perhaps to some of your more recent Pentacostal churches.
The pentecostal churches consider the "main" groups to have been subverted,
and fallen from "the truth". I believe that in most cases, they are hated
and despised far more than actual atheists.
From my own point of view, the key issue Britain faces in trying to stand
against this challenge is an absolute paralysis when it comes to causing
offence. "Tolerance" has spread like a damn cancer to the point that
secularists and atheists are more likely to turn on each other to prevent
the cardinal sin of "intolerance", rather than confronting the religious
head on. Sad, but true.
Anyone who has had any dealings with the likes of the Evangelical Alliance
knows that they are not internally tortured about causing offence to
atheists!
I guess there will be a serious wake up call sooner or later.
Ian.
1024
Lenny Flank
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 19:16:00
> From my own point of view, the key issue Britain faces in trying to
> stand against this challenge is an absolute paralysis when it comes to
> causing offence. "Tolerance" has spread like a damn cancer to the
> point that secularists and atheists are more likely to turn on each
> other to prevent the cardinal sin of "intolerance", rather than
> confronting the religious head on. Sad, but true.
Perhaps. But if you treat this as an "atheist vs religionist" fight,
you will lose. That is fighting them on their own chosen turf, and
they are very very good at it.
This is not a "atheism vs theism" fight. It's not a "science vs
religion" fight. It's not even a "one scientific theory vs another"
fight. It is a political fight. The fundies want a theocracy, and
are trying very hard to get it. So this is a fight between "everyone
who wants a fundamentalist theocracy" and "everyone who doesn't.
You need all the support on your side that you can get. Infighting
amongst theists, atheists etc etc etc, will not help you. It *will*
hurt you.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1025
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 19:21:00
>
Every schoolboy or girl knows how the
> puritans cocked up when they got power
They would like very much to repeat that history.
Never fail to point that out to anyone and everyone.
It's what the fundies are all about. They don't give a rat's
patootie about science or about education. It's political power, raw
unchecked political power, that they are after.
Don't let them get it.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1026
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 19:12:00
>
> Yep, and our Pastor Richard Turner was trained in the USA and is not
> giving much away about himself. One wonders if he is just an AiG
> front.
>
I think that's pretty much a given.
Follow the money.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1027
John Germain
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 19:55:00
This your chappy?
http://www.hydestreetchapel.org/us/
Well, if not, at least he qualifies as a sky-Pilot!
Nasty time, Cyprus in the '70s.
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
1028
John Germain
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 19:58:00
Roger, did you miss this?
"On June 24th at 7.00 p.m Paul Garner from the Biblical Creation Society will be
visiting
us. Paul will give an illustrated lecture exploding the falsehood of this
blockbuster book
and film, showing that truth is more amazing than fiction! More"
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
1029
Ian Lowe
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 20:01:00
> You need all the support on your side that you can get. Infighting
amongst theists, atheists etc etc etc, will not help you. It *will* hurt
you.
Kinda what I am saying.
It should be relatively easy to rally against the fundies.
Pick an obnoxious trait, focus on what that would mean for the public at
large, exaggerate it, and demonise that trait to the point that no rational
person would consider supporting them. Caricature the entire
dominionist/reconstructionist movement as nothing more than an embodiment of
that trait.
Then, in every public debate or discussion, keep returning to the same
obnoxious trait, referring to it the same way, giving the media their sound
bite, and making sure that even if someone can't tell you one single element
of a group's actual beliefs or plans, they can tell you that they have this
obnoxious trait.
If you pour your efforts into defining a group by their adherence to a
particularly odious belief or practice, you remove their ability to define
themselves, to set an agenda and so on.
Witness, for instance, the sex scandals that have rocked the catholic church
- people who can't recite one line of the apostle's creed, know that priests
are paedophiles. The smart person knows that not all priests are
paedophiles, but the constant and persistent mention of "priests are
paedophiles" has removed much of the Church's ability to pontificate on
sexual matters.
Any bishop or cardinal who starts talking about the evils of homosexuality
to a journalist, for instance, finds the "priests are paedophiles" issue
making an appearance in the articles that are written, asking the question,
"what authority does this guy have to speak about this issue". That's where
we need to be - that being a fundamentalist christian is as socially as
acceptable as being a paedophile.
I agree completely with you about one thing in particular Lenny - this is a
political campaign, and in a political campaign, the only time you say
anything positive about your enemy is when you are using it to set them up
for a sucker punch. If you can define the campaign, they have to respond on
the terms you have set, not the other way around.
BUT - can you imagine trying to build an attack profile for your opponent in
a political campaign, when someone on your own team keeps popping up and
telling you that you can't go negative, you can't attack, you can't even
describe your enemy as an enemy?
And I'm not talking here about a simple tactical awareness, and not making
those nasty little comments in public in a way that's attributable. At this
point, it's difficult to get a consensus that these fundies represent an
Enemy that must be beaten, rather than just a different point of view to be
discussed over crumpets and tea.
The team talk on the fundie side is "Convert 'em or Kill 'em All, for the
glory of god"
Team talk on our side at the moment seems to be "can't we all just get
along?". We need a shift towards more aggressive and negative thinking.
Obviously, just my 2p.
Ian.
Ps> Disclosure: I am a former christian fundamentalist. Whilst I was
involved before the dominionist thing really got moving, I can clearly
appreciate where and how it operates at a grass roots level. I'll do an
obligatory plug for www.ex-christian.net here, where a nice healthy number
of former fundies hang out offering support for those on the way to freedom.
1030
ukantic
Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 19:51:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank" <lflank@...> wrote:
>
>
> Perhaps. But if you treat this as an "atheist vs religionist"
fight,
> you will lose. That is fighting them on their own chosen turf,
and
> they are very very good at it.
>
> This is not a "atheism vs theism" fight. It's not a "science vs
> religion" fight. It's not even a "one scientific theory vs
another"
> fight. It is a political fight. The fundies want a theocracy,
and
> are trying very hard to get it. So this is a fight
between "everyone
> who wants a fundamentalist theocracy" and "everyone who doesn't.
>
> You need all the support on your side that you can get.
Infighting
> amongst theists, atheists etc etc etc, will not help you. It
*will*
> hurt you.
I agree with everything you say Lenny, however the situation over
here is a little bit more complicated. Although it is theoretically
possible to have a united front against the creationists that
included moderate religious & secular groups (by just concentrating
on creationism) the issue is complicated by the Academies/faith
school issue where such groups are in conflict. On the one hand we
have the Church of England, the Catholics & Muslims pushing to take
over more state schools, & on the other we have groups like the NSS
opposing such moves.
Thanks to Blair our school system has been turned into an
ideological battleground.
Alan.
1031
John Germain
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 19:59:00
"Our next Creation meeting will be held on Saturday 14th October 2006. When
Graham Bell
from 'Answers in Genesis' will be our speaker. More"
I get a 404
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
1032
Lenny Flank
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 20:18:00
> Team talk on our side at the moment seems to be "can't we all just get
> along?". We need a shift towards more aggressive and negative
> thinking.
The fundies, of course, will help.
They're not known for their tact. Or their honesty.
:>
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1033
Lenny Flank
RE: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 20:21:00
.
>
> Pick an obnoxious trait, focus on what that would mean for the public
> at large, exaggerate it, and demonise that trait to the point that no
> rational person would consider supporting them. Caricature the entire
> dominionist/reconstructionist movement as nothing more than an
> embodiment of that trait.
May I suggest this one? And it has the virtue of being accurate:
"Democracy is evil and contrary to God's law." -- Kent Hovind
(http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=205)
That should be placed, in large bold type, at the top of every
leaflet, given to every press contact, and handed out at every
creationist event.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1034
Marc Draco
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 20:23:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
Maybe someone should go and heckle.
Seriously - if these people are allowed to preach this bile to ordinary
folk more and more will believe it.
Easy answers please easy people.
Safe answers calm frightened people.
These people have those answers and we have the people in their droves.
John Germain wrote:
->
"Our next Creation meeting will be held on Saturday 14th October
2006. When Graham Bell
from 'Answers in Genesis' will be our speaker. More"
I get a 404
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
1035
Marc Draco
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 20:26:00
Lenny Flank wrote:
>May I suggest this one? And it has the virtue of being accurate:
>"Democracy is evil and contrary to God's law." -- Kent Hovind
Excellent. Now that's a quote we should add to our "binverts" in
Middlesbrough. That should be enough on its own to draw people into the
website - you can't beat a good hook for piquing folk's interest.
1036
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 21:05:00
On 25/06/06, Roger Stanyard <roger@dttconsulting.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy Chase"
> <timothychase@...> wrote:
> > A little over a year ago, before I got into debating creationists of
> > various stripes or even really started focusing on evolutionary
> > biology, I remember raising the subject of the resurgence of
> > creationism with Frank Ryan. While he was sympathetic, he stated,
> > "Fortunately we are not having that problem here."
>
> My view as probably the same as Frank Ryan until last year; I am
> increasingly shocked to the extent to which creationism is seeping
> into Britain. As I have posted elsewhere and in this group; it was
> unknown in my home town until two years ago and now there appears to
> be 200 members of a fundamentalist church headed by an American-
> trained pastor. Until recently the local pain-in-the-necks were the
> JWs and the Mormons.
>
> > As I understand it, there still tends to be something of a divide in
> > Great Britain between the more educated classes and those less-well
> > educated. They tend not to mix, or at least talk about religious
> > beliefs. Among the educated classes the subject of religious
> beliefs
> > wouldn't normally come up much at all.
>
> Not really, Tim. I think the class system is largely dead. People in
> the UK tend to socialise outside of the home, often in the pub. Pubs
> are pretty classless places.
I didn't know the extent to which the class system had eroded. But I
understand the cuisine in London has been improving ever since the
eighties - I like variety.
> Your right though about people with education. They don't talk much
> about religion. I just assume that everybody I meet of that ilk is
> irreligious. It's rarely lets me down. It's different of course with
> the Americans I meet over here. It's difficult to know what to make
> of them. Most Americans I know I get on with very well but I assume
> nowadays that many basically look down on Europeans and believe that
> we are basically heathens, so it needs care.
I used to look up at the Stars-and-Stripes with a deeply-felt pride,
but in the past few years the sight of the thing stirs within me a
certain sense of dread. I had always looked upon Europe as
essentially the equal of the United States, but with some growing
degree of familiarity, my attitude towards it has only improved.
In any case, increased urbanization and communication is transforming
the world, and in the more urbanized areas it is doing so much more
quickly, but with the internet the boundaries between urbanized and
rural areas are being quickly eroded.
> In a sense, religion is a very private matter in the UK. The English,
> in particular, are a very private people. My religious beliefs are my
> business and someone else's religion is their business and if they
> choose to proselytise, they get told to push off.
I had learned as much from someone I consider a close friend.
> > Likewise, in the United States, I have noticed that creationism is
> > largely a rural phenomena although not strictly so. The more
> > urbanized areas, particularly in major cities along the coast, have
> > made their peace with modernity some time ago. I strongly suspect
> > that the same principle applies in various parts of Great Britain,
> and
> > even in England herself.
> Yes, but two factors come into play here. The UK is one of the most
> urbanised countries in the world - second only to the Netherlands and
> excluding city states such as Singapore. It's been like this for 150
> years or so. Don't forget, we were the 1st country to industralise.
> The second factor is that everything is so close. People can work in
> central London and live ioin the rural countryside. About 25% of the
> population of the UK live in London or its surrounding sunurbs and
> over half live with about a three hour drive of London. You can't go
> far from anywhere in the UK. The furthest, for example, you can get
> from the coast (as defined by salt water) is 77 miles.
Agreed, and for the sake of brevity and emphasis, I left these two
important details out of my analysis. But while Europe's population
is roughly the equal of that of the United States, its population
density is certainly greater, and culturally (that is, terms of its
evolution, not simply its immeasurable contributions) I would have to
regard it as having advanced considerably beyond the states. But in
some ways, the two aren't really comparable as each has taken a
somewhat different path. In time I suspect this will change.
> As a result we don't really have the equivalent of rural fly-over
> America. What we have you can cycle across in a day. The flyover bit
> is the English Channel.
>
> Rural England is never much far from a big town or city.
With regard to the extent that the UK and the rest of Europe have
become integrated due to transportation and geography, it causes me a
fair amount of wonder. It is still somewhat difficult to grasp.
> Seems to me that the creationist stuff in the UK is entirely centred
> on the towns; the CoE was able to keep its "market share" of rural
> and small town Britain during the industrial revolution but it failed
> in the then new cities. That left the door open for the non-
> conformist (more puritan) denominations. So, in a sense, in the
> towns, the door is more open to new fundamentalist churches.
Understood.
> > I don't have the benefit of being in England, and so I would of
> course
> > have difficulty estimating the degree of religiousity there.
>
>
> The churches are mostly empty, Tim, and it shows.
Measured in this way, I am sure that the United States is quite
different, but for the most part I believe church attendance has been
dropping for quite some time as well. No doubt this will seem odd
given the extent to which we appear to be such a religious nation.
Then again, only 25% of those who voted in the last presidential
election voted for Bush for religious and ideological reasons. The
other 25% were largely influenced by the terror alerts which his
administration kept making every time he seemed to be lagging in the
polls -- particularly just before the election itself.
> But if I
> > were in England, being who I am, I would undoubtedly be in London
> > where I would be at the center of the world, coming in contact with
> > the best that our civilization has to offer. But being in London, I
> > doubt that I would be in that great a position to estimate the
> degree
> > of religiousity which exists out in her hamlets or beautiful
> > countryside.
> Certainly in my part of the world it's the Cathedral towns that show
> the religiousity. When you have a stunner of a mediaevel cathdral in
> the town centre, it really does make a place. At christmas, the
> services are packed - the cathedral is a major centre of music and
> the carol services are standing room only.
>
> However, in the other towns and villages religion doesn't mean much.
Understood.
> > But I believe that even if I were, I would still be at something of
> a
> > disadvantage in estimating this sort of thing. Likewise, if I am
> > right about the inverse relationship between religiousity and
> > population density, I suspect that in many of the less urban school
> > districts religiousity is much higher, high enough that in many of
> > those districts the creationists will be at a distinct advantage.
> Probably not the case in the UK. There's not really the urban/rural
> divide there is in the USA because distances are so short.
> As a rough rule of thumb, each village in the UK is within sight of
> the next by standing on the parish church tower and each village is
> no more than about 10 miles from the nearest town. The church tower
> is usually mediaeval. (You get this in much of France as well, btw.)
You aren't trying to get me to immigrate, are you? If this were the
case, finances permitting, you probably wouldn't have to try very
hard.
> And
> > of course, North Ireland is an entirely different issue.
> Telling me Tim; it's on a different planet. Much of it is stuck in
> the 17th century. It's the one place in the UK where there is an
> affinity with that US rural fundamentalist attitude and I have long
> suspected there is a clear reason for it.
> > However, I do find some consolation in the fact that the Church of
> > England has chosen to side with evolutionary biology, or at least
> the
> > Archbishop of Cantebury. But to what extent his decision affects
> the
> > sermons in the countryside is hard to say.
> The Church does not have much control over its bishops and the
> bishops, likewise over the vicars. It's not a very rational outfit in
> terms of its organisation. The Rev Michael Roberts on SJS amd in
> Panda's Thumb, reckons about 10% of the CofE clergy are creationist
> but I think that this may be an exaggeration because, somewhere, I
> have seen estimates that are much lower.
> Likewise, if he is out of
> > touch with those who are less well educated, I would suspect that
> > there will be those will consider switching denominations, perhaps
> to
> > some of your more recent Pentacostal churches.
> >
> > Another one of those American imports.
> Don't apologise about Pentecostal Churches; they were imported by a
> Welshman from Ireland. They've been around for a long time here but
> many of them are Elim Pentecostal which is a British invention.
>
> In fact, it seems to me that much of the recent creationism is an
> import from Australia, not the USA. AiG is, of course, headed by an
> Australian and much of the trouble earlier this year was about John
> Mackay, another Australian.
I find in that a certain measure of comfort.
> A couple of other points: I would say that traditionally, the CoE
> attracted the middle classes; the non-confirmists the rest and the
> Roman Catholic church people from Ireland and their offsprings. This
> model did not apply to Scotland, though.
>
> It's not really like that anymore. Ireland is now a very prosperous
> country, indeed, so Irish people don't come to the UK so much; as an
> EU member state many of them work and live on the mainland of Europe.
> The Irish have also over the last generation become much more easy
> going about religion.
>
> About a third of the population of greater London are immigrants or
> the descendents of immigrants from abroad. Its a real mixture and it
> is difficult to be precise about such an eclectic mix. Perhaps Peter
> or others who live in London might want to comment.
>
> I think I discussed this about six months ago in debunkcreation but
> there is a different attitude towards religion in the UK than the
> USA. Americans feel happy with the term puritan. The English don't
> because we had a civil war about it. Every schoolboy or girl knows
> how the puritans cocked up when they got power and how they were
> ditched, after which we never looked back and went on the build a big
> empire (whatever its faults) and creat the industrial revolution and
> the modern world (my plug for the UK over for today).
As always, I find that I have a great deal to learn from you. I
greatly appreciate the insights you have given me.
Take care.
1037
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 21:25:00
On 25/06/06, Ian Lowe <ian@scottishatheistcouncil.org.uk> wrote:
> > As I understand it, there still tends to be something of a divide in Great
> Britain between the more educated classes and those less-well educated.
> They tend not to mix, or at least talk about religious beliefs. Among the
> educated classes the subject of religious beliefs wouldn't normally come up
> much at all.
> Except in the case of fundamnetalists. They have a rather good rate of
> attracting the less educated, and relying on the better educated (hence,
> usually better off financially) members to fund the big stuff. Whilst your
> typical "state" church (the Church of England, or Church of Scotland) is
> well used to fund raising to repair old buildings etc, the fundamentalist
> churches are awash with money - and it's not American funds sloshing around
> - these people truly believe in the whole "tithing 10%" thing.
Tithings. That would explain a bit.
> > Likewise, if he is out of touch with those who are less well educated, I
> would suspect that there will be those will consider switching
> denominations, perhaps to some of your more recent Pentacostal churches.
> The pentecostal churches consider the "main" groups to have been subverted,
> and fallen from "the truth". I believe that in most cases, they are hated
> and despised far more than actual atheists.
The same is true here. Likewise I understand there is a considerable
degree of animosity between various Fundamentalist groups here in the
states -- they are able to put on a united front only because of their
mutual hatred of modernity and the pluralism which it has made
possible.
> From my own point of view, the key issue Britain faces in trying to stand
> against this challenge is an absolute paralysis when it comes to causing
> offence. "Tolerance" has spread like a damn cancer to the point that
> secularists and atheists are more likely to turn on each other to prevent
> the cardinal sin of "intolerance", rather than confronting the religious
> head on. Sad, but true.
I have certainly taken a strong position with respect to this issue in
the past. It began in no small part as a matter of considerable
adjustment to conditions as they exist in the United States.
Moreover, I have at times entirely forgotten the diplomacy which I
typically regard to be of such great value within social contexts.
But I have come to the realization that both personal and national
contexts may differ considerably, and that people of goodwill may
nevertheless take quite different views on such matters. Respecting
such differences, my only hope is that I may offer whatever services I
find to be within the range of my abilities.
I have found that my learning consists of a series of approximations
and adjustments. I would only ask a measure of of patience if at
times seem slow.
> Anyone who has had any dealings with the likes of the Evangelical Alliance
> knows that they are not internally tortured about causing offence to
> atheists!
Likewise here in the states.
> I guess there will be a serious wake up call sooner or later.
I have found life itself to be a continual process of awakening. May
all find our way through whatever lies ahead.
Take care.
1038
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 21:43:00
PS In my response to Ian, I forgot the word "I" just after "if at
times" in the third paragraph from the bottom, and omitted the word
"we" from "May we all" in the last sentence. I don't wish to resend
it, but I don't want my intent to be quite so foggy, either. I will
try to be more careful in the future.
1039
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 22:25:00
Likewise I understand there is a considerable
> degree of animosity between various Fundamentalist groups here in the
> states -- they are able to put on a united front only because of their
> mutual hatred of modernity and the pluralism which it has made
> possible.
>
Yes. After the Fundamentalist Revolution, blood will flow freely in
the pews.
I mean that quite literally.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1040
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: New Campaign
25/06/2006 22:26:00
>
> Maybe someone should go and heckle.
>
Hovind's quote would make a GREAT banner.
And it would certainly make the TV news.
===================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
My Reptile Page
http://www.geocities.com/lflank/herp.html
1041
m_cowan32
Boooo!!
26/06/2006 00:02:00
Well hello there everybody - have you missed me?
(Replies must not mention the words "hole" and "head")
It's exam. time, and I've been busy feeding the little goats.
Thankfully there are some sheep among them, including at least one
YEC who's on his way to Oxford to read Chemistry - a proper science
(as opposed to the pseudosciences of evilutionary Biology
and "origins" Geology), which is based on observable, repeatable,
measureable and falsifiable experiments. Evilution is not
falsifiable, as some new speculative (faith) statement such as "the
gaps in the fossil record will one day be found" can always be
adduced as support for its (increaingly discredited0 position.
The last A-level Modules are tomorrow, and I'm amusing myself
reading about the "new campaign". You're fighting a losing battle,
reminiscent of King Canute. Here for example (on page 14) is part of
a suggested Scheme of Work for the new AQA (exam board) GCSE
syllabus (for 14-16 year olds):
www.aqa.org.uk/qual/pdf/AQA-4461-4462-4421-EX2-W-SW.pdf
Apart from spelling Ussher's name wrongly, and getting the date/time
wrong (it was actually October 23rd at 3pm), it's encouraging that
they concede that there are creationists around, and that these
things are worthy of discussion in Science classes! Boy, am I
looking forward to teaching this from September!! You'd better get
going on another New Campaign...
....which brings me back to your last attempts to gag me. Why hasn't
one of you had the "bottle" to write to my Headmaster or a Governor
here to complain about my "indoctrination" of the kids? Is it
because the only governor with a Science degree is a Christian who,
like me, attends "Spring Harvest" - in fact we last saw each other
at Butlins, Skegness at Easter (check it out)? Or is it because I've
now got paper copies of some of your "vitriol" (the nearest some of
you get to a real science!), which clearly shows that it is your
atheistic world-view (hence the abundant references to NSS and BHA)
which drives you, and not a love for scientific truth?
Some interesting stuff these last 3 weeks.
Strange thing about light and its speed - now that really would set
Schrödinger's cat among the pigeons! Maybe Setterfield was right
after all:
www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2196225%2C00.html
I'll be back soon with some individual replies to previous posts.
Must have a break now. I need to decide what to put in the Chemistry
Dept's notice-board ready for Blue Coat school's Open Evening on
Thursday week (July 6th from 6.30-8.30pm). Hey, some of you should
come along; please introduce yourself to me - I'll be in room N10
behind the smoke and burning sulphur.
"Old Nick"
"Old Nick"
1042
John Germain
RE: Boooo!!
26/06/2006 00:21:00
I think this is spoofed at Cow-Pokes addy. (no-one is this potty...)
He can't believe that he's not going to be brought up before the NUT. When his
'n Hers
Pensions go tits up, penury is a sharp focuser of what remains of the mind...
Blah, BLAH, & THE LINK DOESN'T work...
Good start.
What exams are still running, Nick?
Which Board?
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
-----Original Message-----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of
m_cowan32
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 12:02 AM
To: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [BlackShadow] Boooo!!
Well hello there everybody - have you missed me?
(Replies must not mention the words "hole" and "head")
It's exam. time, and I've been busy feeding the little goats.
Thankfully there are some sheep among them, including at least one
YEC who's on his way to Oxford to read Chemistry - a proper science
(as opposed to the pseudosciences of evilutionary Biology
and "origins" Geology), which is based on observable, repeatable,
measureable and falsifiable experiments. Evilution is not
falsifiable, as some new speculative (faith) statement such as "the
gaps in the fossil record will one day be found" can always be
adduced as support for its (increaingly discredited0 position.
The last A-level Modules are tomorrow, and I'm amusing myself
reading about the "new campaign". You're fighting a losing battle,
reminiscent of King Canute. Here for example (on page 14) is part of
a suggested Scheme of Work for the new AQA (exam board) GCSE
syllabus (for 14-16 year olds):
www.aqa.org.uk/qual/pdf/AQA-4461-4462-4421-EX2-W-SW.pdf
Apart from spelling Ussher's name wrongly, and getting the date/time
wrong (it was actually October 23rd at 3pm), it's encouraging that
they concede that there are creationists around, and that these
things are worthy of discussion in Science classes! Boy, am I
looking forward to teaching this from September!! You'd better get
going on another New Campaign...
....which brings me back to your last attempts to gag me. Why hasn't
one of you had the "bottle" to write to my Headmaster or a Governor
here to complain about my "indoctrination" of the kids? Is it
because the only governor with a Science degree is a Christian who,
like me, attends "Spring Harvest" - in fact we last saw each other
at Butlins, Skegness at Easter (check it out)? Or is it because I've
now got paper copies of some of your "vitriol" (the nearest some of
you get to a real science!), which clearly shows that it is your
atheistic world-view (hence the abundant references to NSS and BHA)
which drives you, and not a love for scientific truth?
Some interesting stuff these last 3 weeks.
Strange thing about light and its speed - now that really would set
Schrödinger's cat among the pigeons! Maybe Setterfield was right