1451
oeditor
Re: Noahs Ark Found (again}
10/07/2006 11:44:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Joe Cooper <joe0727@...> wrote:
>
> http://www.space.com
>
> High on Mt. Ararat in eastern Turkey, there is a baffling mountainside
> "anomaly," a feature that one researcher claims may be something of
> biblical proportions
>
Go to that url, search on ararat, and you get this:
http://www.space.com/news/060309_ark_update.html
where the researcher (or should that be 'searcher'?) says
"I had no preconceived notions or agendas when I began this in 1993 as
to what I was looking for,"
So it's hardly surprisibg that he's found a long lump of rock, after
13 years of poring over blurry photographs. That takes some dedicaion.
Or should that be faith? He need have no prejudice about whether it's
an ark, but still have faith in the flood. He's a professor btw - of
law. Sound familiar?
The story is debunked in a blog by John McKay (:-)) here:
http://johnmckay.blogspot.com/2006/03/rite-of-spring-last-fall-i-pointed-out.htm\
l
=
http://tinyurl.com/g5frq
Extensive Googling finds just one non-ark or -legal reference to a
Porcher Taylor, who seems to be a representative of a Lutheran church
in Petersburg, which is near his University of Richmond:
http://tinyurl.com/g5ut9 and
http://tinyurl.com/kfyab
Brian
1452
oeditor
Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 11:58:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...>
wrote:
> This amazing admission appears (complete with the usual bullshit
> arguments) in the college's official newsletter for March 2005. It's
> nigh on impossible to get a normal link to this because it's on
> "Flashpaper."
Nasty stuff, that flashpaper. Not to mention the cretinism.
>
> You can find it here;
>
> http://www.emmanuel-schools.org.uk/school/etmarch.htm
> http://tinyurl.com/ogcw5
>
And you can save it as an html page (you get the whole lot, not what
looks like a page).
Brian
1453
Roger Stanyard
Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 17:33:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Lawyer by profession, the Vardy loons hired a Professor Johnson of
UCA
> to speak on Intellgent Design.
>
> This amazing admission appears (complete with the usual bullshit
> arguments) in the college's official newsletter for March 2005.
Marc, et al,
I think that there is room in notoacademies for a very hard hitting
article about Johnson speaking at Emmanuel College but I need the
absolute proof that he has before I can put pen to paper.
Can you provide the proof in the form of precieley what was said in
the newsletter. I can't open it and find out.
Basically Johnson went to Ahmanson for funding for the DI when
Ahmanson was on the Board of the Chalcedon Foundation. Ahmanson was
on the Board for 25 years.
As your are all aware, the Chalcedon Foundation, funded by Ahmanson
money repeatedly proposed the murder of innocent people who disagreed
with its fundamentalist religious beliefs.
The DI continues to receive Ahmanson money although Rushdoony's
violent and undemocratic proposals were and are widely known.
So what kind of school is Emmanuel College that invites a man to
speak whose organisation accepts funding off of a recluse who has ,
for years, funded an organisation committed to mass murder!
I use strong words but we need to get the message to the public.
Ahmanson's money is seen as so tainted that even Republic politicians
in the USA refuse it.
There is also the issue of the Wedge document; Johnson is regarded as
the driving force behind this. And that, if ever these was one, was a
policy statement to infiltrate the education system without the
public knowing for political ends.
I'll need to check but I suspect the ESF has charitable status which
means it must keep out of politics.
I've managed to assembly an awful lot of information on how the
fundies have deceived everyone, including the Secretary of State for
Education, on fundamentalism in British state schools.
Moreover, that information now shows the connections with the ESF and
Emmanuel College. (see my blog at http://260.yahoo.com/stanyardroger –
you will need to read several of the postings over recent weeks to
show what I have uncovered.)
However, before I write the article I must have proof that Johnson
turned up and Emmanuel College and presented ID to its pupils. If we
don't have that I can be sued for libel.
I know that Ken Ham turned up a few years back. Are there any other
creationists who have made presentations to children there or in
other Vardy schools? The position I am in is that basically any name
I can now link straight back to the deception in the 2002 letter to
Estelle Morris.
Roger
I have posted this comment to the notoacademies site.
1454
Rudy Vonk
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 18:38:00
Roger,
> Can you provide the proof in the form of precieley what was said in
> the newsletter. I can't open it and find out.
This is the full text from "Emmanuel Times", issue # 29, March 29. I
had to edit some of the special characters.
Never a school to shy away from contentious issues, Emmanuel invited
two academics of renown to speak
to a Sixth Form audience on a real hot potato - the origin of life on
earth - as part of their Philosophy,
Theology and Ethics course. Professor Johnson, formerly of the
University of California, is a renowned
author on the subject of Intelligent Design. A lawyer by profession,
Professor Johnson's mind is obviously
still razor-sharp at 65. The Professor resists the view that science
has written God out of the history books.
He challenged students to search out the evidence for themselves, to
think critically rather than being
swept along with the crowd. If you have visited the Life Centre, you
may have seen the transformation of
your own face 'back in time' to a cluster of cells in a primordial
jelly. Have you noticed, however, that
the process by which this happens is not explained? To believe that
life has evolved by chance, said
Professor Johnson, is fine so long as you assume it can and did happen;
however, no experiments have yet
synthesised life, so we have every right to be sceptical of these
theories until scientists bring more
evidence. Dr Snelling spoke on the subject of 'Rock Strata, Fossils
and Geologic Time', saying that the
fossil record supports a catastrophic event. Interesting little fossil
anomalies were presented: a possum and
a whale buried together at the same time, and delicate creatures such
as bees, jellyfish and flowers that
were fossilised in an instant. I believe that this lecture gave all
who heard it much to think about. It proved
wonderfully thought-provoking. A barrage of questions put the speakers
through their paces and proved
that the lectures had served to stimulate real thought. This debate
will run and run!
cellpadding="2"
Attachment: (text/enriched) [not stored]
1455
Rudy Vonk
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 18:51:00
On 10 jul 2006, at 19:38, Rudy Vonk wrote:
> This is the full text from "Emmanuel Times", issue # 29, March 29
That should have read "March 2005".
1456
Timothy Chase
List of Scientists willing to Defend Evolution
10/07/2006 20:20:00
If you have or can get media contacts, this may come in quite handy...
PT Media Advisory Panel
http://snipurl.com/t0qs
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/07/pt_media_adviso.html
"Given the high media profile of discussions about evolutionary
biology and educational policy for public schools, several of the
Panda's Thumb contributors have agreed to make themselves available
for representatives of the media. PT contributors often have
credentials and expertise in relevant fields, or long experience in
analyzing the arguments presented by various antievolutionary groups.
The following list gives concise background information about each
member of the Panda's Thumb Media Advisory Panel."
1457
Roger Stanyard
Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 21:34:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Vonk <rudy@...> wrote:
>
> Roger,
>
> > Can you provide the proof in the form of precieley what was said
in
> > the newsletter. I can't open it and find out.
>
> This is the full text from "Emmanuel Times", issue # 29, March 29.
I
> had to edit some of the special characters.
>
> Professor Johnson's mind is obviously
> still razor-sharp at 65.
Really! I thought that he had had several strokes and admitted that
he was retiring from public life because it was a messsage from God.
Half gagga is what I understood.
Roger Stanyard
1458
oeditor
Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 22:03:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>
ad to edit some of the special characters.
> >
> > Professor Johnson's mind is obviously
> > still razor-sharp at 65.
>
> Really! I thought that he had had several strokes and admitted that
> he was retiring from public life because it was a messsage from God.
> Half gagga is what I understood.
>
Ah, the irony. Clearly they knew full well that that was the case and
he evidently didn't acquit himself very well. Could even be an in-joke
among the YE cretinistas at the OI/ECs expense.
Brian
1459
John Germain
RE: Old Immovable Nick
10/07/2006 22:28:00
My apologies, Ian.
I read some of the articles on the site
exchristian.net
And I thought that some there were still avowing it a tad over their
Subscription..
Anyway, I retract (I hope) ALL offence given.
Glad to see that you have remained,
Best wishes
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
-----Original Message-----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Ian
Lowe
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 9:43 AM
To: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [BlackShadow] Old Immovable Nick
> From the Bowels of Which particular CHURCH crypt did you send this shite,
Ian?
Odd question John - if you are assuming/suggesting that I am still part of a
church, sorry - that ship sailed a long long time ago. I'm an atheist.
If you are asking which Church I was part of in my teens, that would be the
Church of Christ the King in Pather here in Scotland. I *was* a born again
christian who held fundamentalist beliefs (part of an isolationist church
that seperated itself from "the world" etc).
I used to think that my own escape from religion was very unusual, thanks to
exchristian.net I realise that it's a lot more common than most people
think.
Ian.
Yahoo! Groups Links
1460
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 23:39:00
>
> There is also the issue of the Wedge document; Johnson is regarded as
> the driving force behind this. And that, if ever these was one, was a
> policy statement to infiltrate the education system without the public
> knowing for political ends.
Be sure to mention to all the newspapers that Johnson is also an HIV
denier who doesn't think AIDS is caused by HIV.
===================================
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
1461
Ian Lowe
RE: Old Immovable Nick
10/07/2006 23:37:00
No problems John -
We should put all this behind us and conentrate on the task at hand.
Ian.
-----Original Message-----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of John Germain
Sent: 10 July 2006 22:28
To: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [BlackShadow] Old Immovable Nick
My apologies, Ian.
I read some of the articles on the site
exchristian.net
And I thought that some there were still avowing it a tad over their
Subscription..
Anyway, I retract (I hope) ALL offence given.
Glad to see that you have remained,
Best wishes
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
1462
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
10/07/2006 23:40:00
>
Dr Snelling spoke on the subject of 'Rock Strata, Fossils
> and Geologic Time', saying that the
>
> fossil record supports a catastrophic event. I
It might be nice to present some of Snelling's published geology
papers, wherein he accepts and works with all of the standard
geological dates.
He saves his YEC crap for church audiences.
===================================
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
1463
Lenny Flank
RE: Old Immovable Nick
11/07/2006 00:18:00
> We should put all this behind us and conentrate on the task at hand.
Speaking of which . . . . .
One thing I've always found helpful at the beginning of any
grassroots organizing campaign, to help focus everyone on the task at
hand and make sure everyone is working towards the same goal, is to
pose three simple questions to ourselves:
(1) what do we want?
(2) who can give it to us?
(3) what can we do to *make* him/her/them give it to us?
Concentrate on specifics, not on vague generalities. Sure, we want
good science taught. Sure, we want fundies to be kept out of
political power. But specifically and clearly, what is it *exactly*
that we want? Do we want creation "science" banned, by law or by
policy, from all schools? Do we want creationist teachers
fired/removed? Do we want this or that particular school to stop
teaching creationism or to not start teaching it?
What ***specific steps*** do we want to see carried out? We want
what to happen, to whom? Who can do that for us? Is the person who
can do that for us on our side? If not, how do we GET them on our
side? How do we make it happen?
Time to get down to nuts-and-bolts. Talk is cheap, but ACTION is
what gets things done.
So what ACTION do we need to plan for?
===================================
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
1464
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 00:38:00
On 10/07/06, Lenny Flank <lflank@ij.net> wrote:
>
> Be sure to mention to all the newspapers that Johnson is also an HIV
> denier who doesn't think AIDS is caused by HIV.
>
Philip Johnson is listed here along with the other cranks:
VIRUSMYTH HOMEPAGE
THE GROUP
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/group.htm
Other cranks are invited to sign online.
1465
Roger Stanyard
Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 07:20:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Rudy Vonk <rudy@...> wrote:
>
>
> This is the full text from "Emmanuel Times", issue # 29, March 29.
I
> had to edit some of the special characters.
>
Thanks Rudy,
That's probably saved me several hours work.
Why is it that fundamentalists never seem able to keep their mouths
shut?
The one thing I have found, consistently, is that digging around
their web sites provides dividend after dividend. It's worth going
back again and again.
Roger Stanyard
1466
Marc Draco
Re: Citation, citation
11/07/2006 08:00:00
Firefox has a solution on the right click that I hadn't noticed!
I'll locate these articles for dissection later. My web access (port 80)
is off right now across my whole network - so it's screwdriver time!
Marc Draco wrote:
>
> Here's a thorny one.
>
> I just found a VERY interesting and quite worrying piece on the ESF
> website. Well hidden, but it's there. Thing is, it's in a frame so I
> don't know how to legally link to it or cite it for dissection...
>
> Ideas?
>
>
1467
Roger Stanyard
No To Academies
11/07/2006 08:22:00
Peter et al,
I've tried posting to the No To Academies web site twice over the last
24 hours and nothing happens. I'm registered (twice, I believe) but to
no avail?
Any ides what I am doing wrong?
Roger Stanyard
1468
Roger Stanyard
Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 10:07:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank" <lflank@...> wrote:
>
> >
> Dr Snelling spoke on the subject of 'Rock Strata, Fossils
> > and Geologic Time', saying that the
> >
> > fossil record supports a catastrophic event. I
>
>
>
> It might be nice to present some of Snelling's published geology
> papers, wherein he accepts and works with all of the standard
> geological dates.
>
> He saves his YEC crap for church audiences.
>
Snelling has been working with Johnson before on the UK creationist
circuit. See
www.biblicalcreation.org.uk/introductory_articles/bcs147.html
And, of course, Snelling is a YEC and Johnson (as far as I am aware)
is not. Pity they can't agree on first principles. Pity they don't
appear to be able tell their audiences that either.
Roger Stanyard
>
> ===================================
> 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
>
1469
Ian Lowe
RE: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 11:35:00
There's no denying Johnson is indeed a crank, but is the science behind the
HIV situation so clearly defined that we can label people cranks for having
a dissenting opinion?
"I am not a biologist" but I was under the impression that there was still
proper scientific debate about a large percentage of the AIDS symptoms
essentially being a result of stage three syphilis within a previously HIV
infected (or CMV positive for that matter) host, rather than a straight HIV,
therefore AIDS relationship?
ID is clearly not real science, I'm not so sure that the "HIV doesn't cause
AIDS" camp are quite so clear cut.
The fundies have an obvious demonisation reason for wanting to portray AIDS
as a result of lifestyle rather than a pathogen, but I think it would be a
mistake to tar anyone who is unconvinced of the link with the same brush as
them.
That being said, the whole conspiracy/establishment language really puts me
off, and is oddly reminiscent of cranks the world over! With that in mind,
seeing the expertise that the list seems to have, If there are actually good
debunk resources which answer some of these points, I'd be interested in any
pointers to a good place to start reading.
Ian.
-----Original Message-----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Timothy Chase
Sent: 11 July 2006 00:39
To: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BlackShadow] Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
On 10/07/06, Lenny Flank <lflank@ij.net> wrote:
>
> Be sure to mention to all the newspapers that Johnson is also an HIV
> denier who doesn't think AIDS is caused by HIV.
>
Philip Johnson is listed here along with the other cranks:
VIRUSMYTH HOMEPAGE
THE GROUP
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/group.htm
1470
Ian Lowe
RE: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 12:21:00
> That being said, the whole conspiracy/establishment language really puts
me off, and is oddly reminiscent of cranks the world over!
Speaking of which, Ivor Catt is included in the list of signatories - quite
what he has to do with HIV (as opposed to simply being anti-science) I don't
see.
I can only assume that proper biologists see names on that list which just
pop out in flashing red neon in the same way?
Consider me convinced on the "crank" factor. ;)
I.
1471
Nick & Moira Cowan
Re: Re: ESF caught lying (again)
11/07/2006 12:33:00
> > --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank"
> <lflank@...> wrote:
> > > > Fundies are indeed arrogant self-righteous
> prideful pricks who
> > think, > quite literally, that they are holier
> > than everyone else.
> > Just look at Nick. >
> > And look who is paying his public sector salary
> > this month?
> > The very people, you and me included, he looks
> > down on.
> Well, ya know, we colonials stopped paying taxes to
> London a few
> hundred years ago. It was, um, rather a messy
> affair.
> But you are right, Nick *IS* a contemptuous little
> prick.
Thanks for your civility - it's good for the neutrals
to see. Interesting little disagreement on BlackShadow
these last few days - bit unfair it was all linked in
a thread under my name.
As if I'd somehow try to engineer such a thing
(giggle, snigger).
It's hard for you to kick against the pricks.
"Immovable Nick" (but not "Old Nick")
___________________________________________________________
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of
use." - PC Magazine
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
1472
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: ESF caught lying (again)
11/07/2006 13:08:00
>
> As if I'd somehow try to engineer such a thing
> (giggle, snigger).
>
Don't flatter yourself, Nick.
===================================
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
1473
Lenny Flank
what we want, how we are gonna get it
11/07/2006 13:11:00
I've gotten no response to my "what do we want" post, so I'm trying
again. I think it extremely important for us to define exactly what
we want, and how we plan to get it. If we don't form a specific goal
and strategy, we are nothing but a debating society. Nothing WRONG
with a debating society, of course, but it's action that wins the
fight, not talk.
So once again, I offer three questions to help us focus our efforts
and get the ball rolling. They are:
(1) what do we want?
(2) who can give it to us?
(3)how can we MAKE him/her/them give it to us?
Time to get down to nuts and bolts.
===================================
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
1474
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: ESF caught lying (again)
11/07/2006 13:05:00
Hey Nick, don't you have some science questions to answer . . . .?
===================================
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
1475
John Germain
RE: Re: ESF caught lying (again)
11/07/2006 13:37:00
The "neutrals" being all your students who you invited here to watch you
insulting them?
The devil is in the details... Eh, Nick?
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
-----Original Message-----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Nick &
Moira Cowan
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 12:34 PM
To: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BlackShadow] Re: ESF caught lying (again)
> > --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank"
> <lflank@...> wrote:
> > > > Fundies are indeed arrogant self-righteous
> prideful pricks who
> > think, > quite literally, that they are holier
> > than everyone else.
> > Just look at Nick. >
> > And look who is paying his public sector salary
> > this month?
> > The very people, you and me included, he looks
> > down on.
> Well, ya know, we colonials stopped paying taxes to
> London a few
> hundred years ago. It was, um, rather a messy
> affair.
> But you are right, Nick *IS* a contemptuous little
> prick.
Thanks for your civility - it's good for the neutrals
to see. Interesting little disagreement on BlackShadow
these last few days - bit unfair it was all linked in
a thread under my name.
As if I'd somehow try to engineer such a thing
(giggle, snigger).
It's hard for you to kick against the pricks.
"Immovable Nick" (but not "Old Nick")
___________________________________________________________
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of
use." -
PC Magazine
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
Yahoo! Groups Links
1476
Ian Lowe
RE: what we want, how we are gonna get it
11/07/2006 14:40:00
I started writing some stuff out - having done something fairly similar for
the Scottish Atheist Council in the last few weeks.
*but* I don't think I am really the right person for this.
I am, pretty much unashamedly, anti-religious. It permeates my thinking to
the extent that I am not the person to write what has to be a
worldview-neutral position. I can play a part, and bite my tongue when it
comes to operating tactically. Different story when the goal is to define
the change you want to see.
What I had sketched out is the following, consider it a starting position to
work from.
In Schools - What:
Relegation of faith to the RE Class, and the RE Class only. Rather than
opening a war on a hundred different fronts, challenging religion in science
classes, then religion in language classes, religion in... etc, define where
religion *should* be rather than where it *shouldn't* be.
In Schools - Who:
The National Curriculum is the place to fight. It should be enforced, and
latitude to ignore/augment it should be scrapped/controlled. It is clear
that the wiggle room is where the fundies work.
We need the NC people and the exam boards people to remove these idiotic
little weasel words which allow people like Nick and the ESF to claim that
they are supposed to be "teaching the controversy" etc.
In Schools - How:
Writing to the NCA, AQA etc. I can't do this - I'm in Scotland, hence I have
a different set of exam bodies etc to deal with.
We need these people to make a public, quotable statement of intent about
science education that can be shoved down the face of anyone who tries to
portray this as part of the NC.
Defence of Science:
Science in the UK is badly maligned - it is absolutely not given the respect
it deserves, and this comes across badly when dealing with the media.
Challenging every bid of bad science would be a terrible drain on a
campaign, but how else do we confront people who *rely* on the public's lack
of trust in science to push their agendas?
Political:
One thing is a problem - whilst I believe that keeping fundies out of
schools will find broad support across political parties, the Academy
program presents a minefield: like a watered down democrat/republican thing,
Conservatives may find themselves favouring the academies because they take
power away form councils.
We need to use a tack which will remain financial/economic ideology neutral,
whilst closing the door on the fundies. I don't have that, but it needs to
be discussed.
Hopefully that's enough to start discussion.
Ian.
1477
Roger Stanyard
Re: what we want, how we are gonna get it
11/07/2006 14:42:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Lenny Flank" <lflank@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> I've gotten no response to my "what do we want" post, so I'm trying
> again. I think it extremely important for us to define exactly
what
> we want, and how we plan to get it.
Sorry about not replying to your request earlier Lenny. There are
some developments which might change matters a bit and I wanted to
seem them in place before kicking off.
Seems to me that it the members of this group want to become
activists we are going to heve to very tightly define our objectives.
There are only a handful of people in the group who can currently be
considered activists. I see no reason why we couldn't join forces
with Scince Just SCience. That will increase the numbers a bit (but
several of us are members of both anyone).
So, initially, we may have a dozan or so people to call on. That's
not a lot.
So, here is my suggestion for comment:
"The group's aim is to stop the teaching of fundamentalist
creationist and ID pseduo-science in state schools."
It's simple. My own view is that there may be a conflict with
teaching of Religious Education (there is no seperation of church and
state in the UK, I would remind Americans).
However, teaching of creationism and ID in RE is, according to the
creationists, teaching science. So, therefore, there should,be no
conflict. Keep it out of RE as well.
I think it is an absoluely hopeless cause to try and get religion
taken out of state schools. There isn't the public support for it
and, in any case, that's the National Secular Society's patch.
Now, I haven't, so far, addressed ways and means. It seems that we
need to get agreement on this basic principle.
I throw the floor open for comments.
Roger Stanyard
1478
Wilson Alan
RE: what we want, how we are gonna get it
11/07/2006 14:53:00
bgcolor="white"
----
'From:'
BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] 'On Behalf Of 'Lenny Flank
'Sent:' 11 July 2006 13:11
'To:' BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
'Subject:' [BlackShadow] what we
want, how we are gonna get it
I've gotten no response to my "what do we want" post, so I'm trying
again. I think it extremely important for us to define exactly what
we want, and how we plan to get it. If we don't form a specific goal
and strategy, we are nothing but a debating society. Nothing WRONG
with a debating society, of course, but it's action that wins the
fight, not talk.
So once again, I offer three questions to help us focus our efforts
and get the ball rolling. They are:
(1) what do we want?
To get and keep religion
out of school science classes.
(2) who can give it to us?
Public opinion.
(3)how can we MAKE him/her/them give it to us?
Convince the public that religion
free science classes are in the best interests of humanity.
Alan W
Time to get down to nuts and bolts.
===================================
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
1479
Marc Draco
Re: what we want, how we are gonna get it
11/07/2006 17:18:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
Sorry Lenny, I was tied up when that came in.
I want to see universal legislation that
a) Disallows the teaching of ID/creationism as anything other than a
religious idea. With the emphasis on IDEA
b) Disavows anyone found promoting ID/Creationism from any and all
degree qualifications they may have earned in specialist subjects
directly related to a science.
c) Allows for the immediate sacking of anyone promoting religious ideas
in a school - even as an ECA. (Let's face it, no one in their right
mind would let Abu Bakri or Abu Hamza into schools, now would they?
Amounts to the same thing.)
Religion belongs in places of worship (and there are plenty of them for
every branch of every faith).
Everywhere else is off limits.
The public can give it to us if we give them sufficient "rope" to hang
our idiotic politicians with.
NoToAcademies (and sites like it) can do just that.
Lenny Flank wrote:
->
I've gotten no response to my "what do we want" post, so I'm trying
again. I think it extremely important for us to define exactly what
we want, and how we plan to get it. If we don't form a specific goal
and strategy, we are nothing but a debating society. Nothing WRONG
with a debating society, of course, but it's action that wins the
fight, not talk.
So once again, I offer three questions to help us focus our efforts
and get the ball rolling. They are:
(1) what do we want?
(2) who can give it to us?
(3)how can we MAKE him/her/them give it to us?
Time to get down to nuts and bolts.
===================================
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
1480
Mikey Brass
[Fwd: [CA-TOC] Current Anthropology June 2006 (vol 47 no 3) Contents]
11/07/2006 19:33:00
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [CA-TOC] Current Anthropology June 2006 (vol 47 no 3) Contents
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 09:30:23 -0500 (CDT)
From: The University of Chicago Press <TOC@ucp.uchicago.edu>
Reply-To: The University of Chicago Press <TOC@ucp.uchicago.edu>
To: ca-toc@ucp.uchicago.edu
Current Anthropology
Volume 47, Number 3
(June 2006)
is now available
at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/contents?CA+v47n3
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Anthropological Currents
Page 405 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA063901 ]
FREE ACCESS
Current Applications
Page 407 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA063902 ]
FREE ACCESS
ARTICLES
Gender, Farming, and Long-Term Change
Cynthia Robin
Page 409 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA50118 ]
Measuring Forager Mobility
P. Jeffrey Brantingham
Page 435 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA200024 ]
Contesting Spatial Modernity in Late-Socialist China
Li Zhang
Page 461 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA80304 ]
Toward a Critical Anthropology of Human Rights
Mark Goodale
Page 485 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA90420 ]
REPORTS
How Well Does Paternity Confidence Match Actual Paternity?
Kermyt G. Anderson
Page 513 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA100316 ]
New Ideas about Late Holocene Climate Variability in the Central Pacific
Melinda S. Allen
Page 521 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA200041 ]
Hrdlicka's Aleutian Population-Replacement Hypothesis: A Radiometric
Evaluation
Joan Brenner Coltrain, M. Geoffrey Hayes, and Dennis H. O'Rourke
Page 537 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA80411 ]
Palaeodiets of Humans and Fauna at the Spanish Mesolithic Site of El Collado
Elena Garcia Guixe, Michael P. Richards, and M. Eulalia Subira
Page 549 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA90405 ]
BOOKS
Birth and Dying in Cote d'Ivoire (Gottleib's The Afterlife Is Where We
Come From)
Nicolas Argenti
Page 557 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA200186 ]
The Puzzle of Human Evolution: Still in Pieces (Russon and Begun's The
Evolution of Thought)
Jennifer Vonk
Page 558 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA200182 ]
Animal Cognition and Animal Rights (Wynne's Do Animals Think?)
W. Tecumseh Fitch
Page 559 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA200136 ]
Books Received
Page 561 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA063801 ]
Calendar
Page 434 [ http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?CA063999 ]
To subscribe to Current Anthropology see
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/CA/order1.html
To order single articles, see
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/vendor?type=article&journal=CA
To order back issues, see
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/vendor?type=issue&journal=CA
To remove yourself from this mailing list or change your user options,
go to http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ca-toc
Send questions or comments to help@www.journals.uchicago.edu
_______________________________________________
CA-TOC mailing list
To unsubscribe or change your delivery options, visit the URL below:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ca-toc
1481
Mikey Brass
Re: Re: ESF caught lying (again)
11/07/2006 19:33:00
Don't you have a Flood layer to find in aeolian sand, Nick-dearest?
1482
Mikey Brass
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 19:33:00
HIV factsheet on how HIV causes AIDS:
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/howhiv.htm
Evidence HIV causes AIDS:
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm
Johnson has his own agenda.
--
Best, Mikey Brass
MA in Archaeology degree, University College London
"The Antiquity of Man" http://www.antiquityofman.com
Book: "The Antiquity of Man: Artifactual, fossil and gene records explored"
- !ke e: /xarra //ke
("Diverse people unite": Motto of the South African Coat of Arms, 2002)
1483
Mikey Brass
Re: Old Immovable Nick
11/07/2006 19:34:00
Lenny Flank wrote:
> Do we want creation "science" banned, by law or by
> policy, from all schools?
I want all pseudoscience removed from the science classroom until such
times as new views, or old, become accepted in mainstream academia.
Furthermore, if there is to be any discussion on any aspect of
pseudoscience, it needs to be within the framework of the historicity of
science: there are more than enough examples with mainstream science to
teach critical thinking skills to school pupils.
> What ***specific steps*** do we want to see carried out? We want
> what to happen, to whom? Who can do that for us?
It needs to become part of the national education policy.
> Is the person who
> can do that for us on our side? If not, how do we GET them on our
> side? How do we make it happen?
*This* is the most difficult aspect...
1484
Marc Draco
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 20:50:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
Here we are.
http://www.emmanuel-schools.org.uk/school/etmarch.htm
Roger Stanyard wrote:
->
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com,
Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Lawyer by profession, the Vardy loons hired a Professor Johnson of
UCA
> to speak on Intellgent Design.
>
> This amazing admission appears (complete with the usual bullshit
> arguments) in the college's official newsletter for March 2005.
Marc, et al,
I think that there is room in notoacademies for a very hard hitting
article about Johnson speaking at Emmanuel College but I need the
absolute proof that he has before I can put pen to paper.
Can you provide the proof in the form of precieley what was said in
the newsletter. I can't open it and find out.
Basically Johnson went to Ahmanson for funding for the DI when
Ahmanson was on the Board of the Chalcedon Foundation. Ahmanson was
on the Board for 25 years.
As your are all aware, the Chalcedon Foundation, funded by Ahmanson
money repeatedly proposed the murder of innocent people who disagreed
with its fundamentalist religious beliefs.
The DI continues to receive Ahmanson money although Rushdoony's
violent and undemocratic proposals were and are widely known.
So what kind of school is Emmanuel College that invites a man to
speak whose organisation accepts funding off of a recluse who has ,
for years, funded an organisation committed to mass murder!
I use strong words but we need to get the message to the public.
Ahmanson's money is seen as so tainted that even Republic politicians
in the USA refuse it.
There is also the issue of the Wedge document; Johnson is regarded as
the driving force behind this. And that, if ever these was one, was a
policy statement to infiltrate the education system without the
public knowing for political ends.
I'll need to check but I suspect the ESF has charitable status which
means it must keep out of politics.
I've managed to assembly an awful lot of information on how the
fundies have deceived everyone, including the Secretary of State for
Education, on fundamentalism in British state schools.
Moreover, that information now shows the connections with the ESF and
Emmanuel College. (see my blog at http://260.yahoo.com/stanyardroger
–
you will need to read several of the postings over recent weeks to
show what I have uncovered.)
However, before I write the article I must have proof that Johnson
turned up and Emmanuel College and presented ID to its pupils. If we
don't have that I can be sued for libel.
I know that Ken Ham turned up a few years back. Are there any other
creationists who have made presentations to children there or in
other Vardy schools? The position I am in is that basically any name
I can now link straight back to the deception in the 2002 letter to
Estelle Morris.
Roger
I have posted this comment to the notoacademies site.
1485
Marc Draco
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 20:46:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
I think we can do that, Roger. You'll get the link in a private email
from me.
Marc
Roger Stanyard wrote:
->
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com,
Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Lawyer by profession, the Vardy loons hired a Professor Johnson of
UCA
> to speak on Intellgent Design.
>
> This amazing admission appears (complete with the usual bullshit
> arguments) in the college's official newsletter for March 2005.
Marc, et al,
I think that there is room in notoacademies for a very hard hitting
article about Johnson speaking at Emmanuel College but I need the
absolute proof that he has before I can put pen to paper.
Can you provide the proof in the form of precieley what was said in
the newsletter. I can't open it and find out.
Basically Johnson went to Ahmanson for funding for the DI when
Ahmanson was on the Board of the Chalcedon Foundation. Ahmanson was
on the Board for 25 years.
As your are all aware, the Chalcedon Foundation, funded by Ahmanson
money repeatedly proposed the murder of innocent people who disagreed
with its fundamentalist religious beliefs.
The DI continues to receive Ahmanson money although Rushdoony's
violent and undemocratic proposals were and are widely known.
So what kind of school is Emmanuel College that invites a man to
speak whose organisation accepts funding off of a recluse who has ,
for years, funded an organisation committed to mass murder!
I use strong words but we need to get the message to the public.
Ahmanson's money is seen as so tainted that even Republic politicians
in the USA refuse it.
There is also the issue of the Wedge document; Johnson is regarded as
the driving force behind this. And that, if ever these was one, was a
policy statement to infiltrate the education system without the
public knowing for political ends.
I'll need to check but I suspect the ESF has charitable status which
means it must keep out of politics.
I've managed to assembly an awful lot of information on how the
fundies have deceived everyone, including the Secretary of State for
Education, on fundamentalism in British state schools.
Moreover, that information now shows the connections with the ESF and
Emmanuel College. (see my blog at http://260.yahoo.com/stanyardroger
–
you will need to read several of the postings over recent weeks to
show what I have uncovered.)
However, before I write the article I must have proof that Johnson
turned up and Emmanuel College and presented ID to its pupils. If we
don't have that I can be sued for libel.
I know that Ken Ham turned up a few years back. Are there any other
creationists who have made presentations to children there or in
other Vardy schools? The position I am in is that basically any name
I can now link straight back to the deception in the 2002 letter to
Estelle Morris.
Roger
I have posted this comment to the notoacademies site.
1486
Marc Draco
Re: Re: More evidence of Loony Lectures
11/07/2006 20:58:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
Roger, you should have the complete Flashpaper in your mail. It should
open on any Flash enabled machine. I've made a backup just in case the
ESF panic and pull the plug.
Too late - we know now! ;-)
Marc
->
1487
ukantic
Re: what we want, how we are gonna get it
11/07/2006 20:49:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>
>> considered activists. I see no reason why we couldn't join forces
> with Scince Just SCience. That will increase the numbers a bit
Yes, that is possible Roger, but where else can you get to argue,
fight, swear & curse? Where else do you get genuine YEC creationist
(none of this synthetic ID rubbish) for afters? (-:
1488
Marc Draco
Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 21:21:00
This guy, quite a smart lad by the looks of things, is a former King's
student. He doesn't like Vardy's people much... have a look. Even Nigel
McQuoid (apparently) comments on his site about his "homophobia" -
denying that it's anything of the sort and is just down to his
interpretation of the bible. Yeah, right Nige!
http://www.freewebs.com/cityacademies/index.htm
http://tinyurl.com/j9duz
Give that man a pat on the back!
1489
Mikey Brass
Re: Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 21:46:00
The guy's spelling and grammar is absolutely appalling for an 18-year
old. I would be furious if I was his parent.
I've posted a response in his guestbook. The site itself holds promise
and it is wonderful to see a young man, with direct experience, speak out.
1490
Ian Lowe
RE: Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 22:11:00
Mikey,
His use of English is well above the current standard for school leavers in
the UK. If you want to see what's typical, read down a few comments to
Jodie. She's probably quite smart, but that's the txt generation for you.
Anyway, what's important is the content here, not the presentation.
Inevitably though, when you choose to pick someone up for their grammar or
spelling in an internet forum, this happens:
"If I can give one word of advice it would be to proof-read your site for
the grammar and spelling mistakes which are glearingly obvious."
Indeed they are.
Glearingly so.
:D
Ian.
-----Original Message-----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Mikey Brass
Sent: 11 July 2006 21:47
To: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BlackShadow] Ex-student Criticises King's Academy
The guy's spelling and grammar is absolutely appalling for an 18-year old. I
would be furious if I was his parent.
I've posted a response in his guestbook. The site itself holds promise and
it is wonderful to see a young man, with direct experience, speak out.
1491
Marc Draco
Re: Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 22:10:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
Ah yes. It is. A gentle email from someone like Dan (perhaps) may help.
Presumably, King's will say that's because they only had him for a
short time... ya de ya...
Frankly, the state of written English in this country is abhorrent and
he is no exception.
The fact he has the guts to speak out where so many others are
frightened to is what I admire greatly. There's no need to attack him
on that - we can reserve attacks for those who proudly boast their
perfection in all things. And in particular, the vile McQuoid's excuse
that he is anti-gay (if one can call him that) because the bible says
it's wrong. A bigot is a bigot - no matter what the reason.
Marc
Mikey Brass wrote:
->
The guy's spelling and grammar is absolutely appalling for an
18-year
old. I would be furious if I was his parent.
I've posted a response in his guestbook. The site itself holds promise
and it is wonderful to see a young man, with direct experience, speak
out.
1492
Mikey Brass
Re: Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 22:21:00
Ian Lowe wrote:
> Mikey,
>
> His use of English is well above the current standard for school leavers in
> the UK.
A shocking state of affairs.
> Anyway, what's important is the content here, not the presentation.
For you and me, yes. For people who wish to nitpick and degenerate the
site, no. The first lesson someone has to learn is not to give
ammunition to your enemy. These people are both smart and will attempt
to take advantage of any perceived weakness.
Witness Nick's opening e-mail to me back in, I think, April in response
to a message of mine. I wrote it late at night and failed to proof-read
it. The response was predictable by him. Luckily, the list members know
me well enough and, by and large, are well versed in creationist tactics
to see through such slight of hand.
> Inevitably though, when you choose to pick someone up for their grammar or
> spelling in an internet forum, this happens:
>
> "If I can give one word of advice it would be to proof-read your site for
> the grammar and spelling mistakes which are glearingly obvious."
>
> Indeed they are.
>
> Glearingly so.
Consistency, my dear fellow;-)
1493
Mikey Brass
Re: Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 22:34:00
Marc Draco wrote:
> There's no need to attack him on
> that
Constructive criticism should never be mistaken for attack. If spelling
is wrong, regardless of the post, I have *zero* problem with it being
pointed out and frankly neither should anyone else. In addition, once it
has been corrected it provides both a more enjoyable reading experience
as well as cutting off a side venue for attack from those who wish to
degenerate the site.
> And in particular, the vile McQuoid's excuse
> that he is anti-gay (if one can call him that) because the bible says
> it's wrong.
I find McQuoid to be sickening.
The young man should be invited to join BlackShadow. He has shown he has
the guts and former insiders are the best possible recruits.
1494
Lenny Flank
Re: Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 23:38:00
>
> The young man should be invited to join BlackShadow. He has shown he
> has the guts and former insiders are the best possible recruits.
>
Yes indeed.
===================================
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
1495
Marc Draco
Re: Ex-student Criticises King''s Academy
11/07/2006 23:43:00
bgcolor="#ffffff"
OK, Mike. The problem I think was with your choice of words; it read a
little harsh.
As regards Mr Cowan - he picked me up too. Only he made the mistake of
thinking that he was infallible - which he clearly is not. Although in
his 50s if I recall, university educated and a senior teacher, Cowan is
unable to employ basic Latin abbreviations such as i.e. and e.g. in the
correct context, and I believe from another post couldn't even manage
to abbreviate etcetera ("and the others") correctly. In any teacher on
this pay scale, regardless of subject, this is a disgrace.
You and I have fewer excuses (than Stefan) to fail in this regard as we
are both professionally published authors. Incidentally, you've spelt
"glaringly" wrong in your own post Mike... ;-) Hey, it's a typo - one
of the problems of write once - read many! I just love irony... Dan
picked me up on cracker of mine earlier too. (Bugger - must fix that.)
I've moved most of this work to Linux (Kubuntu & Linspire) because
I can enjoy a basic spelling checker in most places - including text
entry boxes on web pages. Last I looked Linux stank worse than a
toilets on day 3 of the Knebworth festival, seems like it's actually
usable for non-geeks now. A pensioner mate of mine is now using it to
track his family tree in tremendous detail using GRAMPS and it supports
his hardware right out of the box. Amazing.
Anyway, I'm hoping to meet the lad tomorrow at my local where I can buy
him a pint and welcome him warmly to our group. Expect to see more of
him. This is another break we've been waiting for!.
As for McQuoid - yes, he is enough to make you vomit. Imagine what it
must be like to have him running your school! <shudders>
I'm linking back to his site - even if the English isn't BBC enough for
some - it will ring true with the people that matter: parents and their
kids! That's something we can't afford to lose sight of.
Mikey Brass wrote:
->
Marc Draco wrote:
> There's no need to attack him on
> that
Constructive criticism should never be mistaken for attack. If spelling
is wrong, regardless of the post, I have *zero* problem with it being
pointed out and frankly neither should anyone else. In addition, once
it
has been corrected it provides both a more enjoyable reading experience
as well as cutting off a side venue for attack from those who wish to
degenerate the site.
> And in particular, the vile McQuoid's excuse
> that he is anti-gay (if one can call him that) because the bible
says
> it's wrong.
I find McQuoid to be sickening.
The young man should be invited to join BlackShadow. He has shown he
has
the guts and former insiders are the best possible recruits.
1496
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: what we want, how we are gonna get it
11/07/2006 23:55:00
>> I throw the floor open for comments.
I quite agree with you. The narrower we keep the focus, the more we
can concentrate our resources (such as they are at the moment) and
have a greater impact. As the US civil rights organizers in the 60's
used to say, "Keep your eyes on the prize".
It seems we should be thinking about an umbrella organization that
can unite all the people and groups in the UK who oppose teaching
creationism in schools. And that means "all" of them. Atheist,
theist, Labour, Tory, whatever. As any union organizer can tell you,
when it's time for a strike, the ONLY thing that matters is which
side of the picket line you are on. Anyone on that side of it, is
your enemy. Anyone on this side of it, is your friend. And you
don't fight with your friends. If you have a gripe with them, save
it till AFTER the strike is over.
Such an umbrella organization should have ONLY the aim of opposing
the creationists and keeping them out of schools. Anything else
falls outside its scope and is just a waste of organizing time and
effort.
So, time to brainstorm some potential coalition partners. Obviously
there is the the Secular Society and the Humanists. The C of E seems
pretty approachable, and the Catholic Church does have the official
position of accepting evolution and opposing creationism. Is there a
national organization of science teachers in the UK (trade union,
professional association)? They are potential partners too. And
there seems already to be local opposition to each of the potential-
creationist-teaching schools. They can all be much more effective if
they are supported and coordinated by a national-level organization.
And don't let the (currently) tiny size of the UK anti-creationist
movement fool anyone. A small well-organized group can make an awful
lot of noise, and in a political fight, that's how you grow. We need
to let people know what's going on and how they can help fight it.
The numbers will grow in response to that.
===================================
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
1497
Lenny Flank
Re: Old Immovable Nick
11/07/2006 23:42:00
> Lenny Flank wrote:
> > Do we want creation "science" banned, by law or by
> > policy, from all schools?
>
> I want all pseudoscience removed from the science classroom until such
> times as new views, or old, become accepted in mainstream academia.
> Furthermore, if there is to be any discussion on any aspect of
> pseudoscience, it needs to be within the framework of the historicity
> of science: there are more than enough examples with mainstream
> science to teach critical thinking skills to school pupils.
OK, we need to break this down into a series of manageable steps.
Political fights aren't won all in one fell swoop; they are won one
small step at a time, each building on what has already been
accomplished.
So, what are the intermediate steps we need to take in order to
accomplish this ultimate goal?
>
> > What ***specific steps*** do we want to see carried out? We want
> > what to happen, to whom? Who can do that for us?
>
> It needs to become part of the national education policy.
OK, and what's the political process for doing that? Whose arm do we
need to twist?
>
> > Is the person who
> > can do that for us on our side? If not, how do we GET them on our
> > side? How do we make it happen?
>
> *This* is the most difficult aspect...
It always is. After all, if enough people were already on our side,
we'd already have won and there'd be nothing we'd need to fight
against, would there . . . . . (grin)
===================================
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
1498
Lenny Flank
RE: what we want, how we are gonna get it
12/07/2006 00:16:00
> > In Schools - Who:
> The National Curriculum is the place to fight. It should be enforced,
> and latitude to ignore/augment it should be scrapped/controlled. It
> is clear that the wiggle room is where the fundies work.
>
> We need the NC people and the exam boards people to remove these
> idiotic little weasel words which allow people like Nick and the ESF
> to claim that they are supposed to be "teaching the controversy" etc.
>
OK, then the question becomes, what's the political process to
accomplish this? Whose arm do we need to twist?
> In Schools - How:
> Writing to the NCA, AQA etc. I can't do this - I'm in Scotland, hence
> I have a different set of exam bodies etc to deal with.
>
> We need these people to make a public, quotable statement of intent
> about science education that can be shoved down the face of anyone who
> tries to portray this as part of the NC.
A good gesture.
>
>
> Defence of Science:
> Science in the UK is badly maligned - it is absolutely not given the
> respect it deserves, and this comes across badly when dealing with the
> media. Challenging every bid of bad science would be a terrible drain
> on a campaign, but how else do we confront people who *rely* on the
> public's lack of trust in science to push their agendas?
I don't know a lot about British political structures or dynamics, so
I can't speak much to that. But I can perhaps speak to this, as we
have much the same problem in the US -- our population is utterly pig-
ignorant about anything scientific.
And, as counterintuitive as it sounds, my advice is to virtually
ignore the "science". The problems with arguing over "science", I
have found over the years, are:
1. No one cares. It sounds blunt, but it's true. People in the US
(and, it sounds, in the UK) simply don't care about science, and
won't lift a finger to defend it.
2. It allows the fundies to set the agenda. If we let them, the
creationuts will have us running around forever trying to correct all
the silly bullshit they are capable of spewing out. It's just not
worth it. Their supply of bullshit is endless, and there's no point
in wearing ourselves out trying to counter all of it. We need to
keep them reacting to what WE do, rather than the other way around.
3. This fight really isn't about science -- it's about political
power. The scientific argument over evolution ended a century ago.
People today are not won TO creationism because of "scientific
arguments", and they won't be won AWAY from it by "scientific
arguments" either. If we try to beat creationists by lecturing
people about "homologies in cytochrome C allele sequences" or "type
III secretory apparatus" or "pre-biotic polymer chemosynthesis", we
will bore people to death and get nowhere.
4. Treating this as a "science" fight only plays straight into the
fundie agenda. THEY are the ones who WANT to paint this as a simple
"dsiagreement over science" and all they want is to "teach both sides
of the scientific controversy". There simply is no scientific
controversy over evolution. None. At all. By acting as if there IS
one, we simply give everyone the impression that there are indeed two
valid sides to a scientific argument. There aren't.
That does NOT mean we shouldn't bother giving scientific rebuttals to
creationist claims. But we should not make it the primary focus, or
even a major focus. Instead, we should focus on all the things the
fundies DON'T want others to know about them. Such as their
theocratic political program, their idiotic ideas (fossils are the
drowned bodies from Noah's Flood, the earth is only 6,000 years old,
the craters on the moon and the rings of Saturn are the result of a
battle between angels and demons, UFO's come from the Devil), their
complete utter lack of any scientific relevance of any sort, and
their flat-out dishonesty and deception.
In the US, we had a wonderful trump card --- any time the fundies
started preaching about their religious opinions (and deep down
inside, that is ALL they want to do), they violated the US
Constitution, the refs blew the whistle, and the whole game was over.
That trump card can't be played in the UK. However, I'd sure like
to hear them explain why their religious opinions (or ANYONE'S
religious opinions) should be taught in a SCIENCE classroom, instead
of in, well, a religious studies class where they belong.
Nick can't explain that. I doubt any other creationists can either.
> Political:
> One thing is a problem - whilst I believe that keeping fundies out of
> schools will find broad support across political parties, the Academy
> program presents a minefield: like a watered down democrat/republican
> thing, Conservatives may find themselves favouring the academies
> because they take power away form councils.
>
Well, we do need to recognize that some people *will* be our
enemies. No matter WHAT we do, there will always be somebody
somewhere who won't like it. (shrug)
>
> Hopefully that's enough to start discussion.
>
Let the discussion begin. :>
===================================
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
1499
ukantic
Reply to Stefan.
12/07/2006 00:05:00
This is my full reply to Stefan which got cut in half without warning
on the guestbook. Stupid bloody thing.
Anyone who has ever spent any time in a courtroom listening to lawyers
presenting detailed legal arguments will soon realise just how
convoluted & complex the law can be. A similar situation exists in
Parliament where those laws are ultimately made. Changes to ours laws
are only made after much debate that takes into account relevant facts
& information. It is often based on advice from experts in different
fields, building on previous laws.
No one in this country these days makes or enforces law by simply
holding up a Bible (or other religious text) & stating, "The good book
says we must do this". There are however countries where they do
thou