3152
George Jelliss
Re: Sharing Interests
29/09/2006 12:28:00
Re: Sharing Interests
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy Chase"
<timothychase@...>
wrote:
>
> /// it helps to sometimes share personal interests if for no other
> reason than getting to know one another a little more.
> For this reason I will name a few of mine.
> My own interests include: /// the Q-beta phage up to the Step-wise
> metabolic theory /// ; the co-evolution of phages and bacteria; the
> role of endogenous retroviruses in the evolution of life; lateral
> gene transfer; the role of tandem repeats in the evolution of
coding,
> regulatory and intronic sequences; the cis-regulatory system,
> regulatory gene networks; and, evolutionary developmental biology.
> /// it is good to find people of similar and often off-beat tastes.
>
!! I'm afraid most of the terms in that account go right over my
head.
Biology is not something I've studied in such depth. I'm more
interested in the broad history of science in general and cosmology
and basic physics, like the efforts to combine quantum theory and
relativity, but again only as an amateur spectator.
I studied mathematics, forty years ago, to undergraduate level and
have continued to maintain an interest in that, but my own original
work has been in mathematical recreations, and its interface with
chess, which has been expressed by producing journals and magazines.
See my home page for more:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/gpjnow/index.htm
It's only since I moved to Leicester six years ago, and found like
minds at Leicester Secular Society, and that creationism is very
active locally, that I've got involved with groups like this. My
philosophical motivation is from a Rationalist point of view.
Since I couldn't find an "edit" button I deleted and reposted this
item (because of an error in the link). Hope this doesn't cause
problems.
3153
George Jelliss
Re: Request for Help
29/09/2006 12:36:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...>
wrote:
>
> I would like to ask the UK members for some very simple help over
> the day or so. It will only take a few minutes of everybody's time.
>
> I think we should all be warning our local MPs about Truth in
> Science. I think a semi-individual letter from each of us to our
> MP will be a big step forward from moving from a talking shop to
> getting the word out about the danger of creationism.
>
> I have now done a practice run with two SJS members on this and
> written to my local MP. This basically uses the standard letter I
> have already posted on this site.
>
> I realise that many in the group are busy so to get matters moving
> quickly and efficently, I am offering to produce the full letter
> tailored to each MP so that all you have to do is email it -
> virtually no work whatsoever.
>
> However, you will need to tell me the name of your MP and your
> personal address, email and contact telephone number. You can do
> that off site. I'll do all the rest.
>
> As you probably appreciate I can't write to evry MP; it is normal
> practice for an MP only to deal with members of the public in
> his/her own constituency.
>
///
This site is supposed to be good for finding out about MPs and how
to contact them.
http://theyworkforyou.com/
I think I got it from BHA originally.
I'll try to get something to the Leicester MPs.
3154
Wankle Rotary-Pyjamas
Re: Sharing Interests
29/09/2006 12:30:00
>From: "Timothy Chase" <timothychase@gmail.com>
>My own interests include: the origin of life (for example, the RNA
>World, the work of Spiegelman and Eigen from the 1960's and 1970's
>with the Q-beta phage up to the Step-wise metabolic theory of House
>and Ferry from 2005); the co-evolution of phages and bacteria; the
>role of endogenous retroviruses in the evolution of life; lateral gene
>transfer; the role of tandem repeats in the evolution of coding,
>regulatory and intronic sequences; the cis-regulatory system,
>regulatory gene networks; and, evolutionary developmental biology.
I go fishing ;)
3155
George Jelliss
Re: Request for Help
29/09/2006 13:21:00
> This site is supposed to be good for finding out about MPs and how
> to contact them.
>
> http://theyworkforyou.com/
>
> I think I got it from BHA originally.
> I'll try to get something to the Leicester MPs.
>
I used it to email my MP, Sir Peter Soulsby.
However, it advises that MPs will only take notice of messages from
their own constituents, so I'll have to find other volunteers to
contact the other Leicester MPs.
3156
Bob Carling
Re: Letter to MP [was Request for Help]
29/09/2006 14:28:00
As Roger Stanyard had encouraged us, I have now written to my MP
about TIS. I changed the suggested wording slightly.
I used www.writetothem.com (nice site where writing to your MP is
made really easy).
Here's what I sent...
>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Dr R C J Carling
> 3 Underwood Court
> 152 Old Dover Road
> Canterbury
> Kent
> CT1 3EX
>
> Phone: 01227 464983
>
> Email: bcarling@ambitnewmedia.com
>
> Friday 29 September 2006
>
>Dear Julian Brazier,
>
>Re: Teaching religious creationism instead of science
>
>I have a longstanding interest in the interface between science and
>Christian belief and have kept a close eye for many years on the issue
>of Young Earth Creationism.
>
>I am very concerned about the teaching of creationism as science in
>schools in the United Kingdom.
>
>I have recently become aware of a new organisation, Truth in Science,
>that is aiming to have creationism taught in state schools alongside
>mainstream science.
>
>Last week Truth in Science announced that it was sending material to
>the heads of science of all schools and colleges in the UK. I
>understand this material suggests that such teachers teach creationism
>in science lessons and shows how they can do so even though it is not
>part of the National Curriculum.
>
>Truth in Science is an organisation wholly run and controlled by
>prominent young earth creationists in the UK. Nowhere in its literature
>or on its web site has it let it be known what their real position is
>on science.
>
>Moreover, members of the organisation have had close links with the
>highly controversial fundamentalist city academies in Northeast England
>backed by Sir Peter Vardy.
>
>As you are aware the official position of the present government is
>that creationism is not part of the National Curriculum and has no
>place in science lessons in state schools.
>
>It is very clear to me that Truth in Science is trying to hide its
>objectives and position by claiming that what it wants taught is called
>Intelligent Design rather than creationism. This has recently been
>shown in a court of law to be nothing more than creationism.
>
>I believe that neither headteachers nor governors or trustees, nor
>local education authorities nor diocese education boards of the schools
>involved were made aware by Truth in Science of material distributed
>last week.
>
>Might I also point out that material being presented by Truth in
>Science of full of scientific errors and misrepresentations.
>
>Former Schools Minister Jacqui Smith has stated that "Creationism is
>not taught as a subject in schools, and is not specified in the science
>curriculum. The National Curriculum for science clearly sets down that
>pupils should be taught that the fossil record is evidence for
>evolution, and how variation and selection may lead to evolution or
>extinction."
>
>I would like to receive your assurances that you are aware of the
>serious danger to education posed by Truth in Science.
>
>I would also like to know what action is being taken in Canterbury to
>prevent creationism being sneaked in by the backdoor without parents,
>the local education authority or school governors being aware.
>
>For background information on Truth in Science, there is a large amount
>of material at
>http://www.blackshadow.me.uk/index.php/Main/TruthInScience.
>
>Yours Sincerely
>
>Bob Carling
>
>04fed373985e11532b40/084291e4ebd4fc06f874
>(Signed with an electronic signature in accordance with subsection 7(3)
>of the Electronic Communications Act 2000.)
============================
Bob Carling
Flat 3, Underwood Court
152 Old Dover Road
Canterbury CT1 3EX, UK
Tel: 01227 464983
Mob: 07800 522724
email: bcarling@ambitnewmedia.com
http://www.ambitnewmedia.com
skype: bcarling
============================
3157
Bob Carling
Fwd: Christians and humanists call on government to rule out creationism in science classes
29/09/2006 14:35:00
From Ekkelsia Daily Email Bulletin 06-09-29
->
Christians and humanists call
on government to rule out 'creationism' in science classes
As reported in today's Times newspaper and by the BBC the Christian think
tank Ekklesia and the British Humanist Association have today written to
the UK government’s education secretary, Alan Johnson, asking him to
ensure that their guidelines are explicit in requiring teachers to
maintain a wholly scientific perspective on the matter of the origin of
species by evolution.
The move comes after a new group calling itself ‘Truth in Science’ sent a
letter and free teaching resources to all secondary heads of science
seeking space for creationist ideas, and appealed to parents through a
new website to challenge the current science teaching agenda.
Full story
(
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/content/news_syndication/article_060929create.shtml
)
Bob Carling
============================
Bob Carling
Flat 3, Underwood Court
152 Old Dover Road
Canterbury CT1 3EX, UK
Tel: 01227 464983
Mob: 07800 522724
email: bcarling@ambitnewmedia.com
http://www.ambitnewmedia.com
skype: bcarling
============================
3158
Mikey Brass
Re: Fwd: Christians and humanists call on government to rule out creationism in science classes
29/09/2006 14:41:00
Great. We need to get a letter to Ekklesia, The Times, the government
and the British Humanist Association ASAP.
I am happy for my name to be associated with such a letter.
3159
Roger Stanyard
ESF Governors
29/09/2006 15:05:00
I promised an update on this by lunchtime today. Sorry, I am a couple
of hours late.
Roger
Governors
According to Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_academies), "in terms of their
governance, Academies are established as charitable trusts with a
Governing Body that also acts as the Trust's Board of Directors (they
are legally accountable for the operation of the Academy, but not
financially so). The Trust serves as the legal entity which the
school element is part of and the Governing Body is the group that
actually oversees the running of the school (although the day to day
management of the school is, as in most schools, conducted by the
principal and their senior management team)."
My interpretation of this is that within the three Emmanuel Schools
Foundation schools, trustee, governor and director all mean the same
thing.
My understanding is that the structure of the boards of each of the
three schools is different but that requires further research to
confirm. IIRC the agreement with the DFES and ESF to establish
Trinity was significantly different from that of King's which, in
turn, was presumably different from that of Emmanuel College because
the latter was established under different legislation.
However, in broad principle, the boards look to have the same
responsibilities. They are ultimately the legal bodies responsible
for running the three schools. The Emmanuel Schools Foundation is not.
One would therefore expect the names of the directors/governors of
the three schools to be readily available in the public domain, not
least because the three are wholly funded by public money except for
the relatively small capital sums put up by the Vardy Foundation.
Not so! None of the prospectuses of the three schools names them. Nor
are they named on the web sites of the three schools or on Emmanuel
Schools Foundation's main web site. Nor does it appear that any of
the three Local Education Authorities know who the governors are. You
may well recommend asking Ofsted (the regulatory agency for education
n England and Wales). Well they don't know either. The Department for
Education and Skills? Forget it. They don't know either.
Let's have a look at this again. It's clear that parents must know
who one of the Governors is for each school as they are allowed to
elect a single governor. The Local Education Authority is allowed to
have one governor on board.
We also understand that each of the boards has at least five members.
That leaves at least three positions in the control of the Emmanuel
Schools Foundation. Three positions out of five mean that the
Foundation has absolute control of the boards of each of the schools.
Yet there appears to be no legal requirement for any independence
amongst the trustees of Emmanuel schools Foundation. They are all
appointed by the Vardy Foundation. Four of the five are members of
the Vardy family (the other is John Burn of the Christian Institute
who we regard as the real power behind the throne). There are no
Local Education Authority representatives, no parent representatives,
no governmental representatives.
The schools are thus controlled in their entirety by one family. The
Boards of the three schools thus, ultimately, have legal
responsibility but no power independent of the Vardy family. The
Board members are either Vardy placemen or can safely be ignored by
the family. The boards themselves are powerless.
Well, how does one find out who the directors/trustees of the three
schools are? We would love to know. All we have been able to put
together is an outdated list of directors of Trinity College. This
has been put together from Google searches of local newspapers. We
have found a single name from a Google search of King's and no names
at all of Emmanuel College apart from Peter Vardy as Chairman.
The web site of Emmanuel College is basically devoid of any
information. Its prospectus is devoid of any information. The
Gateshead Local Education Authority doesn't even mention Emmanuel
College on its web site of schools in its area! The 2001 Ofsted
report mentions only Peter Vardy as Chairman of the Board.
The 2005 Ofsted report on King's Academy in Middlesborough lists
Nigel McQuoid as chairman of the trustees. King's 2004/2005 Yearbook
states that Peter Vardy was then Chairman of the Board of Directors.
The Local Education Authority lists the school as in its district but
does not say who its trustee is.
It's web site also appears to be almost totally silent on who the
school's governors are.
This is what happened when we tried to find out from the Department
for Education and Skills who were the governors of the three Emmanuel
Schools Foundation schools. We assumed that we were entitled to the
information under the Freedom of Information Act.
We also assumed that the department knows who the governors are as
the governors are ultimately responsible for the appropriate spending
of government money.
During September 2006 one of the BCSE members asked (by email) the
Department for Education and Skills about the lack of any information
on the names of governors Vardy schools:
>>clip<<
"On your web site, under the heading of 'Frequently Asked Questions'
is the following:"
" How are Academies accountable to their local communities? We want
Academies to be at the heart of their communities, and expect them to
be established in consultation with local stakeholders. We have been
encouraged by the public response to the first Academies opening and
the development of future Academies. Local interests are represented
on the governing body."
"Then why is it impossible to find out who the Governors
('Directors') of the three schools are? Do you have this information?"
This is the reply the received on 27th September 2006:
>>clip<<
"Thank you for your e-mail of 24 September about the Emmanuel Schools
Foundation."
"Unfortunately the Department for Education and Skills does not
maintain a database of all Academy Governors. As registered
charities, however, the names of all the Directors (which are
normally also the Governors) of an Academy are listed on the Charity
Commission website at http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/ and this
information is open for all to see."
"The Emmanuel Schools Foundation Academies are slightly different in
that the three Academies are managed by one charitable trust, and
therefore only the names of the Directors of the central Trust are
available on the Charity Commission's website. I would therefore
suggest that you contact the Academies concerned or the Trust itself
should you have queries relating to the Governing Bodies of these
Academies"
>><<
There are no names of governors listed at the Charity Commission; nor
are any listed in the Foundations latest accounts submitted to the
Commission. What are listed are five trustees. They are David Vardy,
Peter Vardy, John Burn, Margaret Vardy and Richard Vardy. Moreover,
no trustees at all are listed for the three Vardy schools – Emmanuel,
King's and Trinity.
Our understanding is that the Foundation is managed by a governing
body, the board of trustees, who are also directors of it under
company law. The trustees are appointed by the board of the Vardy
Foundation. This, it appears, there is no LEA or parent
representation on the board of ESF and it is wholly controlled by Sir
Peter Vardy and his family.
Each of the charity's subsidiaries appoints a board of directors or
trustees in accordance with its own governing document.
We have been able to find out something about the governors (called
directors) of Trinity Academy. The information comes form the
Yorkshire Post (a regional newspaper) and a Trinity newsletter to
pupils. The names were announced in the Autumn of 2004.
This was the year or preparation before Trinity Academy was opened.
Chairman : Peter Vardy
Deputy: John Burn
Coopted Directors:
John Hair - former deputy head of Bircotes/Harworth Community School.
Listed as 'active member of The Salvation Army'.
Ernie Bridgewood - listed as 'a practising Christian' who spent 33
years teaching in Doncaster, 12 years as Head of ICT at Hall Cross
School. Has been a volunteer helper for the Christian Institute.
LEA nominated: Tony Sockett, former teacher and youth worker, Labour
councillor on Doncaster Council for Bentley. Was member for education
on elected mayor Martin Winter's cabinet when it approved the Trinity
plan. We are not aware of any religious connections
Nigel Robson, a partner in Eversheds law firm in Leeds.
Sponsor Director: Pastor Graham Johnson of The Assemblies of God
(Pentecostal) church in Thorne (known locally as the happy clappy
church - used to operate in a wooden hut but is now in a redundant
primary school).
Elected Parent Director: Martin Oldknow - was chair of governors at
Thorne Grammar when it closed. In management in local fire service.
He was secreted onto the board of Trinity when it opened. Trinity was
forced to have an election in Jan. 2006 and he was elected. He is a
Labour Councillor on Thorne/Moorends Town Council. Attended a public
meeting on harsh discipline at Trinity in Jan 2006 but did not speak
or identify himself to the 200 parents present. No known religious
links.
The parent director position is through a secret ballot of parents of
children at the school.
Press reports also suggests a local business representative has been
or may be chosen but further details are not known to us.
At King's Academy, the only name of a trustee/director that we have
found (by Google search), apart from Nigel McQuoid was Dr Alan GC
Leighton. He is a retired Anglican ordained minister and Dean of
Academic Studies, St Augustine Theological Seminary. He is a member
of the General Council of the Evangelical Alliance and Chairman of
Gilbrook College of Technology.
3160
Mikey Brass
Re: Request for Help
29/09/2006 14:55:00
I have e-mailed David Howarth, MP for Cambridge. I added in the fact
there was a YEC preacher in the centre last Sunday.
3161
Roger Stanyard
Re: Fwd: Christians and humanists call on government to rule out creationism in science classes
29/09/2006 15:21:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Mikey Brass <michael.brass@...>
wrote:
>
> Great. We need to get a letter to Ekklesia, The Times, the government
> and the British Humanist Association ASAP.
>
> I am happy for my name to be associated with such a letter.
>
Current position is as follows:
I sent a letter to the Times two days ago. What were are missing is
letters to the Times Educational Supplment and the Times Higher
Education Supplement.
The BHA emailed me privately with the BHA/Ekklesia letter to the
government two days ago. That's normal practice to leak them to the
press/reliable sources etc..
I've thanked Andrew Copson of the BHA on behalf of us all. He knows who
we are.
I agree with Mikey about the letter to the Government. I also think a
short letter to the Times, in an indivuals name, would be a good idea.
I also think it a good idea to write to Ekklesia. It's a well run
operation and I gather it has a good reputation.
Does anyone want to do some volunteering here. I have a meeting
tomorrow afternoon with three ant-creationists which is going to knock
a whole block of my free time out over the weekend.
I also have to keep clear some time to deal with the national newspaper
that's running stuff on Truth in Science following my letter. I also
need to spend a little time on coordinating the letters that are sent
to MPs.
However, I think I can find time to at least put a draft together to
letters to Westminster.
Roger
PS: Ten letters to MPs have now been sent or are about to be sent. Any
more volunteers for this very simple exercise?
3162
Roger Stanyard
Re: Request for Help
29/09/2006 15:21:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Mikey Brass <michael.brass@...>
wrote:
>
> I have e-mailed David Howarth, MP for Cambridge. I added in the fact
> there was a YEC preacher in the centre last Sunday.
>
Thanks Mikey!
3163
Michael Roberts
Re: Re: Fwd: Christians and humanists call on government to rule out creationism in science classes
29/09/2006 15:39:00
Ekklesia have already got it. Some odd vicar did that
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Stanyard" <roger@dttconsulting.fsnet.co.uk>
To: <BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 3:21 PM
Subject: [BlackShadow] Re: Fwd: Christians and humanists call on government
to rule out 'creationism' in science classes
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Mikey Brass <michael.brass@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> Great. We need to get a letter to Ekklesia, The Times, the government
>> and the British Humanist Association ASAP.
>>
>> I am happy for my name to be associated with such a letter.
>>
>
>
> Current position is as follows:
>
> I sent a letter to the Times two days ago. What were are missing is
> letters to the Times Educational Supplment and the Times Higher
> Education Supplement.
>
> The BHA emailed me privately with the BHA/Ekklesia letter to the
> government two days ago. That's normal practice to leak them to the
> press/reliable sources etc..
>
> I've thanked Andrew Copson of the BHA on behalf of us all. He knows who
> we are.
>
> I agree with Mikey about the letter to the Government. I also think a
> short letter to the Times, in an indivuals name, would be a good idea.
>
> I also think it a good idea to write to Ekklesia. It's a well run
> operation and I gather it has a good reputation.
>
> Does anyone want to do some volunteering here. I have a meeting
> tomorrow afternoon with three ant-creationists which is going to knock
> a whole block of my free time out over the weekend.
>
> I also have to keep clear some time to deal with the national newspaper
> that's running stuff on Truth in Science following my letter. I also
> need to spend a little time on coordinating the letters that are sent
> to MPs.
>
> However, I think I can find time to at least put a draft together to
> letters to Westminster.
>
> Roger
>
> PS: Ten letters to MPs have now been sent or are about to be sent. Any
> more volunteers for this very simple exercise?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
3164
JAF
Re: Request for Help
29/09/2006 16:20:00
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:51:46 -0000, you wrote:
>I would like to ask the UK members for some very simple help over the
>day or so. It will only take a few minutes of everybody's time.
>
Using the model letter given, I emailed my MP, Eliot Morley (Labour,
Scunthorpe) this afternoon. Within an hour, I received the following -
"Dear Mr Flemming,
The government position on creationism is, as you have correctly pointed
out, very clear. It has no place in science and is not recognised in any
national curriculum. This is a requirement and applies to faith schools as
well as Loughborough. I hope you are reassured by that. You cannot stop
organisations writing round but they should be open about their background
and not attempt to mislead. I don't think there is a science teacher in
this country who would fall for such nonsense. I would certainly be willing
to ask a question on this to DfES.
As an aside I visited the Museum of Natural History in Washington over the
summer and was very pleased to see the uncompromising line they had taken on
evolution. They had numerous references and links to displays and a film
theatre with an excellent presentation explaining the theory of evolution in
an entertaining and informative way, including our links to the Great Apes.
A bronze chimp statue watching the film that children could sit next to the
benches drove the point home. Given the strength of the creationists,
including in the nearby White House! it was good to see sound quality
science being presented in such a professional way.
regards
Elliot Morley MP"
Quite encouraging, I thought.
Since he stopped being a (junior) minister (at DEFRA), I get much more open
and honest replies from him. The freedom of the back-benches, eh?
--
JAF
anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
3165
Timothy Chase
Re: Re: Sharing Interests
29/09/2006 17:34:00
On 29/09/06, George Jelliss <gpjnow@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy Chase" <timothychase@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > /// it helps to sometimes share personal interests if for no other
> > reason than getting to know one another a little more.
> > For this reason I will name a few of mine.
> > My own interests include: /// the Q-beta phage up to the Step-wise
> > metabolic theory /// ; the co-evolution of phages and bacteria; the
> > role of endogenous retroviruses in the evolution of life; lateral
> > gene transfer; the role of tandem repeats in the evolution of coding,
> > regulatory and intronic sequences; the cis-regulatory system,
> > regulatory gene networks; and, evolutionary developmental biology.
> > /// it is good to find people of similar and often off-beat tastes.
>
> !! I'm afraid most of the terms in that account go right over my head.
> Biology is not something I've studied in such depth. I'm more
> interested in the broad history of science in general and cosmology
> and basic physics, like the efforts to combine quantum theory and
> relativity, but again only as an amateur spectator.
A great many of the terms and whatnot that I run across in the
technical papers go a little over my head as well. Oftentimes
different terms will be used to refer to the same thing or the same
term will be used in different ways. But if one keeps reading from
different sources, including some of the less technical material, or
one goes to the reviews, it is possible to get a broad overview and
gradually fill-in the details, look for the connections, etc.. The
technical reviews are especially helpful - they are written for
specialists in closely related fields and upcoming students. I am
still pretty new to this, but I am learning.
I of course take an interest in the history of science as well as the
philosophy of science. I try to keep up on some of the details of
cosmology. Back in high school I was something of a physics geek,
teaching myself special relativity and calculus and the basics of
general relativity and quantum mechanics.
> I studied mathematics, forty years ago, to undergraduate level and
> have continued to maintain an interest in that, but my own original
> work has been in mathematical recreations, and its interface with
> chess, which has been expressed by producing journals and magazines.
> See my home page for more:
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com.gpjnow/index.htm
I needed math for my interest in physics. Funny thing is though that
when I learned calculus, I began with integral calculus and only
afterwards went back and learned differential calculus when I realised
that what I needed most was differential calculus to begin to
understand the mathematics behind general relativity. This is of
course the reverse of how things are normally taught, but as I
understand it, this is the historical order.
I was a philosophy major. I wrote several large papers, including one
critiquing "The Critique of Pure Reason," another critiquing
Descartes' "Six Meditations on First Philosophy," and another
providing a critical analysis of the evolution of twentieth century
empiricism. Later, I took the paper on twentieth century empiricism
and started expanding it into a book which I tentatively titled "Twist
of Fate: From early twentieth century empiricism to the rebirth of
traditional philosophy." By the time I set that project down (largely
for personal reasons) I believe it was about half finished.
I did something along the lines of chess as well, creating a
three-player chess game. It was on a hexagonal grid and combined
elements of European, Chinese and Japanese chess. Currently I am a
programmer doing mostly vb6 at work and almost exclusively C# at home.
> It's only since I moved to Leicester six years ago, and found like
> minds at Leicester Secular Society, and that creationism is very
> active locally, that I've got involved with groups like this. My
> philosophical motivation is from a Rationalist point of view.
For a while I was involved in a movement of sorts over the net, but I
became disenchanted with the politics and found just take care of my
wife and myself (as well as launching a career) to be quite demanding.
But my primary interest in philosophy has been epistemology and the
philosophy of science. My basic philosophic approach is
neo-Aristotelian.
I will check out the website....
3166
Marc Draco
Re: Boris Johnson!
29/09/2006 17:41:00
Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse. However, being the
complete buffoon that Boris obviously IS could be spun in our favour
should we play it that way.
For instance: "Creationism! Boris "Jolly Hockey Sticks" Johnson agrees
with it - and he only managed to offend not just Liverpool, but more
recently an entire country!"
Course, that's off the top of my head.
Sorry if I missed anything I've been away from the computer (wife's
rules while on holiday).
What really stinks is that Cameroon himself and his party support
academies. Now that IS bad. Only the Lib-Dems (who can't decide whether
a drunk and a coffin-dodger is leading them) seem to have a proper
handle on the real peril these new super schools are creating.
Someone mentioned it before, and I remind us here, we should be standing
for parliament or local seats on the secular agenda. No faith in
politics. Even the hideous Claire Short was bumbling on about it in a
paper the other day. She cares about which way she's facing when they
find a hole big enough for her. (This to satisfy another bunch of
religious nuts.) I agree, Muslims shouldn't dictate to Christians, but
why should Christians dictate to me?
Marc
Roger Stanyard wrote:
>
> Boris Johnson needs to be watch like a hawk. He is no longer editor
> of the Spectator but is Shadow Minister for Higher Education. Johnson
> appears to be sympathetic towards creationism.
>
> In the Summer of 2002 Cecil Andrews, the itinerant Northern Ireland
> minister, young earth creationist and rabid anti-catholic sent a
> creationist video to all 659 MPs in Westminster. All but four ignored
> it. Johnson was one of the four and he also replied to Andrews.
>
> This was his reply:
>
> "Dear Mr Andrews,
>
> Thank you for your letter and for sending me a copy of the video A
> Question of Origins. You are quite right in identifying the
> controversy, which surrounds to the long-standing debate between
> those who believe in biblical creation and supporters of the theory
> of evolution. I believe this debate to be another part of a wider
> agenda which seeks to replace the Judeo Christian beliefs that
> underpin society with secularism, a product of political correctness
> and in my view with little to offer any of us. Thank you for writing.
>
> Best wishes.
>
> BORIS JOHNSON MP."
>
> Roger
>
> PS, for Americans etc amongst us Boris Johnson is regarded as an
> eccentric Member of Parliament (equivalent of a US Congressman), a
> sort of Bertie Wooster characater but, unfortunately, without the
> guiding hand of a Jeeves. Consequently he gets into all kinds of
> escapades and trouble.
>
>
3167
Michael Roberts
Re: ESF Governors
29/09/2006 16:27:00
At King's Academy, the only name of a trustee/director that we have
found (by Google search), apart from Nigel McQuoid was Dr Alan GC
Leighton. He is a retired Anglican ordained minister and Dean of
Academic Studies, St Augustine Theological Seminary. He is a member
of the General Council of the Evangelical Alliance and Chairman of
Gilbrook College of Technology.
Michael; look up the St Aug Theol seminary and Leighton. It's all very
wacky.
He is listed in Crockfords - list of all British Anglican clergy but no
mention of his two doctorates
Wierd
Yahoo! Groups Links
3168
Roger Stanyard
Re: Boris Johnson!
29/09/2006 18:20:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Sorry if I missed anything I've been away from the computer (wife's
> rules while on holiday).
>
Since you've been away Marc we got together for a long session in the
pub and have all decided to become fundies.
Roger
3169
oeditor
YEC is a cult - shout it loud!
29/09/2006 18:36:00
I posted this as a reply on SJS, but it didn't attract much enthusiasm.
"Wikipedia has quite a bit to say about cults.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult
"In religion and sociology, a cult is a cohesive group of people
(often a relatively small and recently founded religious movement)
devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or
society considers to be far outside the mainstream. Its separate
status may come about either due to its novel belief system, because
of its idiosyncratic practices or because it opposes the interests of
the mainstream culture."
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
I think it's as good a label as any and needs writing in large letters
and sticking on them at every possible opportunity."
SJS seemed a bit picky about exact meaning and usage, but what the
hell: mud sticks, as the cretinists well know.
Brian
3170
John Germain
RE: Re: Boris Johnson!
29/09/2006 18:46:00
Thanks, Roger, I knew there was something I'd forgotten!
(Note to self: Keep the fag packets when they're empty..)
Someone handy with graphics could knock something up a la Ascent of Man with
Boris on his
rusty steed, perhaps....
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
-----Original Message-----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Roger
Stanyard
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 6:21 PM
Since you've been away Marc we got together for a long session in the
pub and have all decided to become fundies.
Roger
3171
JAF
Re: Re: Emmanuel''s governors (No news).
29/09/2006 19:23:00
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:09:04 -0000, you wrote:
>> >
>> Would you object to me C&P-ing that, and replying to the DfES with it?
>> --
>> JAF
>> anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
>>
>JAF, not at all, feel free.
>
>However, I am doing some more research on it and it may be worth
>hanging fire until after lunch tomorrow.
>
>Roger
>
Very well. Holding on.
--
JAF
anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
3172
Timothy Chase
Check it out: New Entry on [Aetiology]: More anti-evolution rumblings in the UK
29/09/2006 19:38:00
I just got this from one of the blogs that I subscribe to and thought
that it might be of interest...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: webmaster@seedmediagroup.com <webmaster@seedmediagroup.com>
Date: 29 Sep 2006 10:07:47 -0400
Subject: New Entry on [Aetiology]: More anti-evolution rumblings in the UK
To: timothychase@gmail.com
Summary:
Via Dean and Science, Just Science comes this story about a new group
trying to get ID into class in the UK: Parents are being encouraged to
challenge their children's science teachers over what they are
explaining as the origins...
View the entire entry:
http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2006/09/more_antievolution_rumblings_i.php
-------------------------------------------
Change/Cancel your subscriptions:
http://scienceblogs.com/cgi-bin/MT/plugins/Notifier/mt-notifier.cgi
-------------------------------------------
--
MT-Notifier v3.4.4x
http://www.everitz.com/
--
Evolving Perspectives
http://evolvingperspectives.blogspot.com
3173
Marc Draco
Re: Re: Boris Johnson!
29/09/2006 22:22:00
AHHH! Someone pinch me - I'm having a nightmare!
Actually, I am here too. The computerised fish feed has overfed my
precious marine tank several times over - and now I'm battling like mad
to keep everything alive. I love Butlins, but boy, I hate holidays!
Marc
Roger Stanyard wrote:
>
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
> <BlackShadow%40yahoogroups.com>, Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Sorry if I missed anything I've been away from the computer (wife's
> > rules while on holiday).
> >
>
> Since you've been away Marc we got together for a long session in the
> pub and have all decided to become fundies.
>
> Roger
>
>
3174
Roger Stanyard
Re: Check it out: New Entry on [Aetiology]: More anti-evolution rumblings in the UK
29/09/2006 23:57:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy Chase"
<timothychase@...> wrote:
>
> I just got this from one of the blogs that I subscribe to and
thought
> that it might be of interest...
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: webmaster@... <webmaster@...>
> Date: 29 Sep 2006 10:07:47 -0400
> Subject: New Entry on [Aetiology]: More anti-evolution rumblings in
the UK
> To: timothychase@...
>
>
> Summary:
>
> Via Dean and Science, Just Science comes this story about a new
group
> trying to get ID into class in the UK: Parents are being encouraged
to
> challenge their children's science teachers over what they are
> explaining as the origins...
>
>
Dean is actually a member of Blackshadow as well as SJS. I met him
about six weeks ago in London. Very bright, very likeable. He put in
a big effort into setting up Science Just Science.
3175
Roger Stanyard
New Member
30/09/2006 08:38:00
Again, I am pleased to announce a new member.
He goes under the ID dr_adequate amd has been in the JREF forums.
He says that "Creationism is my bugbear, and now it's getting this
close to home, I think I should help do something about it."
Welcome Dr Adequate.
Roger
3176
Marc Draco
Re: God News! (God? news)
30/09/2006 09:23:00
Nice one Roger! I wish the damn tabloids would get behind this. The
problem is we need to educate "normal" people. Broadsheets primarily
talk to the pulpit. How about the red-tops?
The Mail is useless, of course, they have a load of Xians on staff and
campaign against things they nothing (or worse, a little) about - like
GM food, for example.
The Sun: I can never get to grips with, likewise the The Mirror and The
Express. All of these have strong influence in the sector we're aiming
for. It might be worth setting one or two against the the others. The
problem is they all seem to bow to Christian (and big money) pressure
rather than reporting the facts. Active Christians are a minority in
this country now, but they make an awful row.
The Sport (much as I loathe it) could be useful in spoofing the Cretins
but again, I don't know where they stand.
Correction: my allusion to Claire Short was meant to be the equally
awful Anne Widdicomb..
Roger Stanyard wrote:
>
> I have just had a call from a national newspaper following my letter to
> it about Truth in Science.
>
> They are following it up with an article which will be published in w
> week or so.
>
> I'm keeping mum about the name of the newspaper but it is one all the
> UK people in this group know about (it's a broadsheet).
>
> Roger
>
>
3177
Roger Stanyard
Truth in Science: Fossil Hoaxes
30/09/2006 10:30:00
Fundies are foreever shouting their mouths off about The Piltdown man
hoax but I haven't seen any well written counterblast to this which
shows the list of creationist fossil hoaxes - you know, the human
footprints that have been chissled out of rock and the stuff out of
Mexico.
Does anyone know ehere there is a list of fundie hoaxes (or does
nyone want to do an article on it)?
I ask becaue Truth in Science is trying to use Piltdown Man to
discredited science and I would like to see and post a counterblast:
"This subject is an interesting one, and sometimes neglected. For
example, in this week's issue of the leading science journal Nature,
a correspondent draws attention to the ease with which past fossil
hoaxes are forgotten:
I was surprised that you managed to discuss palaeoanthropological
controversies in your Editorial "Rude palaeoanthropology" (Nature
442, 957–958) without mentioning Piltdown man. The discovery of
this 'missing link' in 1912 caused a stir, during the period between
the Neanderthal and Australopithecus africanus disputes that you
mention. Debate about it continued until it was exposed as a hoax in
1953.
Simon L. Goodman Nature 443, 394 (28 September 2006)."
Roger
3178
oeditor
Has this group been down?
30/09/2006 18:17:00
There are no posts in the 9 hours between Marc's and Rogers. I've sent
a post, and reposted it, in that period. It may be just me though -
has anyone else had missing posts?
I'll send it again - about McIntosh
Brian
3179
Timothy Chase
Re: God News! (God? news)
30/09/2006 14:57:00
On 30/09/06, Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Nice one Roger! I wish the damn tabloids would get behind this. The
> problem is we need to educate "normal" people. Broadsheets primarily
> talk to the pulpit. How about the red-tops?
I agree that it is important to educate "normal" people, both in the
moderate and long-term. However, it is just as important in the
short-term if not more so to educate the educated - on the threat
posed by creationism and the extent to which they have already
insinuated themselves into the educational system. The educated are
more likely to be in places of power, to have resources, and to write
to newspapers or lobby politicians. They have the potential of
greatly increasing the reach of this organisation.
> The Mail is useless, of course, they have a load of Xians on staff and
> campaign against things they nothing (or worse, a little) about - like
> GM food, for example.
> The Sun: I can never get to grips with, likewise the The Mirror and The
> Express. All of these have strong influence in the sector we're aiming
> for. It might be worth setting one or two against the the others. The
> problem is they all seem to bow to Christian (and big money) pressure
> rather than reporting the facts. Active Christians are a minority in
> this country now, but they make an awful row.
>
> The Sport (much as I loathe it) could be useful in spoofing the Cretins
> but again, I don't know where they stand.
>
> Correction: my allusion to Claire Short was meant to be the equally
> awful Anne Widdicomb..
We should definitely think about pitching this in such papers - they
will extend our reach and provide us with the opportunity to bring
more on board. I just wouldn't lose sight of the importance of the
well-educated.
3180
oeditor
McIntosh (3rd time lucky?)
30/09/2006 18:19:00
I've posted this twice already, but it vanished....
Seeking yet more evidence of Andy McIntosh's committment to
creationism, I've found some (audio) lectures by him, which can be
listened to online or downloaded. I was going to work through them,
but having heard a few snatches I'm not sure I have the stamina
to listen to him going on for over threee hours. Anyone interested can
find them at http://tinyurl.com/k55uj The one entitled "Science...with
a Bible First Mentality" seems to be him interviewed by Ken Ham.
It's Answers In Genesis, and is the result of a search. If it's gone,
just go to http://www.evolutionthelie.net/answersmedia/ and search on
the cretinist of your choice.
Enjoy!
Brian
3181
oeditor
Re: Truth in Science: Fossil Hoaxes
30/09/2006 18:28:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>
> Fundies are foreever shouting their mouths off about The Piltdown man
> hoax
Typical fundie rubbish - one swallow doesn't make a summer.Finding one
or two hoaxes doesn't mean, as they imply, that the whole of
paleontology is a fake. Any more than the possibility that the speed
of light has changed minutely over billions of years means that those
billions were in fact 10,000 years or less.
Anyway, IIRC the Piltdown thing was a personally-motivated spoof and I
seem to recall that a more recent Chinese one was for money. It led to
the finding of a real intermediate anyway.
Brian
3182
Roger Stanyard
Re: Has this group been down?
30/09/2006 23:35:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
> There are no posts in the 9 hours between Marc's and Rogers. I've sent
> a post, and reposted it, in that period. It may be just me though -
> has anyone else had missing posts?
>
> I'll send it again - about McIntosh
>
> Brian
>
I can't find anything wrong. I've been away from my PC for about ten
hours - has a meeting with Tim Aktinson and also with Alex Labram of
Science Just Science.
Lots to say and lots of detail discussed.
The general consensus is that we had a big success last week
with our first campiagn - against Truth in Science - and we have some
big areas to follow up.
I am tired and just about to hit the sack so I'll work on it tomorrow.
Roger
3183
John Germain
Worship in Schools
30/09/2006 21:25:00
http://tinyurl.com/obh4n
John Germain
Jersey
British Channel Islands
3184
Roger Stanyard
Re: God News! (God? news)
30/09/2006 10:36:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...>
wrote:
>
> Nice one Roger! I wish the damn tabloids would get behind this. The
> problem is we need to educate "normal" people. Broadsheets
primarily
> talk to the pulpit. How about the red-tops?
>
Mark,
I have a meet up with two anti-creationists today and I'll bring the
matter up. Methinks it's a long-term issue but who knows?
In the meanwhile, is there any chance I could get you to write to
your MP complaining about Truth in Science? I have already posted a
draft in this group so it's just adding details about your name and
address and the name and address of your MP.
We now, with SJS, have about 15 letters sent (or just about to be
sent) by members to their local MPs.
Roger
.
> The Mail is useless, of course, they have a load of Xians on staff
and
> campaign against things they nothing (or worse, a little) about -
like
> GM food, for example.
>
> The Sun: I can never get to grips with, likewise the The Mirror and
The
> Express. All of these have strong influence in the sector we're
aiming
> for. It might be worth setting one or two against the the others.
The
> problem is they all seem to bow to Christian (and big money)
pressure
> rather than reporting the facts. Active Christians are a minority
in
> this country now, but they make an awful row.
>
> The Sport (much as I loathe it) could be useful in spoofing the
Cretins
> but again, I don't know where they stand.
>
> Correction: my allusion to Claire Short was meant to be the equally
> awful Anne Widdicomb..
>
> Roger Stanyard wrote:
> >
> > I have just had a call from a national newspaper following my
letter to
> > it about Truth in Science.
> >
> > They are following it up with an article which will be published
in w
> > week or so.
> >
> > I'm keeping mum about the name of the newspaper but it is one all
the
> > UK people in this group know about (it's a broadsheet).
> >
> > Roger
> >
> >
>
3185
Dave Oldridge
Re: New Message
01/10/2006 01:29:00
On 29 Sep 2006 at 9:33, Rudy Vonk wrote:
> On 29 sep 2006, at 01:05, Dave Oldridge wrote:
>
> > On 27 Sep 2006 at 20:50, John Germain wrote:
> >
> > > I was hoping for some good restaurant tips near the Holy
> See,
> > > Dave...
> >
> > Never been there. Probably not going there. But I can point
> to
> > some of our better spots here!
>
> Stay on the same side of the river: Ristorante Sabatini - Piazza
> S.
> Maria in Trastevere 13.
Well, if I ever get there, at least I'll be able to read the
menu! French is my second language.
--
Dave Oldridge
ICQ 1800667
VA7CZ
3186
Michael Roberts
Re: McIntosh (3rd time lucky?)
30/09/2006 20:41:00
McIntosh is 10001% Young Earth Creationist (I always prefer that term or YEC
for short - pronounced yuk) and this is absolutely clear in his little book
Genesis for Today (pub by Dayone Publications). The first part is on the
ethical value of Genesis and a fair proportion I agree with. I diverge over
his insistence of a literal Genesis of course and his overly black and white
ethics. In it he has 3 scientific appendices which a full of YEC "science of
abysmal quality. He makes it clear throughout the book he believes in a few
thousand year old earth.
For someone like me whose theology is more or less evangelical and orthodox,
I find that he has no grasp of the literary nature of the bible and uses it
like a Haynes Manual in literal 21st century language rather than a
collection of writings of 2 to 3000 years ago, written in the thought forms
of the day. (In this it is I that is old-fashioned and traditional as my
views not only go back to Calvin's ideas of the accommodation of the Bible
but also back to Augustine - on this read McMullin's chapter on Galileo and
the Bible in the "Cambridge Companion to Galileo - an excellent book. The
literalism McIntosh and YECs go for began to creep in after the Reformation
and then grew like mad around 1900 in American fundamentalism and seems
almost to be the default position of many evangelicals all over the world.)
His views on the resurrection are most odd and are no better than kiddies at
Sunday school saying Jesus came back to life again.
I better not continue on this but there is a world of difference between
McIntosh and YECs and mainstream evangelicals eg The bishop of Durham.
Michael
My comments of McI's geology
THE GEOLOGY OF GENESIS FOR TODAY
In Genesis for Today McIntosh gives three scientific appendices. I could
either go through and nit-pick his geological errors or consider them under
main headings. I have chosen the latter.
ASSUMPTION OF GRADUAL DEPOSITION
McIntosh claims that "Uniformitarian geologists" assume that all strata were
deposited slowly, and makes this claim on p185-6, p186, line 17-8; p195
lines16-20 (citing Andrews); p198 line 16 ff (largely citing Austin),
p199-201 on fossilized tree trunks.
This is simply a false claim as geologists make no such assumption and for
centuries have been aware of varying rates of deposition.
On p186 the allegation of "this assumption of gradual deposition" is false
negating what he says about the working out of geological history aka the
geological column. A familiarity of the history of geology (see MJS Rudwick,
Bursting the Limits of Time, 2005) and any other work on the history of
geology will refute this claim. In fact the contrary is true as most early
geologists before 1830 were Catastrophists and had no clear idea of
geological time and varied from young, middle or old earth in perspective!
In the 1790s Smith was young earth but accepted an old earth from the
evidence he found soon after 1800.
P193 gives Andrews misrepresentation of geologists "supposed
evolutionary slow rate of formation of rock strata". When someone, even with
a D.Sc makes such elementary errors they can be safely ignored.
P197-199 deals with mudflows. McIntosh gives the impression that
catastrophic events and deposition have long been denied by geologists. That
is simply not the case, even by Lyell, though it must be said that from 1840
to 1970 many geologists had an aversion to catastrophe. However geologists
have long known that erosion can occur very rapidly despite what Austin is
quoted as saying on p 198.
The section of Fossilized Tree Trunks p199-201 is similarly
flawed. Taking the example of "polystrate fossils" or tree trunks, no
geologist has ever said that these were exposed for millions of years.
Further they were in swamps not at "the bottom of the ocean" The quote from
Morris is risible. The main paragraph on p200 contains much error. No
geologist says trunks were exposed for "at least a million years". Further
if mudflows carried the tree trunks to their positions (and cleverly
deposited them mostly vertically!) how can one explain that fossil trees are
in sandstones and are now of sandstone and not in mudstone, shale or
siltstone? The quotes referring to millions of years from J D Morris are
simply misrepresentation as no geologist says that.
One needs to explain how all the mud from the postulated
mudflows has disappeared without trace!
In reference to Austin and Nevins' comments on the coal measures
(which are the same person as Austin used the name Nevins when working for
his Ph D at Penn State) the standard interpretations of coal deposition do
not eliminate an element of catastrophism. Fred Broadhurst of Manchester
argued with evidence that the deposition of coal seams individually took
tens of thousands of years whereas the much thicker intervening sandstones
were deposited rapidly. No geologist would say otherwise that sands are
deposited speedily and muds and silts slowly. There have been many careful
sedimentological studies on this type of question. Finally geology has
advanced a little since the days of Lyell, excellent geologist though he
was!
CIRCULAR ARGUMENT IN GEOLOGICAL DATING
On p 187 McIntosh writes, "The cyclical nature of the reasoning
now becomes apparent.." And then cites J D Morris, who basically reiterates
the accusations made by his father in his many books. (The Genesis Flood
p130-6, Scientific Creationism p 94ff,) and repeated by many other writers.
This is false for several reasons. First, much of the geological
column was worked out without the use of fossils as it was by workers before
1810 or so and by Sedgwick on the Cambrian in the 1830s. Secondly the
Geological Column was worked out in considerable detail well before 1859 by
geologists who rejected evolution. (To take the Palaeozoic -Cambrian,
Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous and Permian, the main workers
were Sedgwick, Murchison and Conybeare who rejected evolution, and worked
out the historical order from a combination of superposition (i.e. the order
of strata) and the use of fossils interpreted in an anti-evolutionary way).
Sedgwick and Conybeare were evangelical Anglican clergy as well; Sedgwick
both taught Darwin geology and opposed The Origin.
The use of fossils in stratigraphy is derivative from the
Principle of Superposition, which is an extension of the law of gravity;
i.e. the stuff at the bottom of a pile got their first (unless
someone/something squeezed it in later) and was first put forward by Steno
in the 1660s. During the 18th this was applied by various "geologists" e.g.
Strachey, and Michell, who produced a geological column from the coal beds
to the chalk, now known as Carboniferous to Cretaceous. Work exploded in the
late 18th century over all of Europe and Hutton was only one of many. The
use of fossils to "date" was developed by Smith and Cuvier in particular
(both anti-evolution) because they were empirically found to come in the
same order wherever you went. This was in Europe first and then further
afield. This is well explained in Rudwick's Bursting the Limits of Time.
The pen-ultimate sentence at the end of the section on p187 is
meaningless. The last sentence is simply wrong, as all Pre-Cambrian strata
have been put in historical order WITHOUT the use of any fossils. I did this
personally in South Africa where I mapped a large area of late Precambrian
strata in the NW Cape, without any fossils to help except a lone
stromatolite. I worked out my own geological column, as I was only the third
geologist to map this area in 1970 for a mining company when Alfred Kroner
was doing it for Univ of Cape Town. (The previous geologists were Rogers in
the 1910s and de Villiers and Sohnge in the 40s, who basically agreed with
my re-writing of the local column and is what is now accepted for the whole
area.) So much for it being impossible! Also Sedgwick mapped much of North
Wales without fossils and all historical geology is in principle possible
without fossils, but they do make life easier.
The order of fossils in historical sequence has been worked out
by sheer observation e.g. trilobites only in the Palaeozoic and then
particular trilobites in certain strata. This information, since 1859 has
been used as evidence for evolution (or more strictly in Darwin's notebooks
from 1838). Some geologists do put this in terms of circular reasoning e.g.
R H Rastall, but have failed to understand the way that the Geological
Column and the fossil succession was elucidated. There is no circular
argument as its basis. However if you found a fossil dinosaur you can be
fairly sure that you are in Jurassic or Cretaceous sediments.
ERRORS ON RADIOMETRIC AGE-DATING
A good summary of radiometric age dating by a Christian is to be found at
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html. So I will not deal with
general issues. McIntosh raises the usual objections, which have been dealt
with by Wiens and Talkorigins. However I will note some other errors.
P186 line 11. This is misleading, as fossils are obviously not dated by
radiometric means. But then he is false when he says that methods can only
be used on igneous rock. They are widely used on metamorphic rock of all
kinds and accessional on sedimentary rocks. He clearly has not grasped how
radiometric methods are used to give dates. E.g. lavas and other igneous
rocks give dates, so if a lava is dated at say 320my then the strata
adjacent are about the same age etc. He gets more confused on p190 l3 on
K/Ar dating and only mentions volcanic rock, overlooking plutonic and
metamorphic rocks and the occasional sediments.
On p 195 he discusses an 1801 eruption in Hawaii, and fails to
record what the papers cited which gave such a wide range of dates were
about. One was to test how accurate the method was and the other giving
results of billions was not on lava, but on ultramafic inclusions within the
lava, whereas the host lava gave young ages with acceptable limits of error.
I will respond by saying of McIntosh's unintentional misrepresentation,
"This hardly inspires confidence." Sadly the quote from Andrews on page 195
does not inspire confidence either, and he also misrepresents radiometric
age-dating both in print and in public lectures. Having read the original
papers from the 60s on these determinations I am appalled by the way that
for 30years they have been misquoted, even though Brent Dalrymple exposed
all this misquotation in 1982. It beggars belief.
As for the Cardenas Basalt of the Grand Canyon, I refer readers
to the talkorigins site as this explains better than I can.
CONCLUSION
McIntosh has clearly misunderstood the principles of geology and his
arguments are usually fallacious. This may be due to the fact that he relies
on unreliable sources like Henry and John Morris, Edgar Andrews and other
YEC writers. It is tragic that he has not applied his scientific skills to
geology and thus opens himself up to charges of incompetence and
misrepresentation. What would he say if I claimed that a mixture of 2 parts
of hydrogen to one of oxygen was non-inflammable?
Michael Roberts
13 September 2006
----- Original Message -----
From: "oeditor" <b-jordan@lineone.net>
To: <BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 6:19 PM
Subject: [BlackShadow] McIntosh (3rd time lucky?)
> I've posted this twice already, but it vanished....
> Seeking yet more evidence of Andy McIntosh's committment to
> creationism, I've found some (audio) lectures by him, which can be
> listened to online or downloaded. I was going to work through them,
> but having heard a few snatches I'm not sure I have the stamina
> to listen to him going on for over threee hours. Anyone interested can
> find them at http://tinyurl.com/k55uj The one entitled "Science...with
> a Bible First Mentality" seems to be him interviewed by Ken Ham.
> It's Answers In Genesis, and is the result of a search. If it's gone,
> just go to http://www.evolutionthelie.net/answersmedia/ and search on
> the cretinist of your choice.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
3187
Michael Roberts
Re: God News! (God? news)
30/09/2006 20:54:00
Marc
Please realise that many Christians like me object to the pathetic religious
comment in many of our papers.
I am unaware that the Mail has Christians on their staff as I get fed up
with parishioners who give me article s from the Mail on church issues. I
usually explain why they are wrong!! The Mail seems to think that the cof E
should only have boring services, no hymns after 1800, never discuss any
ethical or social issue unless an extreme right wing agenda is followed and
so on.
I am pleased to say that the Express recently published a vitriolic attack
on one of my colleagues Philip Gray who is the Bishop's Chaplain i.e. his
aide de camp , chief admin guy etc for an article he wrote in a diocesan
newsletter.(details on Blackburn diocese site - also two articles on mine on
science)
If these daily rags have a Christian agenda, then I think I better become an
atheist!!
Of course these papers influence people including church members as I know
to my cost, but then 20 years ago I was told that I was worse than the Red
Dean of Canterbury but not as bad as Bishop David Sheppard, after preaching
a sermon during Christian Aid week
Simon Barrow might want to comment
Michael.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc Draco" <midnight.diamond@ntlworld.com>
To: <BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: [BlackShadow] God News! (God? news)
> Nice one Roger! I wish the damn tabloids would get behind this. The
> problem is we need to educate "normal" people. Broadsheets primarily
> talk to the pulpit. How about the red-tops?
>
> The Mail is useless, of course, they have a load of Xians on staff and
> campaign against things they nothing (or worse, a little) about - like
> GM food, for example.
>
> The Sun: I can never get to grips with, likewise the The Mirror and The
> Express. All of these have strong influence in the sector we're aiming
> for. It might be worth setting one or two against the the others. The
> problem is they all seem to bow to Christian (and big money) pressure
> rather than reporting the facts. Active Christians are a minority in
> this country now, but they make an awful row.
>
> The Sport (much as I loathe it) could be useful in spoofing the Cretins
> but again, I don't know where they stand.
>
> Correction: my allusion to Claire Short was meant to be the equally
> awful Anne Widdicomb..
>
> Roger Stanyard wrote:
>>
>> I have just had a call from a national newspaper following my letter to
>> it about Truth in Science.
>>
>> They are following it up with an article which will be published in w
>> week or so.
>>
>> I'm keeping mum about the name of the newspaper but it is one all the
>> UK people in this group know about (it's a broadsheet).
>>
>> Roger
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
3188
Lenny Flank
Re: Truth in Science: Fossil Hoaxes
30/09/2006 21:10:00
>
> Does anyone know ehere there is a list of fundie hoaxes
Paluxy "manprints".
The "Jurassic human tooth".
The "Jurassic human finger".
The "trilobite that was stepped on by a sandal".
The "pre-Cambrian pollen".
That's just for starters.
In fairness, most of these were gross creationist incompetence, not
deliberate fraud.
>
> I ask becaue Truth in Science is trying to use Piltdown Man to
> discredited science and I would like to see and post a counterblast:
>
Try this:
First, it was EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGISTS, not creation "scientists", who
discovered the Piltdown fraud. The creation 'scientists" were just
standing around looking stupid.
Second, many of those evolutionary biologists rejected Piltdown right
from the beginning, since it did not fit into the established fossil
sequence. While most did not suspect outright fraud, many of them DID
suspect (and argue out loud) that the jawbone and the skull simply
did not belong together.
Third, the evolutionary biologists (not creation 'scientists') who
discovered the fraud did it using RADIO-DATING techniques --- the
very same ones that creationuts keep telling us are so wildly
inaccurate and unreliable.
And finally, since creationists reject both radio-dating AND the
order of the fossil record, they have NO BASIS AT ALL upon which to
declare that Piltdown is a fake anyway. Not only did the creation
'scientists' not discover the Pitldown fraud (remember, they were
just standing there looking stupid), but they COULD not have, since
they "don't believe in" the very things that led evolutionary
biologists to suspect and then demonstrate that it WAS a fraud.
So please by all means tell me, Mr Creation "Scientist", since
creationists reject radio-dating and the order of the fossil record,
why you think Piltdown IS a fake. . . . . . ?
===================================
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
3189
Timothy Chase
Re: Has this group been down?
30/09/2006 21:05:00
On 30/09/06, oeditor <b-jordan@lineone.net> wrote:
>
> There are no posts in the 9 hours between Marc's and Rogers. I've sent
> a post, and reposted it, in that period. It may be just me though -
> has anyone else had missing posts?
>
> I'll send it again - about McIntosh
I just figured that most people were taking time off for the holiday.
As for myself, I was at work until late, then collecting some material
on the web this morning and will probably be doing a little
programming at home, personal emails, etc., but I intend to look at it
later today - assuming they don't have me go in to work. One of my
bosses just called me, but he wasn't insisting on my going in as of
yet. There is some good news, though: they aren't expecting me to
have two weeks work done in two and a half days any more - I should
have a week.
A real mess as usual at my company - we ended up doing one build at
least six different times in a two-week period and two different
revisions for the same customer on the same day - with one presumably
being the general acceptance version and the other being the beta for
the next revision. The build process is a real Rube Goldberg held
together with paperclips, rubberbands and chewing gum, too. I try to
stay away from sharp objects when at work...
3190
Timothy Chase
Re: Has this group been down?
01/10/2006 03:30:00
Boss insisted on my going into work. It is 7:30 PM. This will be the
seventh build. Round trip should be five or six hours.
Whoopee!
3191
Lenny Flank
Re: Re: Truth in Science: Fossil Hoaxes
30/09/2006 21:12:00
> >
> Anyway, IIRC the Piltdown thing was a personally-motivated spoof and I
> seem to recall that a more recent Chinese one was for money. It led to
> the finding of a real intermediate anyway.
>
Indeed, it should be pointed out that the Chinese fossil was NOT a
"fake" -- it was two legitimate fossils that were illegitimately
pieced together to increase the monetary value. Not a single part of
it was faked, and indeed one of the two species was actually a
previously unknown species that has since been recognized and
scientifically described.
===================================
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
3192
oeditor
McIntosh At Large 2000-01
30/09/2006 15:01:00
Seeking yet more evidence of Andy McIntosh's committment to
creationism, I've found some (audio) lectures by him, which can be
listened to online or downloaded. I was going to work through them,
but having heard a few snatches I'm not sure I have the stamina
to listen to him going on for over threee hours. Anyone interested can
find them at http://tinyurl.com/k55uj The one entitled "Science...with
a Bible First Mentality" seems to be him interviewed by Ken Ham.
It's Answers In Genesis, and is the result of a search. If it's gone,
just go to http://www.evolutionthelie.net/answersmedia/ and search on
the cretinist of your choice.
Enjoy!
Brian
3193
oeditor
McIntosh At Large 2000-01 (repost)
30/09/2006 16:14:00
I've posted this once, but it vanished....
Seeking yet more evidence of Andy McIntosh's committment to
creationism, I've found some (audio) lectures by him, which can be
listened to online or downloaded. I was going to work through them,
but having heard a few snatches I'm not sure I have the stamina
to listen to him going on for over threee hours. Anyone interested can
find them at http://tinyurl.com/k55uj The one entitled "Science...with
a Bible First Mentality" seems to be him interviewed by Ken Ham.
It's Answers In Genesis, and is the result of a search. If it's gone,
just go to http://www.evolutionthelie.net/answersmedia/ and search on
the cretinist of your choice.
Enjoy!
Brian
3194
Roger Stanyard
Re: Emmanuel''s governors (No news).
30/09/2006 09:53:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, JAF <anarch@...> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:09:04 -0000, you wrote:
>
> >> >
> >> Would you object to me C&P-ing that, and replying to the DfES
with it?
> >> --
> >> JAF
> >> anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
> >>
> >JAF, not at all, feel free.
> >
> >However, I am doing some more research on it and it may be worth
> >hanging fire until after lunch tomorrow.
> >
> >Roger
> >
> Very well. Holding on.
JAF,
I've gone as far as I can go know with the issue of ESF governors. I
posted the full research in this group yesterday. It's over to you.
Roger
> --
> JAF
> anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
>
3195
Roger Stanyard
Re: McIntosh (3rd time lucky?)
01/10/2006 08:44:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Roberts"
<michael.andrea.r@...> wrote:
>
> McIntosh is 10001% Young Earth Creationist (I always prefer that
term or YEC
> for short - pronounced yuk) and this is absolutely clear in his
little book
> Genesis for Today (pub by Dayone Publications). The first part is
on the
> ethical value of Genesis and a fair proportion I agree with. I
diverge over
> his insistence of a literal Genesis of course and his overly black
and white
> ethics. In it he has 3 scientific appendices which a full of
YEC "science of
> abysmal quality. He makes it clear throughout the book he believes
in a few
> thousand year old earth.
>
> For someone like me whose theology is more or less evangelical and
orthodox,
> I find that he has no grasp of the literary nature of the bible and
uses it
> like a Haynes Manual in literal 21st century language rather than a
> collection of writings of 2 to 3000 years ago
It is one of the bigger puzzles to me why McIntosh should have such a
simplistic view of the world. I was a contemporary of his at what was
then Cranfield Institute of Technology. That's where he did has PhD.
The engineers were regarded by the management school people
as "welders", partly because of their very narrow educational
backgrounds.
I have a distinct feeling that McIntosh has difficult seeing outside
of his core competenace. Talented though he is at chemical
engineering, he is no polymath.
Roger
3196
George Jelliss
Re: God News! (God? news)
01/10/2006 09:49:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy Chase"
<timothychase@...> wrote:
>
> On 30/09/06, Marc Draco <midnight.diamond@...> wrote:
> >
> > Nice one Roger! I wish the damn tabloids would get behind this.
> > The problem is we need to educate "normal" people. Broadsheets
> > primarily
> > talk to the pulpit. How about the red-tops?
>
> I agree that it is important to educate "normal" people, both
> > in the
> moderate and long-term. However, it is just as important in the
> short-term if not more so to educate the educated - on the threat
> posed by creationism and the extent to which they have already
> insinuated themselves into the educational system.
> > The educated are more likely to be in places of power, to
> > have resources, and to write
> to newspapers or lobby politicians. They have the potential of
> greatly increasing the reach of this organisation.
>
///
Last year I joined the local Geology group
(http://www.charnia.org.uk/), partly out of interest but also to try
to raise awareness among the qualified people there of the exchange
of correspondence at that time in the Leicester Mercury (which is a
daily local paper) between the local creationists (Answers in
Genesis) and secularists supporting evolution. My efforts however
were unsuccessful in getting anyone to write to the paper.
I suspect most of the people I met there don't bother to read the
local paper (I've given up on it lately myself), since it is rather
repetitive and although it covers the occasional science story (like
the Beagle 2 to Mars and the National Space Centre) it has a
definite religious and superstitious bias (astrology, ghost stories,
alternative medicine, etc).
My attempt to get them to replace the daily quotation from the King
James Bible, or to include some genuine philosophical thoughts for
the day, only resulted in them putting in two quotes every day, one
from the bible and the other from equally obscure Hindu or Muslim
scriptures. I must have another go at them on that!
3197
Mikey Brass
Saw our YEC friend...
01/10/2006 10:17:00
We saw our YEC friend preaching in the city centre mid-day yesterday. We
didn't have time to stop and rubbish him. However (a) he was being
heckled by a couple of other people (I mean, it is Cambridge for
goodness sake! Not to sound snobbish but it is generally a bright town),
and (b) Isabelle waved and yelled out "HELLO!" to him and he turned his
head away!
3198
Marc Draco
Re: God News! (God? news)
01/10/2006 12:56:00
I'll wait to see what Simon has to say.
For myself I'm a vitriolic secularist; so please take into account that
when I "diss" belief, it's out of a sense of disbelief, lack of
understanding of the need for it and observation that for the most part,
it only brings misery and suffering into our lives.
Ghandi and Mother Teresa are worshiped as saints, yet they had hidden
agendas that makes me wonder if they were really any better than Mo.
Having Aspergers syndrome (not to mention several nasty experiences with
Evangelical and "normal" Christians too during my teens) I tend to see
the religious world in black and white terms.
The creationist debacle only serves to throw that hate, and it is hate
make no mistake, into sharper relief. Frankly, with the exceptions of
those present here, Christians (like so-called moderate Muslims) are the
worst offenders and not routing out the problem elements in their midst.
Christians have let Tony Blair and Dubya run roughshod over our secular
rights, because it suits your ideals. Course, when they got out of hand,
it was too late and now we're fighting for the life of proper science
and governance without intervention from the supernatural.
Look at the Alpha course: all smiles, cheer and aimed at confused young
folk: but with a frankly political agenda that serves no real purpose
other than to promote a particular branch of US-originated Christianity.
Yet question these people at their own game (by challenging Pascal's
Wager, for instance) and you're "encouraged" to leave. This isn't free
speech, it's a type of brainwashing previously the preserve of the
Scientology movement.
Creationism is based on one dumb allegory. Sure. But so are many more in
the bible - yet the anti-creationist Christians continue to take them on
face value. For instance, there isn't a scrap of archaeological evidence
to support, say, Exodus - not one single thing. Yet it's taken as read
that it's a historical event. One example of many but is it really so
different to believing/not believing Genesis?
Michael Roberts wrote:
>
> Marc
>
> Please realise that many Christians like me object to the pathetic
> religious
> comment in many of our papers.
>
> I am unaware that the Mail has Christians on their staff as I get fed up
> with parishioners who give me article s from the Mail on church issues. I
> usually explain why they are wrong!! The Mail seems to think that the
> cof E
> should only have boring services, no hymns after 1800, never discuss any
> ethical or social issue unless an extreme right wing agenda is
> followed and
> so on.
>
> I am pleased to say that the Express recently published a vitriolic
> attack
> on one of my colleagues Philip Gray who is the Bishop's Chaplain i.e. his
> aide de camp , chief admin guy etc for an article he wrote in a diocesan
> newsletter.(details on Blackburn diocese site - also two articles on
> mine on
> science)
>
> If these daily rags have a Christian agenda, then I think I better
> become an
> atheist!!
>
> Of course these papers influence people including church members as I
> know
> to my cost, but then 20 years ago I was told that I was worse than the
> Red
> Dean of Canterbury but not as bad as Bishop David Sheppard, after
> preaching
> a sermon during Christian Aid week
>
> Simon Barrow might want to comment
>
> Michael.
>
> -
>
3199
Mikey Brass
Re: Truth in Science: Fossil Hoaxes
01/10/2006 14:51:00
> Does anyone know ehere there is a list of fundie hoaxes
There are quite a few listed on talkorigins. If you wish for a printed
compilation, then Forbidden Archeology is your "bible" of crap.
--
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)
3200
oeditor
Re: Truth in Science: Fossil Hoaxes
01/10/2006 15:46:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Mikey Brass <michael.brass@...> wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know ehere there is a list of fundie hoaxes
>
> There are quite a few listed on talkorigins. If you wish for a printed
> compilation, then Forbidden Archeology is your "bible" of crap.
>
While not directly listing fundie hoaxes, there's a good article on
fake fossils on evowiki:
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Some_fossils_are_faked
This is one of a vast compilation of fundie claims/arguments, with
refutations, which I hadn't come across before. There are over 600 of
them! Ordered logically, they can be found at
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/List_of_Creationist_arguments
Listed alphabetically, they are at http://tinyurl.com/fkvdx
Much of it comes from talkorigins.
Brian
