601
ukantic
Re: New school location forJohn Mackay?
02/05/2006 23:43:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" <taoist.hermit1@...>
wrote:
>
> Looks like I may as well keep the comments on the letter in mind
for any
> future uses it may have.
>
Hi Andrew,
If you do decide to refine your letter then I would agree with the
previous comment that it should be made a little more compact.
I would like to make some quick comments on the following:
"Then in addition to all that, there's the false claim made by
fundamentalists that their ideas are necessary for Christians to
believe."
You could point out, that most mainstream religious denominations
(E.g. Church of England, Catholics, etc) accept the ToE.
"That view, if it prevails, will obviously make Christianity
unacceptable to any clear thinking person and seems set to do
massive damage to Christianity in the long term"
The term I often hear to describe this is, "bad theology", which
obviously brings Christianity into disrepute.
Finally, I would lose the bits about DC or put them in as a
footnote they confuse the flow of your letter.
Alan.
602
ukantic
Pmwiki
03/05/2006 00:23:00
Pm Wiki.
I have decided to move my complete website across to a wiki-style
format, where hopefully I can at last spend time adding content as
opposed to fighting with the web design program, which I have found
to be very tedious & frustrating to use.
Having played around with PBwiki I then needed to find some software
that I could use to host my own wiki on rather than risk leaving my
content in the hands of third parties.
Looking around I found pmwiki at:
http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/PmWiki/PmWiki
I think this is a brilliant piece of free software, which worked
near enough first time on my web space. It has numerous skins (take
a look at the Gemini one), can incorporate a logo into the header,
is relatively easy to learn to use & obviously I have no
restrictions on memory usage etc.
I would recommend this software to anybody.
If anyone wants to contribute content (Roger?) then e-mail me for a
password in a week or two.
Alan.
603
Dean Morrison
RE: Pmwiki
03/05/2006 00:26:00
Thanks for the tip Alan Wikis do seem to be very useful things!
----
From: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com [BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ukantic
Sent: 03 May 2006 00:24
To: BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [BlackShadow] Pmwiki
Pm Wiki.
I have decided to move my complete website across to a wiki-style
format, where hopefully I can at last spend time adding content as
opposed to fighting with the web design program, which I have found
to be very tedious & frustrating to use.
Having played around with PBwiki I then needed to find some software
that I could use to host my own wiki on rather than risk leaving my
content in the hands of third parties.
Looking around I found pmwiki at:
http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/PmWiki/PmWiki
I think this is a brilliant piece of free software, which worked
near enough first time on my web space. It has numerous skins (take
a look at the Gemini one), can incorporate a logo into the header,
is relatively easy to learn to use & obviously I have no
restrictions on memory usage etc.
I would recommend this software to anybody.
If anyone wants to contribute content (Roger?) then e-mail me for a
password in a week or two.
Alan.
----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 2266 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!
604
Andrew
Re: Re: New school location forJohn Mackay?
03/05/2006 15:58:00
Thanks for the additional comments and info. I've noted everything, and
learned a few things.
605
Andrew
City Academies sponsorships not paid
03/05/2006 15:55:00
Not only are very dubious people buying controlling interests in schools,
they're not even coming up with the cash, either.
http://ichuddersfield.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0330features/tm_objectid=17026919\
&method=full&siteid=50060&headline=city-flop--name_page.html
606
Roger Stanyard
Re: New school location forJohn Mackay?
03/05/2006 19:10:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" <taoist.hermit1@...> wrote:
>
Andrew,
I do think we need to keep a hawk's eye on what Mackay is up to in the
UK until the end of June. There have clearly been changes in his plans
over the last few weeks and I am expecting more.
He also has not yet made it clear that he isn't speaking in state
schools and, indeed, has said on Sky that there are several he intends
to visit. This statement was made after Millfield told him to shove it.
As you are aware, my basic opinion of fundies is that I never believe
anything they say.
Roger Stanyard
> Thanks for the additional comments and info. I've noted everything,
and
> learned a few things.
>
607
Andrew
Re: Re: New school location forJohn Mackay?
03/05/2006 22:16:00
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Stanyard
> Andrew,
> I do think we need to keep a hawk's eye on what Mackay is up to in the
UK until the end of June....
Yes, I agree. Places like Warrington are difficult because the local media
is hopeless. I'm glad someone knew he was here.
I wonder if the fundamentalist churches own communications network is maybe
more useful for keeping an eye on?
608
Andrew
Re: Re: New school location forJohn Mackay?
03/05/2006 23:35:00
Regarding my last comment, I hadn't been able to log on to the `amen.org.uk'
site you'd mentioned when I wrote that. Having now done so, I think it
confirms that's the best way to keep informed of what's happening.
609
ukantic
Re: ESF - Teachers comments
04/05/2006 00:48:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
> Look, a teacher at, The Kings Academy, has stuck his head out of the
> Vardy Foundation trench!
>
my reply:
<teacher> Please would everyone stop banging on about Vardy-sponsored
schools and creationism. It is a non-issue.
<reply> In America, there have been numerous attempts by creationists
to interfere with the teaching of evolution in state schools, & only 6
months ago, they suffered a major court defeat at Dover Pennsylvania.
There have also been numerous reports from other countries (e.g.
Turkey, Australia) of similar interference. In this country, hardly a
week seems to go by without some report on the issue. Only this week
there has been controversy over the Australian creationist John Mackay
& his attempts to gain access to schools in the Blackpool area.
Creationism has recently been condemned by leading scientists, senior
members of the Church & the Royal society - & you think it is a
non-issue!
<teacher> In my school, The King's Academy in Middlesbrough, very few
if any of the science teachers even believe that the earth is less
than 10,000 years old.
<reply> Well that is hardly surprising when you consider that the vast
majority of teachers with a background in science will reject such a
viewpoint because it conflicts with the evidence.
<teacher> If they suggest to students that there are sane, intelligent
people (scientists, even) that believe in a 'young earth', then that
can only be a good thing.
<reply> Otherwise sane & intelligent people believe all sorts of
stupid things (for example astrology); that however is absolutely no
excuse for encouraging other people's children (possibly against their
parents wishes) to also believe the same stupid things. If David
Beckham believed that the moon was made of cheese, would anyone think
it was a, "good thing" to mention that to a class full of young
impressionable football supporters?
<teacher> Too often children (and adults) are led to believe that
current scientific understanding is infallible.
<reply> Where in the science curriculum that you are *supposed* to be
teaching the pupils, does it say that the current scientific
understanding is infallible? The key stage 4 science curriculum for
example, makes many references to such things as controversies & the
limits of science. Moreover, most scientists do not believe that
science is infallible & neither do the press who are only too keen to
sensationalise controversies over for example, "Frankenstein foods",
which tends to have the effect of undermining peoples confidence in
science.
<teacher> As a geography teacher, one of the key things I hope to
encourage in my students is to develop a degree of healthy cynicism
about what people (especially the media!) sell them as being the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
<reply> You are supposed to be teaching the pupils geography, not
indoctrinating them with your extremely biased opinions of
the,"truth". As for cynicism about the media: well I suppose you could
always point out how utterly biased the local press have been in their
reporting of this issue. There have been many glowing reports about
the Vardy Foundation but hardly any of the strident criticism from
their opponents (including many leading scientists). This constitutes
censorship by omission.
<reply> The truth is that state schools in a largely secular society
are being taken over by religious fanatics, who have publicly
advertised their extremist beliefs & goals far & wide. Not only have
they openly stated their goals they have also implemented them. That
is the, "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth", but
listening to you, I somehow doubt that that is what you want your
pupils to hear.
<teacher> The King's Academy is a good school, well managed,
forward-thinking,
<reply> How can a school based around the belief that a 2000-year-old
book should dictate modern thinking, ever be described as,
"forward-thinking"!
<teacher> with dedicated teaching staff.
<reply> All schools should have dedicated staff, not just those run
for the benefit of religious organisations.
<teacher> Sir Peter is a well-meaning old-fashioned philanthropist who
simply wants to use some of the wealth he feels God has blessed him
with for good.
<reply> Then in that case he should donate his money to education
without attaching strings.
<teacher> He certainly is not in the business of wanting to
brain-wash young people with young-earth creationism.
<reply> Well then why does he employ so many people in senior
positions who clearly do believe in creationism (be it young earth, or
otherwise)? People who incidentally who have made crystal-clear their
intentions to preach their fundamentalist views to other people's
children.
<reply> And if I keep on banging on about, "other people's children",
then that is to remind you that that is what they are. They are not
Peter Vardy's children: they are the children of people who could be
atheists, agnostics or simply indifferent to religion, as much as they
could be religious. Are these people considered by you to be
second-class citizens or something? Are you really so arrogant that
you & your fellow creationists (don't bother denying it) feel you have
some God-given right to ride roughshod over their beliefs, frightening
their children with all this psychopathic nonsense about hell-fire,
teaching them negative views about homosexuals, undermining their
belief in the scientific method & all the other nonsense that goes
with creationism? These people have very little choice but to send
their children to these schools & the children should be taught in an
environment free from any religious or political bias.
<teacher> Essentially he believes that modern society would be
improved if (1) children are disciplined effectively but lovingly, so
that they learn about boundaries and consequences;
<reply> This is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. He may
believe this, but reading between the lines of the evasive bluster
that he feeds the press with, it is quite clear the Peter Vardy is a
creationist whose personal views are extremely antagonistic to modern
science & modern society, which he would prefer to see run along
biblical lines. These views are by any standard extreme & it is
therefore just straightforward deception to spin them into the
portrayal above. Then again, what do you expect from a creationist.
<reply> Furthermore, many people believe in good discipline, but you
do not have to have strong religious opinions to do so & there is
absolutely no reason why effective discipline cannot be delivered
within a secular setting untainted by this person or that person's
personal religious beliefs. Of course many secular state schools do
maintain effect discipline; however, this is not a viewpoint expressed
by those (example Vardy & his little gang, Edmiston & his little gang)
wishing to push YEC onto other people's children, because they have a
policy of consistently denigrating the efforts of non-religious state
schools.
<teacher> (2) children realise that they were "wonderfully made" for a
good purpose (Psalm 139).
<reply> Children are the product of evolution & I personally do not
think it helps anyone to claim otherwise.
<reply> So, in summary, what PV *really* wants to do is preach *his*
religious & right wing political views to an impressionable captive
audience of children. (1) & (2) are just his rationalizations &
excuses for doing so.
<teacher> Whether or not you agree with the Christian basis from which
he is coming at things, surely very few people would suggest that the
effective communication of these two ideas to children is a bad thing?
<reply> No, I doubt that many people would disagree with the principle
of instilling a sense of discipline into children or promoting their
self-esteem; however, this is something that can be achieved without
ever once having to mention Peter Vardy's personal religious views.
610
Roger Stanyard
Re: New school location forJohn Mackay?
04/05/2006 08:03:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" <taoist.hermit1@...> wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> I wonder if the fundamentalist churches own communications network is
maybe
> more useful for keeping an eye on?
Yes, they are useful; I'm tracking the fundies in my own home town
through their network of web sites. It's a scary thing to see how they
operate. They opened up shop here about two years ago and I guess that
there is now a hardore of 75 organised around a local Baptist chapel.
However, I also suspect that there are other fundie bits operating in
the town.
What we are doing is alterting local councillors and schools (and the
MPs). What worries us is when they start to get themselves appointed as
school governors.
I have a preliminary report on the fundies in my home town
(Winchester); if anyone wants to see it, let me know and I'll post it
here.
I must say that few of the fundies here look to be very bright but I
guess the same comment applies elsewhere in the fundie movement.
Roger Stanyard
611
Roger Stanyard
Re: New school location forJohn Mackay?
04/05/2006 08:12:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>
I forgot to add that the report appears on my own Yahoo 360 blog site
at http://360.yahoo.com/stanyardroger.
Roger Stanyard
> I have a preliminary report on the fundies in my home town
> (Winchester); if anyone wants to see it, let me know and I'll post it
> here.
>
> I must say that few of the fundies here look to be very bright but I
> guess the same comment applies elsewhere in the fundie movement.
>
> Roger Stanyard
>
612
Mikey Brass
Online archaeology courses
04/05/2006 11:52:00
Dear all,
I am going to be offering two online archaeology courses for anyone
interested. The first course details the whole timespan of human
evolution and the second examine the archaeology of Ancient Egypt:
1. Human evolution
It is an eight week course, starting on 28 May. Details on the content
of this course and its cost are available at
http://www.antiquityofman.com/course_worldarchaeology.html .
2. Ancient Egyptian archaeology
It takes place over 6 weeks, also from 28 May. The cost and details are
available at http://www.antiquityofman.com/course_AE_general.html .
Please feel free to contact me offline for any queries.
--
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)
613
oeditor
Mackay Blackpool excuses
05/05/2006 15:12:00
[I've posted this twice on secular_newsline but it hasn't appeared -
has anyone seen it?]
School claims that Mackay visit cancelled because he didn't submit
lesson plans.
"A creationist who caused a rumpus by refusing to name the school he
was due to visit says he's not disappointed' the visit has been
cancelled." (thisislancashire.co.uk)
If you believe that, you'll believe anything!
"Millfield head teacher, Alan Harvey, said the visit had been
cancelled because of concerns over fundamentalism' and a lack of
lesson plans.
But Mr Mackay, speaking from a Creation Research family conference in
Powys, Wales, said: "The school has always been open and friendly. I'm
not disappointed."
But he called the lack of lesson plans a superficial reason' for the
cancellation, and feared the possibility of demonstrations by
opponents from across the UK might have changed the school's mind."
"Creation Research also issued a statement saying it was trying to
shield the school' from intense press attention, but added: "In the
wake of all this coverage we have been informed by the school that
they have decided to cancel the visit.
"We can only hope that others will recognise that real debate about
what is taught in schools is not between science and religion', but
between one particular belief system, atheism, and other faiths.""
"Mr Harvey, Millfield's head, confirmed: "John Mackay visited us last
year as part of our RE course. We do get visiting speakers some times
and he was one that we invited."
But he added: "The view of the RE department head was that he was
extremely fundamentalist and really it wasn't a broad enough approach,
which is what we would have preferred."
Rather than pull the plug' on future visits, the school asked Mr
Mackay to submit lesson plans before the visit was fully confirmed.
"We never got the lesson plans. We thought it was probably best not to
go ahead. It would just be as the previous time," Mr Harvey said."
Excuses, excuses.
http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.751210.0.creationis\
t_visit_off.php
=
http://tinyurl.com/pt488
Brian
614
Roger Stanyard
Re: Mackay Blackpool excuses
06/05/2006 10:21:00
How Much Proselytising at Millfield High?
Roger Stanyard, 6th May 2006
We now know that hard-line creationist John Mackay and his team were
looking at having a full five days of access to Millfield High School
in Lancashire and that the "target" pupils were in Key Stage 3 levels
of study. That is to say 11-14 year oldsor the 1st to 3rd years of
the school. Millfield is a state comprehensive school whose children
are between 11 and 16 years old. It has no 6th form (for children
between 16 and 18).
My understanding is that the Theory of Evolution is not taught until
Key Stage 4 (14 to 16 years old). Thus Mackay's apparent plan was to
teach the children creationism before their science teachers were in
a position to correct them.
Moreover, the information points to a very heavy indoctrination by
Mackay and his team, totalling four people. Given that, typically,
each child in a UK school has 5 hours of lessons per day, this
suggests that the Mackay team, over 5 days, could be able to provide
100 hours of teaching to the school.
Moreover, given that it only applied to Key Stage 3 pupils, only
around 550 of the 920 or so pupils at the school would be affected.
Assuming 30 pupils per form, that indicated six forms per year, or 18
for the three years involved. That means that each form could have
been subjected to 5.5 hours of creationist teaching more than a
full day each.
No wonder Millfield suggested that the lack of a lesson plan from
Mackay was a problem.
However, there is a clue to the lesson plan from the Creation
Research Family Conference which ran from 1st to 5th May. This was a
residential event held in Wales, using, it appears, exactly the same
Millfield team of 4 plus Creation Research UK's people.
The subject matters that were planned for the conference are enough
to make most people wince.
It was intended to answer such questions as "Why on earth do snakes
have poison if they ate fruit?" amongst other deeply profound
intellectual issues such as:
"Did bees sting before Adam sinned?
"Why are zebras so well camouflaged if lions didn't eat meat?"
"Why did God create fire breathing dragons?"
"Did God invest mosquitoes as judgement?"
"Is bird flu evolving because the world has fallen?"
"Where did polar bears live before there was ice?"
"How many rabbits got off Noah's Ark?"
"Is your dog a devolved mutant?"
"What did great white sharks eat before Aussies went surfing?"
"What are spider webs really for?"
Was Mackay "disappointed" about Millfield's decision? No, he must
have been livid.
Not only has the school labelled him publically as an extreme
fundamentalist, it has stopped him in his tracks when it comes to his
standard fundie whinge that it's all the fault of atheists - it was
the school's RELIGIOUS EDUCATION department that concluded he was an
extreme fundamentalist.
It's a public relations disaster for Mackay and unless he is
extremely thick skinned, he knows it. No other state school in
Britain would now dare touch him with the end of the proverbial barge
pole.
Roger Stanyard
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
> [I've posted this twice on secular_newsline but it hasn't appeared -
> has anyone seen it?]
>
> School claims that Mackay visit cancelled because he didn't submit
> lesson plans.
> "A creationist who caused a rumpus by refusing to name the school he
> was due to visit says he's not disappointed' the visit has been
> cancelled." (thisislancashire.co.uk)
>
> If you believe that, you'll believe anything!
>
> "Millfield head teacher, Alan Harvey, said the visit had been
> cancelled because of concerns over fundamentalism' and a lack of
> lesson plans.
>
> But Mr Mackay, speaking from a Creation Research family conference
in
> Powys, Wales, said: "The school has always been open and friendly.
I'm
> not disappointed."
>
> But he called the lack of lesson plans a superficial reason' for the
> cancellation, and feared the possibility of demonstrations by
> opponents from across the UK might have changed the school's mind."
>
>
> "Creation Research also issued a statement saying it was trying to
> shield the school' from intense press attention, but added: "In the
> wake of all this coverage we have been informed by the school that
> they have decided to cancel the visit.
>
> "We can only hope that others will recognise that real debate about
> what is taught in schools is not between science and religion', but
> between one particular belief system, atheism, and other faiths.""
>
> "Mr Harvey, Millfield's head, confirmed: "John Mackay visited us
last
> year as part of our RE course. We do get visiting speakers some
times
> and he was one that we invited."
>
> But he added: "The view of the RE department head was that he was
> extremely fundamentalist and really it wasn't a broad enough
approach,
> which is what we would have preferred."
>
> Rather than pull the plug' on future visits, the school asked Mr
> Mackay to submit lesson plans before the visit was fully confirmed.
>
> "We never got the lesson plans. We thought it was probably best not
to
> go ahead. It would just be as the previous time," Mr Harvey said."
>
> Excuses, excuses.
>
>
http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.751210.0.
creationist_visit_off.php
> =
> http://tinyurl.com/pt488
>
> Brian
>
615
ukantic
Re: Mackay Blackpool excuses
06/05/2006 14:21:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...>
wrote:
>
>
> How Much Proselytising at Millfield High?
>
> Roger Stanyard, 6th May 2006
>
> We now know that hard-line creationist John Mackay and his team
were
> looking at having a full five days of access to Millfield High
School
> in Lancashire and that the "target" pupils were in Key Stage 3
levels
> of study. That is to say 11-14 year oldsor the 1st to 3rd years of
> the school. Millfield is a state comprehensive school whose
children
> are between 11 and 16 years old. It has no 6th form (for children
> between 16 and 18).
>
> My understanding is that the Theory of Evolution is not taught
until
> Key Stage 4 (14 to 16 years old). Thus Mackay's apparent plan was
to
> teach the children creationism before their science teachers were
in
> a position to correct them.
>
> Moreover, the information points to a very heavy indoctrination by
> Mackay and his team, totalling four people. Given that, typically,
> each child in a UK school has 5 hours of lessons per day, this
> suggests that the Mackay team, over 5 days, could be able to
provide
> 100 hours of teaching to the school.
>
> Moreover, given that it only applied to Key Stage 3 pupils, only
> around 550 of the 920 or so pupils at the school would be
affected.
> Assuming 30 pupils per form, that indicated six forms per year, or
18
> for the three years involved. That means that each form could have
> been subjected to 5.5 hours of creationist teaching more than a
> full day each.
This is disgusting. It is almost inconceivable that the school had
no idea about the full extent of Mackay's beliefs & the only logical
conclusion seems to be that they were sympathetic to them. I bet
that the only reason they have now distanced themselves from this is
because of the bad publicity they are receiving.
I think it is about time that the children who have had their minds
& education damaged by this nonsense were financially compensated by
their abusers. Perhaps they should all be issued with some sort of
questionnaire & every time it can be proved that the school was
responsible for the child learning for example that, "evolution is
only a theory & has gaps in it", then the perpetrators should be hit
with a mandatory £1000 fine. That would shut the two-faced ****** up
once & for all.
616
Roger Stanyard
Re: Mackay Blackpool excuses
06/05/2006 14:37:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
>>
> This is disgusting. It is almost inconceivable that the school had
> no idea about the full extent of Mackay's beliefs & the only
logical
> conclusion seems to be that they were sympathetic to them. I bet
> that the only reason they have now distanced themselves from this
is
> because of the bad publicity they are receiving.
>
Right on two points there, Alan. Millfield knew all about mackay
because he taught there last year. I'm also told by the "lead"
clergyman who opposed Mackay's teachin that the school had to drop
Mackay because of the potentially very serious bad publicity. He had
talked to the head master.
> I think it is about time that the children who have had their minds
> & education damaged by this nonsense were financially compensated
by
> their abusers. Perhaps they should all be issued with some sort of
> questionnaire & every time it can be proved that the school was
> responsible for the child learning for example that, "evolution is
> only a theory & has gaps in it", then the perpetrators should be
hit
> with a mandatory £1000 fine. That would shut the two-faced ******
up
> once & for all.
I agree, but they will get at the kinds in other ways. The Mackay
residential family course is obviously one method but the experience
of the USA sugegsts they will use dirty tricks galour including
threatening biology teachers, training children to abuse they
teachers when they start to teach evolution, refusing to employ
teachers that believe in Evolution, home teaching of children using
material supplied by creationists, keeping books on evolution out of
the school library (and, indeed local public libraries), teaching ET
and then denying it.... it goes on and on. ID was not the only dirty
tricks method. It's the one though that had the high profile.
One trick I've seen in the UK uses satellite set top boxes that only
allow reception of religious TV channels. That means the viewers
(kids, no doubt) have little option but to watch creationist drivel
on such channels as Revelation TV.
Roger Stanyard
617
ukantic
Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 16:14:00
'Darwin's evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense, built on too
many suppositions'
JOHN MACKAY: GEOLOGIST
7 May 06
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/darwins-evolutionary-theory-is-a-
tottering-nonsense-built-on-toomany-
suppositions/2006/05/06/1146335967549.html?page=3
http://tinyurl.com/j7neb
A charismatic Australian has materialised at the centre of national
argument in Britain about the teaching of creationism, Annabel Crabb
writes.
Listen to this bit:
"Nick Cowan, 54, is the head of chemistry at Liverpool's leading
public school, Bluecoat. He is a creationist, and while his syllabus
generally doesn't tangle with the big issues of where it all began,
he says he slips in thought-provoking material whenever he can.
"If we're having a conversation about the old chicken-and-egg
conundrum, for example, I'll say, 'Well, I believe God created the
chicken, and the chicken laid the egg. What's your answer?"'
Cowan says the school knows where he stands, and he is yet to be
challenged on his teaching style.
But he believes the increasing temperature of the debate will
inevitably result in an intervention.
Once a parent complains, that will be it, he predicts."
618
Mikey Brass
Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 16:58:00
ukantic wrote:
> "Nick Cowan, 54, is the head of chemistry at Liverpool's leading
> public school, Bluecoat. He is a creationist,
If I found out that the head of RI, biology, history or chemistry in any
school any future child of mine is in, I'd be in the headmaster's office
the next day.
619
Roger Stanyard
Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 18:00:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
> > writes.
>
> Listen to this bit:
>
> "Nick Cowan, 54, is the head of chemistry at Liverpool's leading
> public school, Bluecoat. He is a creationist, and while his
syllabus
> generally doesn't tangle with the big issues of where it all began,
> he says he slips in thought-provoking material whenever he can.
>
There is something deeply wrong here. A 54 year-old chemistry teacher
takes it on himself to contradict the biology curriculum with
religion which he isn't paid or authorised to teach?
This isn't a naοve teacher this person is 54 years old and knows
perfectly well that his views are far from mainstream, highly
contentious and unacceptable to most Christians. Bluecoat is a non-
secular school historically close to the Church of England.
If my child was at this school I would be contacting the head
teacher tomorrow for an explanation and a clear statement that the
teacher be told to button his lip or resign.
Failing that, I would go straight to the governors and my local MP.
I suspect that this sort of fundamentalist doesn't seem to understand
that he is not answerable to God on this one but to the people that
pay him and the parents of the children he teaches. His religion
doesn't come into the contract he has. If he doesn't like that, he
should resign and find someone willing to pay him to be a
proselytiser.
Certainly if I were the head teacher of Bluecoat school and had the
power to do so, I would fire this teacher on the spot before he does
any more damage either to the children or to the school's reputation.
Roger Stanyard
620
ukantic
Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 18:40:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
> "If we're having a conversation about the old chicken-and-egg
> conundrum, for example, I'll say, 'Well, I believe God created the
> chicken, and the chicken laid the egg. What's your answer?"'
Do they send them on some sort of course to learn this shit?
Details of the school can be found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Liverpool_Blue_Coat_School
Scroll down to the bottom for heads of departments.
621
oeditor
Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 18:52:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
> Details of the school can be found at:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Liverpool_Blue_Coat_School
>
> Scroll down to the bottom for heads of departments.
>
Scroll back up again, and you'll find that "notable alumni" include
Evan Harris MP. Didn't do HIM any harm then! Perhaps the nutters even
convinced him that they were spouting nonsense :-)
Brian
622
Roger Stanyard
Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 19:05:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
Jeez,
Nick Cowan is head of the chemistry department. One wonders what the
head of the biology department thinks.
> Do they send them on some sort of course to learn this shit?
Well, if you consider the Swanwick conference a couple of weeks ago
to be a course, the answer is yes. It had 400 attendees.
The evidence also suggests that the fundies have long developed
special videos and DVDs specifically for "education" teachers. School
teachers have long been a target group for them (see the Wedge
document).
The evidence I have from Australia is that they keep these videos and
DVDs out of the public domain.
It's worth remembering that Ken Ham and John Mackay's orgins are in
Queensland and they initially appear to have set up shop selling
creationist educational material to the Queensland educational sector.
I suspect that once the Queenslanders banned teaching (in 1987) of
creationism in state schools, the Ham/Mackay partnership fell apart
over money.
Reading between the lines, it appears that the Bluecoat school is one
where Mackay has been teaching - do you have any further evidence? If
that is the case it clearly calls for letters to the local
newspapers, the governors and the head teacher.
Roger Stanyard
>
> Details of the school can be found at:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Liverpool_Blue_Coat_School
>
> Scroll down to the bottom for heads of departments.
>
623
Roger Stanyard
Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 19:25:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>> > Do they send them on some sort of course to learn this shit?
>
> Well, if you consider the Swanwick conference a couple of weeks ago
> to be a course, the answer is yes. It had 400 attendees.
>
Just to remind everybody that we are dealing with hard line
fundamentalists, the Swanwick conference was advertsied as "Creation
Without Compromise".
Now that sends a deep shudder through me.
Roger Stanyard
624
oeditor
Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
07/05/2006 19:53:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>
> Reading between the lines, it appears that the Bluecoat school is one
> where Mackay has been teaching - do you have any further evidence?
Well, it comes from the Sydney Morning Herald and they're not likely
to have a correspondent who knows about the details of a particular
school in Liverpool. They've obviously spoken to Mackay, and my guess
is that he's been boasting about other schools to offset the Millford
fiasco. So it's probably straight from the dinosaur's mouth!
Brian
625
ukantic
Reply to Cowan
07/05/2006 21:42:00
I have e-mailed the Headmaster this:
Nick Cowan's creationist comments.
Could you please pass this on to Nick Cowan Head of chemistry.
Thank you.
Hi Nick,
I am e-mailing you in response to an Australian press report
('Darwin's evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense, built on too
many suppositions') in, The Sidney Morning Herald, dated 7th May 07.
In this, you have openly boasted of preaching creationism to your
pupils, even though you are supposed to be teaching them chemistry.
I am interested in how this works. If for example I believed (using
an example first described by Richard Dawkins) that the Roman Empire
did not exist, then would it be acceptable for me to suggest this to
a class full of impressionable children? After all, it is only fair
that children get to hear both sides of the Roman Empire
controversy, isn't it?
Following this line of reasoning a little further: what if I
suggested to them (against the wishes of their parents) that the
moon was made of cheese or that fairies exist, or that there is a
flotilla of alien spacecraft flying around in the night & abducting
sleeping people from their beds. Would these be acceptable?
Most scientists consider creationism to be nonsense on par with
stories about fairies & alien abductions. Not only is it bad science
but also bad theology, which is why it is rejected by both the
Church of England & the Vatican.
I cannot see that there is any excuse for abusing your position as a
teacher. You should not be targeting impressionable & vulnerable
children with your extreme fundamentalist views.
Not only am I appalled by what you are doing, but I feel sure that
the parents of the affected children will be also.
Surely if your views on the subject were that compelling then they
should be able to stand up in the real world of science & peer
review.
With this in mind I would like to take the opportunity of inviting
you across to the Debunk Creation forum, which was specifically set
up to allow creationists to advance scientific arguments in favour
of creationism. If creationism is indeed science, then this will be
your chance to prove it.
Debunk Creation can be accessed at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DebunkCreation/
The signing up process only takes a minute.
It's time to come out of the playpen Nick .
Good Luck (I think you are going to need it!)
Alan.
PS. I run a website at www.creationism.co.uk that deals with this
issue. I will be adding Blue Coat School to the list of UK screwball
schools. I will even do the page in the school colours if you like.
I get hundreds of hits every week & lots enquiries from journalists.
If the school has the equivalent of a press officer then let me know
so that I can pass them onto the correct department.
626
Mikey Brass
Re: Reply to Cowan
07/05/2006 22:02:00
You have forgotten to ask him whether you was quoted correctly.
627
ukantic
Re: Reply to Cowan
07/05/2006 23:20:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Mikey Brass <michael.brass@...>
wrote:
>
> You have forgotten to ask him whether you was quoted correctly.
>
That's true Mike, but it is difficult to see how he was misquoted so
badly that he is reported as supporting creationism, when in fact he
doesn't.
Of course, there is always the possibility that there has been some
type of a mistake in which case I will apologise & remove the
webpage.
I once uploaded some unsavoury comments from a pupil at Emmanuel
School to my website. It never occurred to me that there was
anything wrong with all the references to French sounding words &
that it was in fact, Emmanuel School in Canada!
Alan.
628
Mikey Brass
Re: Re: Reply to Cowan
07/05/2006 23:26:00
ukantic wrote:
> That's true Mike, but it is difficult to see how he was misquoted so
> badly that he is reported as supporting creationism, when in fact he
> doesn't.
I do not trust any creationist quoting anyone not adequately proven to
be a creationist. Witness their attempts to misconstrue Gould as
supporting creationism.
629
Andrew
Link to Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism
13/05/2006 01:43:00
This article may be of interest: Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian
Nationalism"
By Michelle Goldberg
An excerpt from senior writer Michelle Goldberg's new book, "Kingdom Coming:
The Rise of Christian Nationalism. "
Full article at:
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article13017.htm
630
oeditor
Cowan: a lurker speaks
13/05/2006 09:55:00
I was surprised to get a personal email from Nick Cowan this morning:
"--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@> wrote:
> >
> > Reading between the lines, it appears that the Bluecoat school is
one
> > where Mackay has been teaching - do you have any further evidence?
>
> Well, it comes from the Sydney Morning Herald and they're not likely
> to have a correspondent who knows about the details of a particular
> school in Liverpool. They've obviously spoken to Mackay, and my
guess > is that he's been boasting about other schools to offset the
Millford > fiasco. So it's probably straight from the dinosaur's mouth!
>
> Brian
>
Dear Brian,
A simple phone-call to this school (0151-733-1407 - ask for
Mr. Cowan) would have confirmed to you that John Mackay has in fact
spoken here twice in the last 5 years. Indeed he was so popular that
he has been invited back when he next tours the UK. You would be most
welcome to attend. Nick Cowan."
I'm not sure what that's got to do with the price of fish - I was
speculating on how an Australian paper came to know Nick Cowan.
However, I'm left wondering 1) with whom he was popular - pupils,
staff or parents? and 2) whether form triumphed over substance -
perhaps we should go around wearing cowboy outfits - or perhaps
space-suits would be better?
Brian
631
Roger Stanyard
Re: Cowan: a lurker speaks
13/05/2006 10:15:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
> I was surprised to get a personal email from Nick Cowan this
morning:
I got a personal email this morning as well. It reads:
Dear Roger,
I extend to you an open invitation to come here to Blue
Coat and talk to me, or to any of the young men and women I teach,
ideally at the same time. Most are non-Christians but I don't
believe that they would back your wild assertion that I am causing
them "damage". In 2002 we were England's top school in the annual
Chemistry "Olympiad", with 3 Gold Medals and 2 Silver. Only one of
these five is, like myself, a young earth creationist. She is at
Trinity College, Cambridge (I was at Downing) and is set to start
her Ph.D. in Physical Geology in October.
It's good that you aren't my Head teacher, alongside whom I have
taught amicably for 33 years, and who is keen for the students here
to be taught the virtues of a liberal education where all views are
considered. The only thing that is "deeply wrong" is your bigotry
and narrow-mindedness. I pray God will open your eyes. Nick.
This is the first time in my life I've ever been told I'm
narrowminded and bigoted. An this is from a creationist. Jeez.
Roger Stanyard
632
Mikey Brass
[Fwd: Re: Darwins evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense]
13/05/2006 10:47:00
I got one as well.
My response:
Care to say what the scientific theory of creationism is?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: 'Darwin's evolutionary theory is a tottering nonsense
Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 01:10:53 -0000
From: m_cowan32 <m_cowan32@yahoo.co.uk>
To: Mikey Brass <michael.brass@uclmail.net>
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, Mikey Brass <michael.brass@...>
wrote:
>
> ukantic wrote:
>
> > "Nick Cowan, 54, is the head of chemistry at Liverpool's leading
> > public school, Bluecoat. He is a creationist,
>
> If I found out that the head of RI, biology, history or chemistry in
any
> school any future child of mine is in, I'd be in the headmaster's
office
> the next day.
>
Dear Mike,
Your English is so poor that You need to get back into the classroom
first! God bless! Nick.
--
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)
633
ukantic
Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 12:07:00
Here is mine:
Hello Alan - I have been alerted to your comments by one of an
increasing army of "Young Earth Creationist" science teacher friends
here in the north-west. (My wife, for example, is Head of Science at
Liverpool's top independent girls' school.)
Yes, it's time to "come out of the playpen". Perhaps you'd like to
come to Liverpool to debate me on this issue, in front of the young
men and women I teach (mostly non-Christians aged 16-18 -
hardly "children") in this non-denominational school. Or are you
afraid - like Professor Dawkins (an evangelical atheist whose views
are admirably demolished by Alister McGrath in a recent book) - to
actually engage with the scientific issues involved, in a head-to-
head debate. Maybe you can provide a justification for the
spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter - a theory I
thought had been refuted in the late 17th century as superstitious
nonsense! Perhaps you can convince my students that (Neo-)/Darwinism
fits all the accepted categories of scientific proof viz:
observability, measurability, repeatability - and falsifiability.
You might even be able to give them a plausible model for the
biogenesis of a DNA molecule - we teachers here rather struggle to
do so.
So let's talk science, as I do in my classroom - and in my C. of E.
church, where the vicar (as he, like most of our parents with
secondary schoolchildren, has no science credentials himself) wisely
leaves me to teach the church about the harmonisation of Scripture
and Science. Even Prof. Roger Penrose is happy to accept the notion
of "the Creator"! I will check out the Debunk website - I'll even
recommend it to my students as long as it seems open to honest
truth-seeking and not to atheistic faith-centred brainwashing.
Time to come out of the play-pen Alan!
Nick Cowan (0151-733-1407)
PS. I'm not a historian, but I'm intrigued by the controversy about
the Roman Empire to which you allude. Please amplify.
PPS. I've just read the "Sidney" (sic) Morning Herald article. Can't
find the words "preach" and "boasted". Have I missed something?
>
<end>
I was slightly worried that he might have got into trouble with the
school over my e-mail, but he is actually quite brazen about what he
is doing. I'm busy today but I will have a shot at this tomorrow.
Alan.
634
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 12:33:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
>>
> I was slightly worried that he might have got into trouble with the
> school over my e-mail, but he is actually quite brazen about what he
> is doing. I'm busy today but I will have a shot at this tomorrow.
>
> Alan.
>
Yes, that was my thought. However, the replies are in classic
fundamentalist style and, in my case, patronising.
I've been doing a little background research; you may be interested to
know that David Alton, the former LibDem MP, is a foundation governor
of the school. My understanding is that Alton is a staunch Catholic who
does not accept the literal interpretation of Genesis and all this
creation nonsense.
Moreover, Alton's former election agent, Chris Rennard, is both a
Bluecot Liverpool Old Boy and chief exective of the Lib Dems. He really
is a big wig in the Lib Dem movement.
Roger Stanyard
635
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 12:48:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
I forgot to add that the Catholic view looks to be that creationism
is a form of paganism. I brought the Catholic bit up because Alton
is, apparently, is well connected in the Catholic church nad
Liverpool, as you well know, is a very Catholic city. I've put out a
feeler on this to an Anglican clergyman in that part of the world.
Teaching of creationism in science lessons is, of course, against
CofE "policy statements" as well as the Catholic position. I'm trying
to find out whether Bluecoat was one of the schools Anglican clergy
in the region are hopping mad about because of Mackay.
As you are well aware, I am a member of ScienceJustScience which
includes christians so expect some action there. I think Deano posts
to this group from time to time.
I hope your not daft enough to fall for the debating trap. See what
Eugenie Scott has to say about that at NCSE. Cowan's position on
abiogenisis astonishes me.
Roger
> Here is mine:
>
> Hello Alan - I have been alerted to your comments by one of an
> increasing army of "Young Earth Creationist" science teacher friends
> here in the north-west. (My wife, for example, is Head of Science at
> Liverpool's top independent girls' school.)
>
> Yes, it's time to "come out of the playpen". Perhaps you'd like to
> come to Liverpool to debate me on this issue, in front of the young
> men and women I teach (mostly non-Christians aged 16-18 -
> hardly "children") in this non-denominational school. Or are you
> afraid - like Professor Dawkins (an evangelical atheist whose views
> are admirably demolished by Alister McGrath in a recent book) - to
> actually engage with the scientific issues involved, in a head-to-
> head debate. Maybe you can provide a justification for the
> spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter - a theory I
> thought had been refuted in the late 17th century as superstitious
> nonsense! Perhaps you can convince my students that (Neo-)/Darwinism
> fits all the accepted categories of scientific proof viz:
> observability, measurability, repeatability - and falsifiability.
> You might even be able to give them a plausible model for the
> biogenesis of a DNA molecule - we teachers here rather struggle to
> do so.
>
> So let's talk science, as I do in my classroom - and in my C. of E.
> church, where the vicar (as he, like most of our parents with
> secondary schoolchildren, has no science credentials himself) wisely
> leaves me to teach the church about the harmonisation of Scripture
> and Science. Even Prof. Roger Penrose is happy to accept the notion
> of "the Creator"! I will check out the Debunk website - I'll even
> recommend it to my students as long as it seems open to honest
> truth-seeking and not to atheistic faith-centred brainwashing.
>
> Time to come out of the play-pen Alan!
> Nick Cowan (0151-733-1407)
>
> PS. I'm not a historian, but I'm intrigued by the controversy about
> the Roman Empire to which you allude. Please amplify.
> PPS. I've just read the "Sidney" (sic) Morning Herald article. Can't
> find the words "preach" and "boasted". Have I missed something?
> >
> <end>
>
> I was slightly worried that he might have got into trouble with the
> school over my e-mail, but he is actually quite brazen about what
he
> is doing. I'm busy today but I will have a shot at this tomorrow.
>
> Alan.
>
636
oeditor
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 12:55:00
The devil, it seems, is in the detail:
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
Nick Cowan wrote:
>
> I've just read the "Sidney" (sic) Morning Herald article.
I've long since given up being critical of typos and odd turns of
phrase - I've produced far too many myself. (Can't find that one in
the group or on your site, btw). He also snipes at Mikey in a very
rude manner in his letter to him.
> Can't > find the words "preach" and "boasted". Have I missed >something?
Well, I'm the one who said "boasting" (sic), if he wants to sink to
the level of nit-picking. And (if he'll excuse the lapse in
punctuation) it was Mackay I suggested was boasting, not Cowan. Not
sure about "preaching", but I'm sure he does (some, to make it
grammatical;-)
Far more worrying, if true, is the "increasing army of "Young Earth
Creationist" science teacher friends here in the north-west. (My wife,
for example, is Head of Science at Liverpool's top independent girls'
school.)" It beggars belief (sic;-) that anyone can be a science
teacher and seriously believe all the twisted arguments that Mackay
and his ilk use to fit the development of the planet into a few
thousand years. "Those who can, do; those who are only paying
lip-service, teach" it would seem :-(( (Or, in the case of the girl he
mentions in his letter to Roger, go and do a Ph.D. in Geology, all the
better to misrepresent the subject.)
Brian
637
oeditor
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 12:59:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>
>
> I've been doing a little background research; you may be interested to
> know that David Alton, the former LibDem MP, is a foundation governor
> of the school. My understanding is that Alton is a staunch Catholic
>who > does not accept the literal interpretation of Genesis and all
>this > creation nonsense.
> Moreover, Alton's former election agent, Chris Rennard, is both a
> Bluecot Liverpool Old Boy and chief exective of the Lib Dems. He
really > is a big wig in the Lib Dem movement.
>
As of course is that other former Bluecoat pupil, the NSS's very own
Evan Harris M.P.
Brian
638
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 13:01:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
As I say, Brian, its all classic fundie style - the bragging holier-
than-you attitude, the absolute certainty, the patronising and the
put downs.
Like all fundies, though the obvious weakness is clearly for all to
see. He can't keep his mouth shut.
Roger
>
> Far more worrying, if true, is the "increasing army of "Young Earth
> Creationist" science teacher friends here in the north-west. (My
wife,
> for example, is Head of Science at Liverpool's top independent
girls'
> school.)" It beggars belief (sic;-) that anyone can be a science
> teacher and seriously believe all the twisted arguments that Mackay
> and his ilk use to fit the development of the planet into a few
> thousand years. "Those who can, do; those who are only paying
> lip-service, teach" it would seem :-(( (Or, in the case of the girl
he
> mentions in his letter to Roger, go and do a Ph.D. in Geology, all
the
> better to misrepresent the subject.)
>
> Brian
>
639
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 13:02:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
Brilliant, Brian!!!
> >
> As of course is that other former Bluecoat pupil, the NSS's very own
> Evan Harris M.P.
>
> Brian
>
640
oeditor
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 13:09:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>Nick Cowna wrote:
> Here is mine:
>
>
> So let's talk science, as I do in my classroom - and in my C. of E.
> church, where the vicar (as he, like most of our parents with
> secondary schoolchildren, has no science credentials himself) wisely
> leaves me to teach the church about the harmonisation of Scripture
> and Science.
What sort of school is that? I can understand that the vicar might not
have any science credentials, but most parents? Maybe a generation or
two ago, but I'd have thought that the generation now in their 40s and
50s would be the most scientifically educated English people ever. Are
there no hospitals in Liverpool? Is not the vast Unilever chemical
company on their doorstep? Are there not two universities? Perhaps the
scientists have all been driven to sending their children elsewhere.
Brian
641
Mikey Brass
Re: Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 13:21:00
The arrogance of this Cowan character is astounding. It is also very
telling that he refuses to post on DC (where he picked up my post) or to
set up a website where students can read both his messages and all the
replies, er demolitions. He obviously prides himself on a
headmaster-like attitude and rates his debating abilities.
642
Mikey Brass
Re: Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 13:14:00
Roger Stanyard wrote:
> I've been doing a little background research; you may be interested to
> know that David Alton, the former LibDem MP, is a foundation governor
> of the school.
Interesting.
It is also interesting how this Cowan character attempts to legitimise
himself by placing himself on par with active scientists.
643
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 13:23:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
> > So let's talk science, as I do in my classroom - and in my C. of
E.
> > church, where the vicar (as he, like most of our parents with
> > secondary schoolchildren, has no science credentials himself)
wisely
> > leaves me to teach the church about the harmonisation of Scripture
> > and Science.
Oh dear,
So now we have three schools teaching fundie nonsense - an unnamed
CoE Church, the leading independent girls school in Liverpool and
Bluecoat and the teaching all involves Nick Cowan and his wife. Hum,
I call that infiltration.
Now lets see what the science is. Oh, its a mixture of science and
religion - "harmonisation of scripture and science". So now the
Cowans are theologians and RE teachers as well! All paid for and
agreed by the state!
Oh, and look, there's a standard fundie out of context quote!!! Roger
Penrose accepts that there is a creator! So that's it, Penrose
supports YECers!!!
Talk about give enough rope to hang himself!
Roger Stanyard
644
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 14:17:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@> wrote:
> >Nick Cowna wrote:
> > Here is mine:
> >
>
This is a difficult one - my definition of scientific literacy is
appropriate A levels but I think others might argue decent GCSE
results are enough. Others may sugegst at least a science first
degree.
For what it is worth, I take the view that most people with an
education in whatever disciplines can understand the big broad issues
in science, even if they are confused over bits of it (that's
certainly the case with the Theory of Evolution). However, it does
take a real effort to understand.
My guess is that most parents are probably still scientifically
illiterate or are on the border line. One of the sources on
Debunkcreation suggested that 94% of Americans were scientifically
illiterate but I've no idea what that was based upon.
Still, if my child came home from school quoting creationist nonsense
I would conclude that both the RE and the science teaching were plain
damn wrong and that the school was not up to the job of educating its
pupils.
Roger Stanyard
645
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 14:28:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@...> wrote:
>
> (My wife, for example, is Head of Science at
> Liverpool's top independent girls' school.)
>
Anyone got any idea which school this is. From my very limited
knowledge of Liverpool, the leading independent girls' school there is
Merchant Taylors School for Girls but it doesn't have a position as
head of science and none of the science teachers there is called Cowan.
Roger Stanyard
646
oeditor
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 17:52:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Stanyard" <roger@...> wrote:
>
> --- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "ukantic" <ukantic@> wrote:
> >
> > (My wife, for example, is Head of Science at
> > Liverpool's top independent girls' school.)
> >
> Anyone got any idea which school this is. From my very limited
> knowledge of Liverpool, the leading independent girls' school there is
> Merchant Taylors School for Girls but it doesn't have a position as
> head of science and none of the science teachers there is called Cowan.
>
The only other one seems to be the Belvedere School - smaller and
cheaper - belonging to the Girls Day School Trust. I couldn't find any
list of staff, but then I couldn't for Merchant Taylors either.
Brian
647
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 18:53:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "oeditor" <b-jordan@...> wrote:
>
It is Belvedere (I was emailed this infor a couple of hours ago) and
the jead of science there is a Mrs Cowan.
Note that this is being turned into a city academy. Seems like we could
have another Vardy school here.
Roger STanyard
648
Andrew
Re: Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 19:47:00
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Stanyard
> I've put out a
> feeler on this to an Anglican clergyman in that part of the world.
Liverpool Anglican Cathedral hosted a debate on evolution and creationism a
couple of years ago. I didn't go, but I believe the Cathedral was defending
evolution aganist criticisms from creationists at a local school.
Your information source will probably fill in the gaps, but I can probably
find out more if it's needed.
649
Mikey Brass
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 20:55:00
I have received a second message from Cowan. I was under the mistaken
impression that the message of mine he was originally responding to
was posted to DebunkCreation; I found it in this list's archives
instead. He has been filtered into my trash, because my limited time
is taken up doing legitimate scientific research - not staged events
like a "debate" to confir legitimacy where none exists. My reply is below:
-------------
I may be a Christian (although that should and does not matter at
all), but I strongly object calling "In the beginning" a valid
scientific theory. There is no falsifiable basis.
I am also not interested in the slightest who your friends, or claimed
friends, are as that has absolutely no bearing on whether a proposal
is valid science or not.
You have:
(a) failed to answer my question to provide a scientific theory of
creationism. You and I both know that this is because you cannot.
Forcing your religious viewpoint on children in a science classroom is
intellectual abuse. Your offer of a debate to certain acquaintances is
nothing more than a joke; if you have something to say, write it up
and submit it for peer-review;
(b) e-mailed me offlist (outside of DebunkCreation) uninvited and
unwanted. I therefore consider both your e-mails to be spam. If you
wish to discuss anything, then talk in public on DebunkCreation. I am,
however, reporting this to the list owner.
--
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)
650
Roger Stanyard
Re: Nick Cowan replies.
13/05/2006 21:26:00
--- In BlackShadow@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" <taoist.hermit1@...> wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Roger Stanyard
>
> > I've put out a
> > feeler on this to an Anglican clergyman in that part of the world.
>
> Liverpool Anglican Cathedral hosted a debate on evolution and
creationism a
> couple of years ago. I didn't go, but I believe the Cathedral was
defending
> evolution aganist criticisms from creationists at a local school.
>
Thanks for the offer of help. If its the debate I'm thinking about,
John Mackay was involved and he has been bragging every since that he
won it.
Still, if local school teachers were involved I would like to known
more.
Roger Stanyard
