JLT
Posts: 740
Joined: Jan. 2008
|
| Quote (Louis @ Sep. 12 2008,16:23) | Smug mode disabled. Again.
Louis
ETA: This was forwarded to me from an anonymous English contributor who wants no credit and is in no way bro^wn and or sme^lly. Put the very thought right out of your minds.
| Quote | http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/tabid/68/id/10341/Default.aspx
leads here
http://www.srsp.net/
"The object of the project is to ensure that students in these age ranges are well informed, have a balanced view of the science and religion debate, and study both subjects with open-minded humility."
teach the controversy?
then the 'about' page gives you "The project is supported by a grant from the John Templeton Foundation."
..the last cartoon is good, though:
[URL=http://www.srsp.net/new/jokes.html |
|
In this post from the Guardian blog it doesn't sound as if Reiss wants to teach creationism.
Guardian Blog
Another article in the Telegraph.
And a statement from the Royal Society:
| Quote | UPDATE - The Royal Society has issued the following statement:
No change in Society position on creationism
The Royal Society is opposed to creationism being taught as science. Some media reports have misrepresented the views of Professor Michael Reiss, Director of Education at the Society expressed in a speech yesterday.
Professor Reiss has issued the following clarification. "Some of my comments about the teaching of creationism have been misinterpreted as suggesting that creationism should be taught in science classes. Creationism has no scientific basis. However, when young people ask questions about creationism in science classes, teachers need to be able to explain to them why evolution and the Big Bang are scientific theories but they should also take the time to explain how science works and why creationism has no scientific basis. I have referred to science teachers discussing creationism as a worldview'; this is not the same as lending it any scientific credibility."
The society remains committed to the teaching of evolution as the best explanation for the history of life on earth. This position was highlighted in the Interacademy Panel statement on the teaching of evolution issued in June 2006. |
from Nature blog The Great Beyond
--------------
"Random mutations, if they are truly random, will affect, and potentially damage, any aspect of the organism, [...]
Thus, a realistic [computer] simulation [of evolution] would allow the program, OS, and hardware to be affected in a random fashion." GilDodgen, Frilly shirt owner
|
