Royal Society, Pillar of Society smashed to bits

[TykeMerc]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7612152.stm

I really can't believe that a Member, let alone a LEADING Member of the Royal Society could have made this statement.

Political correctness taken far, far too far.

[Moose423956]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7612152.stm

I really can't believe that a Member, let alone a LEADING Member of the Royal Society could have made this statement.

Political correctness taken far, far too far.

It should be discussed purely from an educational viewpoint. At the end of the lesson the teacher should say "Of course, creationism is completely wrong".

[Diver]

The man's a religious Nutjob, intent on spreading ignorence; and whose opinions should be treated with the scorn and derision that they deserve . nuff said

[TimberWolf]

Most kids don't take a blind bit of notice of what's taught at school anyway. I doubt you could teach many kids to be a creationist or a scientist or to switch their world view.

[Troll]

"An increasing percentage of children in the UK come from families that do not accept the scientific version of the history of the universe and the evolution of species.

It's those peace loving muslims again

[TimberWolf]

Latest press releases

No change in Society position on creationism

12 Sep 2008

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.

http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=8004

[Diver]

No change in Society position on creationism

The man's a religious Nutjob, intent on spreading ignorence; and whose opinions should be treated with the scorn and derision that they deserve . nuff said

See! jumping the gun again

IGMC

[TimberWolf]

See! jumping the gun again

IGMC

Maybe not. He's saying creationism has no scientific basis, but should be taught. His latest statement could be interpreted as meaning that he believes in creationism, that it should be taught in school, but that it is not science. Sneeky eh?

[Diver]

Maybe not. He's saying creationism has no scientific basis, but should be taught. His latest statement could be interpreted as meaning that he believes in creationism, that it should be taught in school, but that it is not science. Sneeky eh?

RE trying to annex the science class

Third world war about to start?

[TimberWolf]

RE trying to annex the science class

Third world war about to start?

If kids are like we were, it doesn't matter what schools teach, since it will be ignored. We had to sing hymns, pray and take RE until 13 or so. To us, it was all (not just RE) just 'school stuff'