Should The Blinkered Religious Be Allowed To Teach Kids?

[youngmafbog]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3428056/Church-England-primary-school-headteacher-sparks-online-ridicule-claiming-evolution-theory-evidence-Bible-true.html

[grasscarp]

She is not alone in what she says. Evolution IS a theory - not a fact.
Many scientists and technologists pay lip-service to Darwinian theory only because it supposedly excludes a Creator." (Dr. Michael Walker, Senior Lecturer in Anthropology, Sydney University, quoted in Quadrant, October, 1982.)

Since the facts do not prove evolution, since the fossil record does not show any transition from one species to another, since "scientific" dating methods have been proven unreliable, let us remember that for those who desperately desire to reject God, evolution is a religion of last resort.

A. Lunn summed up the curious faith of the evolutionist as follows: "Faith is the substance of fossils hoped for, the evidence of links unseen." (The Collapse of Evolution, by Dr. Scott Huse.) Those supposedly omniscient scientists who still teach evolution as though it were fact are finally seen for what they are...frail men willing to believe a lie because it helps them avoid the truth.

[andy-hughes]

Possibly - but more importantly, teachers should stay away from social media - this is the kind of nonsense that results from waffling nonsense to the universe.

[youngmafbog]

So the Bible is right then?

Or is it the Koran ?

[Mamyalynne]

Someone holding that position should think carefully about what they post on Twitter etc and how it may reflect on them in their professional career.

The school follows the National Curriculum , so that is good.

[andy-hughes]

Mamyalynne - //Someone holding that position should think carefully about what they post on Twitter etc and how it may reflect on them in their professional career. //

I think the sensible approach is for people who have something to lose by having their social media views exposed, should simply abstain from the entire vainglorious nonsensical timewasting exercise altogether.

[jackthehat]

Religion should be kept to the R.E./R.K. lesson periods and out of the Science-classes.

Providing the National Curriculum is being followed there ought to be no problem.

[-Talbot-]

The blinkered religious should not be allowed to teach kids religion, if kids want religion let them go to places of worship not education.

[andy-hughes]

Talbot - //The blinkered religious should not be allowed to teach kids religion, if kids want religion let them go to places of worship not education. //

Absolutely!

It's not as if there is no danger of them not being given the balanced view of various religious faiths they receive in school, by going to a particularly denominational church is it!

[maggiebee]

But folks, she works in a Church of England primary school.

[-Talbot-]

Church of England primary schools should not exist imo

[Bazile]

^^^^^^

Or catholic schools talbot ?

Yet there are many atheist parents who fight to send their kids to catholic schools over non religous schools

[mushroom25]

DM: //There's more evidence that the Bible is true.'//

ok then let's hear it.

[andy-hughes]

Bazile - //Yet there are many atheist parents who fight to send their kids to catholic schools over non religous schools //

There are indeed - because the ethos basis of support, respect, and looking after one another is one that is highly valued by parents outwith the faith.

My wife was deputy at an inner-city Catholic primary, and over seventy per cent of the intake was Muslim, for exactly the reasons I have described.

[bazwillrun]

"Since the facts do not prove evolution, since the fossil record does not show any transition from one species to another, since "scientific" dating methods have been proven unreliable, let us remember that for those who desperately desire to reject God, evolution is a religion of last resort."

please move to joke section...

[andy-hughes]

bazwillrun - //"Since the facts do not prove evolution, since the fossil record does not show any transition from one species to another, since "scientific" dating methods have been proven unreliable, let us remember that for those who desperately desire to reject God, evolution is a religion of last resort."

please move to joke section... //

Would it be fair to see that you don't entirely agree with grasscarp's view on this?

[grasscarp]

You have to look at the many many references to this lack of proof of this claim. One example is - Dr. Niles Eldredge, an invertebrate paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History, who said:
"But the smooth transition from one form of life to another which is implied in the theory is ... not borne out by the facts. The search for “missing links” between various living creatures, like humans and apes, is probably fruitless ... because they probably never existed as distinct transitional types ... But no one has yet found any evidence of such transitional creatures. This oddity has been attributed to gaps in the fossil record which gradualists expected to fill when rock strata of the proper age had been found. In the last decade, however, geologists have found rock layers of all divisions of the last 500 million years and no transitional forms were contained in them. If it is not the fossil record which is incomplete then it must be the theory. “Missing, Believed Nonexistent,” Manchester Guardian (The Washington Post Weekly), Vol. 119, 26 November 1978.

[jomifl]

/ since the fossil record does not show any transition from one species to another,/

Grasscarp, sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between species when you have complete specimens in front of you. When you only have a partial fossilized skeleton the job is nigh impossible. Some species are only distinguishable by their behaviour and as in the cuckoos, the eggs that they lay. If palaeontologists can distinguish any difference they give it a different name. There is no need to look in the fossil record for evidence of evolution it is all around you now.

[jomifl]

/“Missing, Believed Nonexistent,” Manchester Guardian (The Washington Post Weekly), Vol. 119, 26 November 1978./

Hot off the press I see.

[mushroom25]

grasscarp, Niles Eldredge's scepticism when it comes to evolution as traditionally explained is down to a view that environment plays a bigger part than previously allowed for; thus evolution doesn't advance steadily but in a form of "punctuated equilibria", ie fits and starts. nowhere in his work does he state - or even suggest - that he prefers a creator view when it comes to explaining the diversity of natural life.

[grasscarp]

"There is no need to look in the fossil record for evidence of evolution it is all around you now."
So the apes in the zoo are slowly turning into humans?
What is evolving and becoming a different species at the moment jomifl?
Also what difference does it make if something is said a few years ago?