Anorak News | Do You Believe?

Do You Believe?

by | 28th, November 2006

Creationism or die

RICHARD Dawkins is the pin-up boy for the country’s non-believers.” So says the Telegraph, which unable to call upon a Page 3 stunna has to make do with middle-aged Dawkins, the Oxford University geneticist.

Dawkins has set up the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science and Reason.

The group set out to challenge the “educational scandal” of creationism, which has fuelled the rise of “irrational ideas”.

Dawkins is not all that keen on religion. He attempts to refute theism.

But Dawkins does acknowledge that believing in something is good. So she wants us to believe in the notion of their being no God. His group are producing pamphlets and DVDS for schools which will teach the young to question religion.

As the Guardian reports, Dawkins’ foundation will investigate what makes some people more susceptible to religious ideas than others. Why are some people more “vulnerable” to religious ideas than others?

Anorak’s position on this is in line with most Britons – if there is a God, believing in Him/Her can only result in a decent afterlife, better than the non-believer who will go to Hell; if there is no God, the time for the non-believer to gloat will be hideously brief, a stifled “Ha!” before the black abyss of nothingness swallows him up.

Says Dawkins: “The enlightenment is under threat. So is reason. So is truth. So is science, especially in the schools of America. I am one of those scientists who feels that it is no longer enough just to get on and do science. We have to devote a significant proportion of our time and resources to defending it from deliberate attack from organised ignorance."

By ignorance, Dawkins means religion and creationism, the idea that the world was made in six days and Eve was made from Adam’s spare ribs.

It’s the kind of thing fired from the pulpit on any given day. And it’s being taught to British children in science lessons.

In the Telegraph, readers learn that “hundreds of state schools” may be teaching their charges the Biblical story of the creation.

The paper says that back in September, a group called Truth in Science sent a booklet and two DVDs to 5,700 private and state schools.

Yesterday, Richard Buggs, the group’s spokesman, told us that 59 schools said they consider such materials "suitable for classroom use".

The Telegraph hears a spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills say that new guidance would clarify its position that creationism cannot be debated in science.

Fair enough. But why? Surely all things are open to rational debate, even the story of the creation. Isn’t this what learning is all about? Or is it about passing an exam and fitting in with the norm?

And what does it all say about the state of evolution..?

Posted: 28th, November 2006 | In: Uncategorized Comment | TrackBack | Permalink