Who to vote for; a "must visit" web site

Current News and Links of interest

Moderator: News Editors

Who to vote for; a "must visit" web site

Postby Paul Braterman » Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:05 pm

http://skeptical-voter.org/wiki/index.p ... y_Response

In particular Question 2, about the teaching of creationism in schools.

I was appalled to find that the candidate I was going to support is in favour of this, on the grounds that creationism is a scientific theory and that students should be encouraged to make up their own minds. Whereupon I wrote to the candidate as follows:

"I am a strong **** supporter, and had been looking forward to giving you my support.

I was therefore horrified to see your response to the skeptical vote questionnaire:

"[2. Should schools be allowed to teach creationism as an equivalent theory to evolution?]

2. School children should be taught as wide a variety of theories as possible to allow them to learn to think and make their own decisions. In particular I (and many other people I know, including the scientist I'm married to) regard creationism as scientifically respectable and it should be taught, like creatonism as a theory many people accept."


I do not know what kind of scientist your husband is, but regarding creationism as a viable scientific theory shows a level of ignorance of molecular and developmental biology, to say nothing of the geological, anatomical, observational, and fossil evidence, that I find completely staggering.

For me, this is an overriding issue of intellectual honesty and competence, and I cannot vote for you.

Paul S. Braterman,
Professor Emeritus, University of North Texas
Honorary Senior Research Fellow in Chemistry, University of Glasgow
Support British Centre for Science Education (BCSE)

http://www.bcseweb.org.uk/"
Last edited by Paul Braterman on Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Paul Braterman
Paul Braterman
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:03 pm
Location: Glasgow

Postby Michael » Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:13 pm

Here's the response for the rev Kevin Logan. Very mealy mouthed as he is a totlal YEC

Kevin Logan is the 2010 Christian Peoples Alliance Parliamentary candidate for Hyndburn.

Skeptical Voter Questionnaire Response
1. Do you support the use of NHS money to provide unproven health products such as homeopathy?

No. "Close Encounters with the New Age", published by Kingsway, is my critical answer to unscientific treatments. I list the DOs and DON'Ts - especially don't touch alternative/complementary medicine unless it has rigorous, quality peer-reviewed support.

2. Should schools be allowed to teach creationism as an equivalent theory to evolution?

Schools should have freedom and choice to explain evolution as the theory that the vast majority of scientists support. They should also teach that the majority of faith groups also accept evolution in one form or another.

However, honesty and integrity demands that children, especially questioning ones, should be informed that a minority of scientists, both radical secularists and some from a faith background, do have reservations. Some question evolution's ability and capacity to produce the complexity we see today, while others insist that a creator is involved.

Science should have nothing to fear from honest questioning. Evolution, secularism and faiths have nought to fear so long as none are gagged and all have freedom to determine the truth. Fear arises when fundamentalism, whether in religion or science, gags dissent and debate.

I cover this in my book "Responding to the Challenge of Evolution" published in the USA, Germany and the UK (Kingsway).

3. Do you believe that religious belief should be legally protected from ridicule?

We should have freedom to question, probe and even poke fun at others and their beliefs, whether religious or scientific. Gagging people is wrong. Freedom of choice is always good. We should be very careful to censor only those things which are known to damage community cohesion.

4. Should an independent government adviser whose views in their area of expertise conflict with government policy be able to express those views publicly?

Yes, always.

5. Should religious courts such as Shari'a and Beth Din be recognised as alternative systems within UK law?

No. There should be just law for all.

6. Do you agree that testing on animals (within strict criteria) is a necessary part of the development of medicines?

Yes. The lives of humans are of a higher value than animals, therefore limited and essential testing is permissible.

7. Should policy-makers trust scientific evidence even when it appears counter-intuitive?

Scientific evidence tells me there is global warming while my winter fuel bills and other things tell me otherwise. With recent news of experts faking GW statistics, I prefer to wait for a settled scientific opinion. Science makes progress only by its mistakes and humanity has been caught out too many times to give blind trust. When science produces results that are not immediately understandable it needs to understand that education is needed, and it also needs to allow for the fact that science may not be infallible.

8. Do you think that abortion time limits should always be determined by the current scientific and medical consensus?

No. I think scientists have a contribution to make in this area, and so too do philosophers and people of faith and no faith. One discipline or section claiming sole right to determine ethical issues to the exclusion of other parts of society is a recipe for disaster.

9. Should religious leaders be entitled to vote in the House of Lords?

All levels of society should be represented in the Lords. Anything short of this would be undemocratic and foolish.

10. Do you support the reform of English and Welsh libel law to allow a stronger 'public interest' defence?

Presumably you're referring to the Simon Singh case against the Chiropractic Association. I do believe that qualified people should be able to advance reasonable arguments against suspect practices as a matter of free speech. I welcome the April 1st Court of Appeal ruling.

If it had gone against Simon Singh, my own book entitled Paganism and the Occult (Kingsway/ Reachout 1987 and still in print), which criticises similar practises, would have been illegal. It would also have smacked of 1984 and George Orwell's Big Brother.

I think libel reform is in need of reform to cope with tourism libel.

External Links
Parting Thoughts of Vicar Kevin - article written on his retirement as a vicar
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Re: Who to vote for; a "must visit" web site

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:06 pm

Paul Braterman wrote:http://skeptical-voter.org/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Candidate_Survey_Response

In particular Question 2, about the teaching of creationism in schools.

I was appalled to find that the candidate I was going to support is in favour of this, on the grounds that creationism is a scientific theory and that students should be encouraged to make up their own minds. Whereupon I wrote to the candidate as follows:



I tried to check the candidates fr this part of thw world but they are not listed on the survey. I suspect it will be a walkover for he Lib Dems here. Evan Harris is te sensible voice about creationism there.

The ones to take a lokk at for shere scientific illiteracy is UKIP. They are bonkers. Indeed,a few years back one of their top people was Tony Bennett. He's an aout and out YECer. Got kicked out of UKIP then went to Veritas and got kicked out of that as well. Turned up on the BCSE forum about four years back.
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm


Return to News and Links

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron