Tackling Creationism In British Schools

It would appear that Professor Michael Reiss, Director of Education at the Royal Society, is claiming that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in British schools. However, he's been misrepresented on this - as is apparent when you read his own words.

Professor Reiss is actually asking how a teacher should respond if a pupil raises the question of creationism in a class on evolution. That's fair enough, I suppose. Given the increase in superstition in our society it's very likely that some pupils will bring the matter up. The answer is straightforward. The teacher says, 'You believe what you like, but if you want to pass your exam you have to learn this material.'

Where Professor Reiss is fundamentally wrong is in suggesting that creationism  'is best seen by science teachers not as a misconception but as a world view'. Science has nothing to do with 'world views' of this kind. There is no such thing, for instance, as Hindu science or Christian science or Muslim science. There is just science.  Evolution is science. Creationism is dogma. Creationism should be included in classes on the history of science but not in science classes themselves. Inclusion of  creationism in science books would indeed legitimise it, contrary to what the Professor believes.

I can't be the only person who finds it depressing that at the beginning of the twenty-first century anyone should even be talking about creationism in the same breath as evolution, let alone suggesting it should be acknowledged in science classes as a legitimate 'world view'.

Why Farmers Can't Drive On Their Own Fields

Many UK arable farmers are facing bad harvests this year as a result of the rain. Watching a brief report on our local news I heard Hilary Benn (Environment Secretary) saying he was going to lift the ban on farmers working on waterlogged land.

What ban is this? I thought. Who forbids farmers to gather harvests on wet fields? Got it in one - the European Union.

A quick search on the net turned up the culprit - The Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition standard GAEC 3. These people think of everything.

Not Our Fault; This Week's Special Pleading

John Redwood claims in his blog that regulation was the root cause of the credit-crunch and the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac collapses.

This point is reiterated in the Adam Smith Institute blog post. 'When markets are changing rapidly, market players can easily miss the signal of things going wrong from the noise of universal change. Until it's too late.' - says the author, Dr Eamonn Butler.

The signals were there a couple of years ago. Everyone knew that subprime lending was highly risky and subject to a large percentage of foreclosures. These players are supposed to be experts in the 'market'. They weren't that clever then, were they? Mind you, most of them have walked away with their fat bank balances, homes and pensions intact, so they've got the last laugh - now they're passing the buck for their own greed and irresponsibility.

Preposterous; and insulting to all those people conned into buying homes they couldn't afford only to find themselves out on the street.

Dr Butler can take his 'markets' and shove them up his fundament.

The Problem With Trial By Jury Is

The problem with trial by jury is that the jury may exercise their own judgement and come up with a surprise decision. Hence the acquittal of four British men accused of planning to blow up planes while three of their co-defendants were convicted of conspiracy to murder.

That the three men were up to no good is beyond doubt. But, although the prosecution were obviously keen to convict them of planning to bomb planes, they produced no evidence of this. Not enough evidence to convince a jury of ordinary people, that is.

As a result the CPS (ie the State) will be asking for a retrial, so they can get the outcome they want (a bit like the EU with regard to the Irish no vote on the Lisbon Constitution). In other words, they wanted a show trial but the British public let them down by exercising their own judgement. No wonder Blair and his successors want to do away with traditional trial by jury.

On the other hand we have a jury acquitting a bunch of environmental campaigners of criminal damage at Kingsnorth Power Station (£35,000' worth). The campaigners had intended to write 'Gordon, bin it' but only got as far as 'Gordon'. Oh well.

None of the political bloggers I have read has said anything about the 'plane' bombers re-trial/show trial but they are all fulminating about the Greenpeace activists being let off. Plenty of links here.

It seems to be a requirement of all libertarian or right-wing bloggers to espouse a virulent global-warming-conspiracy/scam attitude, hence their frothing about this issue. No doubt they, too, would like to do away with trial by jury.

Mrs Pudding Face Sacks Crap Data Firm, etc

Jacqui Smith fires firm responsible for loss of prisoners' data. Sack yourself while you're at it.

Patients' data lost in theft from surgery.
The politicians still haven't grasped how the technology works, have they?