The school of creationism

[Kulapavana 0]

Source: Independent

Published: December 20, 2004 Author: Andrew Buncombe

 

The school of creationism

 

Children in a Pennsylvania town will be taught that God made the world, igniting a debate which splits the US. Andrew Buncombe reports from Dover

 

20 December 2004

 

Was the landscape around the small town of Dover in Pennsylvania created in just six days? Were the gently curving hills perfected, the streams formed and finished, the wide, empty skies fixed in place beneath the firmament and the narrow wooded valleys completed? Was it all really done in less than a week?

 

It was, at least according to the creationist beliefs of much of the town's population of 1,800, who have little time for Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. And their fundamental beliefs are set to gain further currency.

 

As of next month, in a hugely controversial move, the town's high school will become the first in the US for several generations to teach a form of creationism as part of its curriculum.

 

But the controversy that has split the town of Dover, an hour's drive north of Baltimore, is not simply some local squabble. Rather it is a debate that is taking place in communities across the US.

 

Classrooms, courtrooms, public places, even the very pledges that officials swear when taking office have become the focus of a bitterly contested and growing dispute about whether Christianity should be officially incorporated into civic life or if there should be a real and meaningful separation of church and state.

 

It is a row that has pitched Christian against Christian, scientist against scientist.

 

It has led to accusations of lies and deliberate misrepresentation and even claims that America is turning its back on its traditions. And now that President George Bush, a bornagain evangelical, has won a second term in office with the assistance of a large turnout by evangelicals at the polls, the dispute is likely to get even more heated.

 

At the eye of this storm is Dover, where a legal battle that could end up costing local taxpayers very dear has been launched.

 

"I was very surprised. I would not have thought it [would come to this]," said Steven Sough, one of 11 parents who last week filed a lawsuit with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to try to prevent the change to the curriculum, arguing it would breach the US Constitution. "I have a daughter, Ashley, who will be 14 in two-weeks time. This is a personal issue. I want her learning science at school. I want her learning religion at home with me or at church."

 

The dispute in Dover blew up in October when the elected members of the district school board voted 6-3 that the biology course for 15-year-olds should be amended to include a theory about the origins of life known as intelligent design or ID.

 

The proponents of ID claim life is so complex that its origins must in some way have been directed by a supernatural actor. The Seattle-based Discovery Institute, a leading proponent of ID theory, says "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection".

 

In addition to ordering that pupils be taught about ID and "made aware in the gaps or problems in Darwin's theory", the board arranged for the donation to the school of 60 copies of a controversial biology book, Of Pandas and People. Copies of the text, which is critical of Darwin's "natural selection", were placed in the classrooms for pupils to browse.

 

After a meeting of the board on 18 October, two members, Carol and Jeff Brown, resigned in protest. The Browns, both Christians, said they believed religion had no place in science. "This country was founded on the belief of freedom of religion and freedom from religion," said Mrs Brown, sitting at her kitchen table, knitting with a ball of electric-blue wool.

 

Her husband said he also had practical concerns. "It is going to get shot-down in court. We cannot afford it."

 

The lawsuit filed last week by the ACLU, accuses the school board of breaching the First Amendment of the US Constitution which prohibits the establishment of an official religion.

 

In its lawsuit it argued: "ID is a non-scientific argument or assertion, made in opposition to the scientific theory of evolution that an intelligent, supernatural actor has intervened in the history of life and that life 'owes its origin to a master intellect'." It also noted that in 1987 the US Supreme Court ruled that creationism was a religious belief that could not be taught alongside evolution.

 

The school board has insisted it is not trying to force religion into the classroom. Vice-president Heather Geesey said its aim was simply to make information about ID available. "All I want to do is have anything the kids [could] learn, there for them to learn. That is our job, to teach children everything we can. "I think [the row] has been [ the result of] a misconception. Most of the people I know are in favour of it, or else are once I explain it."

 

But what of intelligent design? Is it, as critics claim, simply creationsim-lite? Glenn Branch, vice-president of the National Centre for Science Education, which promotes Darwinism, said: "There is nothing wrong with the idea of a creator but teaching it as [a part of science] leads to detriment of both religion and science. There is a blurring of the two and it involves a lot of misrepresentation of science."

 

The Discovery Institute's Centre for Science and Culture counters that labelling creationism and ID together is simply an attempt by Darwinists to limit scientific debate. Rob Crowther, a spokesman for the group, said: "We advocate that schools teach more about evolution, not less. We think that the scientific challenges to Darwinian evolution should be discussed in the classroom, but that is much different from teaching any alternative theory."

 

And what about Of Pandas and People? Now more than 15 years old, the book is considered one of the seminal texts of ID. One of its co-authors, Dean Kenyon, a controversial academic, is a fellow of the right-leaning Discovery Institute.

 

But Professor Kenneth Miller of Brown University's biology department, who wrote a stinging critique of the text during an earlier creationism row in Kansas, said: "It's an awful book. It's filled with scientific mistakes and misrepresentations. It is also out of date."

 

It is clear from even a day in the quiet town of Dover that behind the rather academic argument about the strengths and weaknesses of Darwinism and about its alleged gaps, the debate that is taking place here, as elsewhere across the US, is really about two fundamentally different views of the world. One says that America has for too long been in retreat from its Christian traditions while the other argues that America's very traditions include a separation of church and state.

 

In Dover, for instance, while the proponents of ID insist they do not wish to put religion in the classroom, they readily admit their own fundamentalist beliefs. The move to change the curriculum was initiated by a school board member, William Buckingham, who at one public meeting declared: "Two thousand years ago, someone died on a cross. Can't someone take a stand for him?"

 

Mr Buckingham has declined to speak to reporters but his wife, Charlotte, who works at one of the town's evangelical churches, told The Independent: "All ID is saying is that the origin of life is so complex that it had to be created by a higher power. That is all it says. It gives the students a chance of going to think about that."

 

Asked whether she believed schools ought to be allowed to teach religion, she said: "There are many people who homeschool their children because they cannot get what want they want elsewhere, the truth about what we believe about our creator."

 

Rumours suggest that the 60 copies of Pandas were donated to the school by Irene and Don Bonsell, whose son is a board member. Mrs Bonsell, who described herself as a creationist, refused to confirm or deny whether they had donated the books. She said she approved of the books being available to the students even though she also denied religion was being placed in the classroom. "I think it's a good idea that students should learn this theory," she said. "I'm a creationist. I don't understand what the problem is [with ID]. It's another theory. Darwinism has never been proved, it's just a theory. They are trying to take God out of everything, out of the pledge, off our money."

 

Pandas also has evangelical links. The book is published by the Texas-based Foundation for Truth and Ethics, a small conservative think-tank which has published two other books, one promoting abstinence before marriage and another which disputes that America's founding principles came from Greek, Roman and Enlightenment traditions but rather from Christianity.

 

The foundation's president, John Buell, who formerly worked to promote Christianity on university campuses, said Pandas was not a religious book even though he conceded that ID implied a "supernatural power".

 

In Dover, the school board will meet lawyers this week to discuss its options and decide whether to go ahead with the changes to the curriculum and fight the lawsuit. The members' decision will be carefully scrutinised not just by the townsfolk of Dover but by school boards across the US which are considering similar measures.

 

In Grantsburg, Wisconsin, for instance, a school board has revised its curriculum to teach "various scientific models of theories of origin" though it has since argued that it will only be teaching students "about the controversy surrounding evolution" and not ID.

 

In Charles County, Maryland, the school board is considering a proposal to eliminate textbooks "biased toward evolution" from classrooms. Similar proposals have been considered this year in Missouri, Mississippi and Oklahoma. In Cobb County, Georgia, school textbooks have for the last two years contained a sticker which informs students: "Evolution is a theory, not a fact."

 

Indeed, if recent polls are accurate, the Dover school board members may not be lacking in support. A poll last month by Gallup suggested that 45 per cent of Americans believe that humans were created by God in their current form within the past 10,000 years.

 

It is less clear what the students in Dover think about the proposed changes. On a freezing afternoon last week, Melissa Owen, 16, and 18-year-old Alex Jones, were waiting for a lift home. They both believed that the teaching of ID should be allowed in classes that were elective rather than mandatory.

 

Melissa confirmed that all the students were talking about the controversy. "It was freezing today, there was no heat," she said. "People were joking that the school was saving money to pay for the lawsuit."

 

[theist 1]

The only worry is some of these creationists call themselves Young Earth creationists and say the world and indeed universe is only 10,000 years old. Now how long with that absurd idea stand? And everyone calls that nonsense idea religion.

 

Actually the scientific truth is there is an intelligent designer behind all this phenomenon.

 

But at least they are standing up to the atheists. But I think they should be satisfied with ID and leave their own theories of timelines out of it.

[theist 1]

Dr. Singh. What you have been saying completely contradicts Darwin’s theory of evolution.

 

Srila Prabhupäda. Darwin is a rascal. What is his theory? We kick out Darwin’s philosophy. The more we kick out Darwin’s philosophy, the more we advance in spiritual consciousness.

 

-------------

 

Kick out Darwinianism ("with boot"). /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Kulapavana 0]

"The only worry is some of these creationists call themselves Young Earth creationists and say the world and indeed universe is only 10,000 years old. Now how long with that absurd idea stand? And everyone calls that nonsense idea religion."

 

yes, they definitely give creationism a bad name. it all goes back to the primitive concepts from Old Testament, both in case of religion and cosmology. how can anyone believe such naive stuff if you can personally see live trees that are 5000 years old standing near petrified trees going back more than 50,000 years using the growth ring method of dating (comparing growth ring size patterns to date tree wood).

 

[theist 1]

The trees and other examples are literally everywhere. I asked one YE (young earther) about the fact that fossils of sea creatures are found in the Himalayan mountains. But blind unthinking faith is hard to shake. He said God just choose to do that 10,000 years ago and because God can do anything we shouldn't question why He did it.

 

Can't get past that kind of "logic".

 

Just like devotees when they were on the Earth is flat kick in the 70's. I asked them about the ships disappearing over the horizen and planes also as well as the satelite mapping that has been done etc. and the answer was "the demigods are playing tricks on the material scientists because they are demons".

 

If we can get everyone to agree on ID that is good enough I feel and a tremendous stride forward. Myself I never try to explain Brahma and the lotus flower and etc. It's just intelligent design and then the next question is whose intelligence. I leave it there.

[Kulapavana 0]

"Just like devotees when they were on the Earth is flat kick in the 70's. I asked them about the ships disappearing over the horizen and planes also as well as the satelite mapping that has been done etc. and the answer was "the demigods are playing tricks on the material scientists because they are demons"".

 

he he... this is funny /images/graemlins/smile.gif but the mixture of blind faith and ignorance can be dangerous too

[Gauracandra 1]

A key problem with education is that it creates a sort of religious atmosphere - as if it is giving ultimate answers. Materialism is just as much a religion as spiritualism. If by this you mean it has certain ethics, symbols, and ideas. So the modern educational set up (initially proposed by the clergy) makes it seem like Darwin's ethics are the meaning for life. And what were Darwin's ultimate ideas? That we are animals. Thats a powerful idea. A negative idea but powerful. It was the idea behind Hitler's genocide. The strong survive the weak perish. At least the Christian idea is that we are created in God's image, which if it were false would atleast be a positive idea. But we are animals and do animals have mercy? No. The ideas of Darwin lead to abortion, eugenics, and a sort of cold heartlessness towards others (just as animals treat one another).

 

Now I think an important thing could be added to the curriculum. The problem with materialists is they only look so deep into the world and then stop. Thus they think they understand the world. But the world is truly bizarre and inexplicable. The further down you look into it the more miraculous it is.

 

So for instance I think a book called Darwin's Black Box is a good start. The more you look into it the more you realize that for Darwinian evolution to occur the odds are like one in several trillion if even that. After all most mutations are bad, not good. The book really goes into details about how inexplicable life is.

 

Another instance was a program last night on Nova. Now I'm not saying physicists believe in angels, but I don't think it would be something they would (or should) say couldn't be. They went into 'String Theory' and basically said there are worlds all around us that we can't see, there are multiple layers and dimensions, each of varying orders. It was a fascinating program. They pointed out that they could never prove it or test it, so some physicists didn't like it calling it more a philosophy than a science.

 

But suppose you showed in class what is true - that if the atomic weight of particles were off even slightly the universe couldn't exist. Show the odds of Darwin's idea, show the ideas behind String Theory and their implications, show how perfectly balanced the universe is. And then say simply "Did this happen by chance?" I think most kids would be very unsure that it did happen by chance.

 

The problem is right now most kids are intimidated in class. Most teachers know more than they do. They are being graded. So what can they say but to write the "correct" answer on their essay. But if you created videos that showed the inexplicableness of creation you would undermine the materialists argument.

 

That is, don't let them only go a few feet down, but make them keep digging deeper until they realize the world does not explain itself.

[theist 1]

Gaurachandra,

 

Brian Greene was being interviewed by Terry Gross (Fresh Air) and at one point he said he was explaining all this to his brother who is a HARE KRSNA! and his brother told him "yeah I know that's in the vedas".

 

I wonder who his brother is.

 

I saw that show before, there are two parts I think. It was great because it makes it very clear that it's really all "too much" for our tiny brains.

[Gauracandra 1]

He was the host of this Nova program. I actually am considering buying it. Its a two part series. It was really good, and while they tried to make it sensible to the average joe (for instance, explaining that various layers of membranes are like slices of the same bread), I didn't quite follow it all the time.

 

However, what I did conclude was this world is crazier than we ever imagined. And even after all this craziness they still can't explain how in the world it all came to be anyways.

 

Now, if someone says "I don't believe in angels because I can't see them." my response might be something like "Well I don't believe in 11 different dimensions predicted by string theory because I can't see them...." It seems to me 11 dimensions (there might be more as this is a relatively new theory likely to change) is pretty damn strange.... stranger than believing that an entity greater than man exists. So if there are multiple dimensions all around us (with entities who could literally could be millimeters away), who is to say there isn't a higher dimensional being able to see all of our activities and drop in on occasion. It doesn't sound that remote if you think about it.

 

And I also had the same response his brother gave him. Multiple universes? Extra dimensions? Has anyone read the Bhagavatam? They are discovering this within the last few hundred years, and string theory within the last 25 years, and yet there are many examples of multiple dimensions in Vaisnava theology.

 

So show this program in a high school class and then ask the kids "Was this all by accident?" The deeper you go the stranger it gets. Its like magic.

[theist 1]

I have seen it twice and I still get really lost trying to follow along. The average Joe that it was written for may get it but not me. /images/graemlins/smile.gif But it really plays right into Krsna conscious teaching. The kingdom of God is right here, in fact it is everywhere it's just a question of being conscious of it. Kind of like say I am in this room but I am daydreaming about being outside in the cold. It becomes so vivid I actually feel cold even in a warm room.

 

So the question arises am I really in the room or "outside"? This to me is like the fall of the soul which never falls, but does.

 

And string theory shows how there can be all these separate dimensions occupying the same "space". I agree with you 11 is just the beginning. A multitude of varying dimensions between this one all the way up to where at some point the energy becomes purely spiritual, Brahman. And then those that are of an even finer consciousness can move into Vaikuntha and finer still Goloka.

 

And it's all right here right now. The only distance seems to be one of consciousness.

 

All we say is "Oh My God!" as our jaws drop to the floor.

 

I really have a feeling that string theory opens many doors for those expert preachers who can converse in physic speak. It's just light years over my head.

[theist 1]

It's All Too Much

George Harrison

 

It's all too much

It's all too much

When I look into your eyes

You love is there for me

And the more I go inside

the more there is to see

 

It's all too much for me to take

the love that's shining all around you

Everywhere it's what you make for us to take

it's all too much

 

Floating down the stream of time

form life to life with me

Makes no difference where you are

or where you'd like to be

 

It's all too much for me to take

the love that's shining all around you

All the world is birthday cake

so take a piece but not too much

 

Sell me on a silver sun

where I know that I'm free

Show me that I'm everywhere

and get me home for tea

 

It's all too much for me to see

the love that's shining all around you

The more I learn, the less I know

and what I do it's all too much

 

It's all too much for me to take

the love that's shining all around you

Everywhere it's what you make for us to take

it's all too much

 

It's all too much

It's all too much

 

*With Your long dark hair and your form of blue

With Your long dark hair and your form of blue

You're too much

 

--------------------

* I changed the last couples of lines just a little