Science, Just Science Campaign Petition

Please sign this petition if you are a UK citizen who feels as strongly about the issue of teaching JUST science in UK science classrooms as we do. If you are not from the UK we ask that you do not sign this petition but welcome you to discuss the issue in our forum

If you wish to engage us (or others) in discussion on the issue then please use our discussion forum (all signatories are assumed to support our petition and all that are perceived not to be will be removed).

Thanks

Ben (Science, Just Science Campaign)

We, the undersigned, feel it is an inappropriate use of taxpayer's money (and inappropriate within the UK National Science Curriculum) to teach religion in the science classrooms of UK schools. We feel is more appropriate that religion be taught as a separate subject from science. We want religion taught as a separate subject from science and the science taught to our (the nation's) children to reflect our scientist's current best understanding of the world & universe around us.

   
Name:
Email:
Comment/s:
UK Location:

 
Chris Gibson in Nottingham at 09:13:41 Monday July 31 2006
How can religion be related to science? The two are very different subjects and should be taught as individual class subjects. Religion in a science class will simply lead to confusion.

Brian Betts in mansfield Woodhouse, Notts. at 09:32:00 Wednesday July 26 2006
Teaching at school age should be based on hard facts.As a person develops a greter understanding of the world about them they will naturally think about the many various religions and come to their own conclusions of there worth or otherwise.

Anthony Lane in Nottinghamshire at 19:25:33 Tuesday July 25 2006
Children should not be confused with religion classed as a science. If poeple want to teach their children about religious principles it should be done in a separate context away from science.

Sean Dodds in Derby at 16:57:51 Tuesday July 25 2006
What has religion got to do with science? The only connection I know of is that it has always tried to stop the advance of science

Zoe Hulme in Derbyshire at 07:50:24 Tuesday July 18 2006

Roland Laycock in Nottinghamshire at 23:04:06 Monday July 17 2006
How can we tolerate the indoctrination of schoolchildren with garbage,let them look at reality and plan for tomorrow with peace in mind and love in there hearts not the Hatred taught by religions

Fiona Wilson in Northumberland at 21:33:34 Sunday June 11 2006
In today's society we are trying to open children's minds and allow them to express themselves freely - how can they do this if religion is not treat as an entirely different subject to science?

James Lefrere in London SE1 at 21:34:18 Sunday April 30 2006
Not only should religion be taught completely separately from science, religious education should teach the ideas of atheism, agnosticism and secular humanism.

Phil Bushell in London at 23:25:07 Saturday April 1 2006

Jim Pendleton in Milton Keynes at 23:11:59 Tuesday March 21 2006
What a load of nonsense

Geoff Caldwell in Nottingham at 13:20:53 Wednesday March 15 2006

David James at 10:24:19 Wednesday March 15 2006
How can we tolerate the indoctrination of schoolchildren with this backward claptrap, when it would be illegal even in the USA?

Hayley Griffiths in Newcastle upon tyne at 12:50:08 Monday March 13 2006

Shona McCulloch in Leeds at 12:35:23 Monday March 13 2006
Religion is about BLIND FAITH not FACT, it requires denial of empirical evidence, not interpretation, KEEP YOUR IRRATIONAL DOGMATIC LIES AWAY FROM SCIENCE AND AWAY FROM IMPRESSIONABLE YOUNG MINDS.

Leonie Smith in Leeds at 12:24:31 Monday March 13 2006
So-called Intelligent Design plays on the myth that there is a scientific controversy around this issue where none exists. If we're letting children hear about a story where the world was created in 6 days as science, I want my own personal favourite, that the universe is an experiment by aliens, to be taught as well - there's as much evidence for either.

Julie Corbett-Hirst in Leeds at 12:23:32 Monday March 13 2006

David Corbett in Leeds, West Yorkshire at 12:22:03 Monday March 13 2006
Creationism is NOT science and has no place in the classroom disguised as such.

Gary Auker in Chelmsford, UK at 11:08:30 Monday March 13 2006
I am a Christian and believe in exposing falsehoods, even those put forward by people of the same faith as myself. The scientific case for Evolution and an Earth millions of years old has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt. People who say other wise on the grounds of giving our children a "balanced" view are wrong. On their "balanced" view agenda why don't they propose we also teach the earth is flat, or the sun goes around the stationary Earth in 24 hours. I would suggest because they would be laughed out of school.

Steve Tett at 11:47:41 Saturday March 11 2006

Grant Ransom in Brighton at 03:52:37 Saturday March 11 2006
While were at it, what about all of the other religious and philosophical theories of origin? Surely the argument of "balance" makes their inclusion mandatory... This all smells of biggotry, and *that* should be kept out of sciece classes.

Ruth Horsman in Leeds at 13:42:51 Friday March 10 2006

Geoff Mather in Middlewich, Cheshire at 18:23:17 Thursday March 9 2006
Religion had its day: it was called "The Dark Ages".

Jean Illes in York at 21:23:52 Monday March 6 2006

Edward Bradshaw in Aldershot at 20:12:19 Wednesday March 1 2006
Creationism is NOT science.

Nick Edwards in Ormskirk, Lancs. at 00:11:11 Wednesday February 22 2006
Being a scientist and avid rational thinker, I can't conjure up a worse image than bringing religion into science class. It's times like this I almost think about saying "Wait, if you're going to include Christian mythos in science, you damn well better include my Flying Spaghetti Monster before I scream 'religious discrimination' louder than you can believe."

Matthew James McGee in Warrington, Cheshire at 12:59:38 Thursday February 16 2006
Biblical theories of creation have no place in the science classroom. If creationism must be taught, it should be reserved for RE lessons, and presented, not as fact, but as a theory that a minority of people happen to believe.

Daniel Gordon in Newcastle upon Tyne at 10:51:39 Wednesday February 8 2006
It is highly irresponsible to teach children religious doctrine in a science lesson. Science lessons should be kept for science only, and religion should be taught separately.

Test in UK at 10:50:32 Wednesday February 8 2006
Test

Anon at 00:28:24 Sunday February 5 2006

Steve Wright in Oxford at 12:10:17 Saturday February 4 2006
As a science teacher I am extremely concerned about science being misrepresented to children and education being used to further the social/political adgenda of certain religious groups.

Jan Bruce in Bristol at 21:55:41 Thursday January 26 2006
Science offers an understanding of the world by subjecting physical evidence to a process of reasoned analysis. Religion doesn't just look at the evidence differently; it tries to sweep the evidence under the carpet. To bring religion into a science class would be an act of sabotage.

Ian White in Macclesfield at 16:08:34 Thursday January 26 2006

Donna G. Blackmond at 13:36:01 Sunday January 1 2006

Jesus Christ is Lord of the Universe at 23:50:52 Tuesday December 20 2005
not mean he does not exist. I pray that you will find Jesus Christ. We all will be judged.

Dean Morrison in Hastings at 16:00:19 Sunday October 30 2005
I think that religion should be kept out of schools altogether - religous seperation has done nothing to help cross community understanding in Northern Ireland, even if exam results are good there compared to the rest of the UK. Who draws the line as to what religions are acceptable? If Tom Cruise were to put up a couple of million to take over a state school and teach the tenets of Scientology, would Tony Blair care as long as the 'exam results' were good?

Bill McGruder in Birmingham at 15:32:06 Friday October 7 2005
I will accept religion being taught in science classes, just as soon as religious studies teachers give lectures on quantum physics. As the Bible teaches us, an eye for an eye...

Stuart Edgington in middlesbrough (university) at 23:36:33 Thursday September 29 2005
The fact that any state school's cirriculum should be controlled by a private investor is a scandal but the fact that "fundmentalism" (something we are using millions in military spending to defeat abroad) christian ideas and being taught in a BIOLOGY lesson is incredible. These ideas not only effect the proven sciences of evolution, DNA and the like but spread to other diciplines such as geography, history and the wider sciences. Creationlism is a stepping stone to nonsense such as dinosaurs not existing, the denial of radioactive decay and carbon dating and not to mention the moral issues of abortion, cloning and other subjects that belong in a RE lesson not a fact driven science. I wonder what other unproven theories are next? Perhaps holocaust denial, myths being taught as fact, fairytales taught as quanitive evidence and the abolishion of all diciplines that don't fit the bibles version of events.

Mrs Juliet Hepworth in Midlands at 19:12:48 Saturday September 24 2005
I am a teacher of 'religious studies'. For the uninformed I teach a HUMANities subject. History - the human past. Geography - the human environment. RS - human beliefs and morality. World religions, humanism and atheism are given an equal share of the curriculum. No religious or moral view is allowed - I am not a vicar or rabbi - we simply teach IDEAS. Any society afraid of ideas is doomed - history demonstrates that repeatedly. In RS, we teach a lot of science when it comes to theories about the origins of the universe and how many people accept both a scientific and faith based explanations of the origins of life. The science dept in turn, my close friends) teach pure biology, physics and chemistry. They occasionally refer to the moral implications of genetic engineering etc... Both subjects are taught as absolutes in their own right. This hysteria is actually fairly ignorant and I suspect has been brought about by people wholly unconnected with today's KS3 strategy and national curriculums.

Ian Hawkes in West Midlands at 00:11:43 Saturday September 17 2005
People need to be told the difference between a layman's theory and a scientific theory. A layman's theory like Intelligent Design or Creationism has none of the objective evidence and testing that an accepted scientific theory is required to have before it can even be so called. Until there is some testing of the "god/creator hypothesis" this conjecture should be kept as far away from science classrooms as possible.

Susan Kirk in Buxton, Derbyshire at 13:24:54 Thursday August 25 2005
As a scientist, I find the idea of presenting creation as an equally valid theory alongside evolution ridiculous. While people are welcome to believe whatever they want, education should be kept secular in order to include all, and science classes should teach just that, science.

Paul Whettig in West Midlands at 20:26:23 Sunday August 21 2005
Mark, grasshoppers have 4 legs: Leviticus 11:20-23: All winged swarming things that go upon all fours are a detestable thing unto you. Yet these may ye eat of all winged swarming things that go upon all fours, which have jointed legs above their feet, wherewith to leap upon the earth; even these of them may ye eat: the locust after its kinds, and the bald locust after its kinds, and the cricket after its kinds, and the grasshopper after its kinds. But all winged swarming things which have four feet, are a detestable thing unto you."

Mark in Outiside UK at 20:11:26 Sunday August 21 2005
I have but one question (this is actually very serious) for any Bible literalist who cares to answer: How many legs does a grasshopper have?

Bryn Walters in Outside UK at 09:22:49 Sunday August 21 2005
I believe religion should be taught. BEFORE you judge whether religion should be taught in school, view some of the seminars by Dr. Kent Hovind with an unbiased mind, part six is particually good but view part 1 first, these seminars can be downloaded free here: http://www.biblebelievers.com/hovind/.All facts brought about in the seminar can be verified on the net.

chris purcell in hertfordshire at 21:47:16 Wednesday August 17 2005
i am a strong catholic and believe in the creation story word for word, however it is important that children are given the two views and the freedom to choose for themselves

Bryan Clark in Glasgow at 21:42:59 Thursday July 21 2005
Religious Education is an oxymoron.

Darran Anderson at 12:10:34 Monday May 23 2005

Duncan Wilkins in Hertfordshire at 16:46:33 Monday May 9 2005
Science classrooms are for science lessons not brain washing.

Ravi Somaiya in London at 11:27:41 Friday April 29 2005
Children should be taught that nothing is beyond question and that no-one has the right to tell them to abide by an arbitrary set of beliefs. Humanity already has too much of a tendency to bend at the knees without inculcating it in schools.

R Smith in Nottingham at 10:36:10 Thursday April 28 2005
Teach science not science fiction! Creationism is not a science and should not be taught as such.

Philip Griffiths in Newcastle at 22:50:26 Wednesday April 27 2005
The state should not be funding religious indoctrination. Education should be strictly secular, as it is in France

Chris Martin in Somerset at 19:51:18 Tuesday April 26 2005
The teaching of religion should be replaced by how to bring up children so as they don't become delinquents!

Lauren Kelly in Cardiff at 00:18:10 Saturday April 16 2005
Opinion should never be presented as fact. Fact.

Adam Johns in Cardiff at 22:55:19 Friday April 15 2005
Creationism is nonsense. Everybody knows it is nonsense. Those who persist in believing that the universe is 6000 years old and was created in 6 days should be sent to a secure ward, not to run a school.

Mark Smith in Worcester at 20:28:27 Wednesday April 6 2005
Science rejects self delusion, religon embraces it.

Neil Wilkes in London, England at 14:27:51 Thursday March 3 2005
I am totally opposed to any form of religious indoctrination in Schools, as I believe it should be the individuals right to decide which, if any, religion they wish to be brought into. Okay - there are problems with the traditional "Big Bang" theory, but to teach creationism on the grounds that the cosmological constant is too precise to be accidental is utter balderdash - the fact is, it is the number that works in our universe, and you might as well look for "proof" of intelligent design in the fact that the angle between oxygen atoms in a water molecule is 60 degrees. Science only - but not dogma.

Amy Whitelaw in Middlesbrough at 18:43:27 Friday February 25 2005
I live near Kings Academy and have been informed that they teach pupils about Noah's Ark in Science! One boy stated that he did not believe in the Ark as it would have been impossible to fit all species of animal on the Ark and he got suspended. This school shut be shut down

Warren Green in Surrey at 18:39:57 Friday February 25 2005
Religion causes nothing but war and should not be a mandatory part of the curriculum.

Thomas the Tank engine! in Isle of Sodor at 00:52:17 Friday February 25 2005
Puffder eh?!

Gillian Laird in Lennoxtown, near Glasgow. at 21:35:44 Thursday February 24 2005

Timothy Markham in Bath at 17:30:02 Thursday February 24 2005

Ian Consterdine in http://newolder.netfirms.com/ at 15:55:41 Thursday February 24 2005
To whom will the petition be sent?

Sam Simpson in London at 14:59:25 Thursday February 24 2005

Tim Baker in North West of England at 14:04:51 Thursday February 24 2005

James Wright in Hertfordshire at 13:55:39 Thursday February 24 2005

Paul O'Sullivan in Cambridge at 13:34:56 Thursday February 24 2005

Andrew Joseph in Southend, Essex at 13:02:04 Thursday February 24 2005
Im all in favour of this petition I think is also a distraction to the pupil and puts more pressure on the studant.

Mark Bailey in Didcot, UK at 12:46:33 Thursday February 24 2005
I note that the National Curriculum says, under Sc1 Scientific enquiry: Ideas and evidence in science, that "Pupils should be taught... how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting empirical evidence [for example, Darwin's theiry of evolution]". It is unfortunate that even the authors of the National Curriculum have misunderstood that the evolution of life is an observation. Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection is the theory that describes how the observed evolution of life happened. The authors of the National Curriculum have effectively raised a controversy in science, where none existed! Mild debates such as between Dawkins and the late S.J. Gould were not disputes about whether evolution happened or about whether Natural Selection was the driving force. And the controversy between the scientific approach and the religious approach (including creationism and ID) is simply the battle between the forces of enlightenment and reason over those who wish for the return of the dark ages and the abolute power of the Church.

Jonathan Cairns in Reading at 12:36:58 Thursday February 24 2005
Science should be based on critical analysis of evidence in the world around us- not just accepting what someone wrote in a book a few thousand years ago as fact. Evidenceless theories belong in the RE classroom.

Mark Bigelow in North West England at 12:24:44 Thursday February 24 2005
Religion belongs in church, not in school.

Simon Springate in Kent at 11:54:29 Thursday February 24 2005

Chris Habgood at 11:54:12 Thursday February 24 2005
Religion has a place in school and that place is the RE classroom. Neither creationism nor ID (introduction of the supernatural creator via the backdoor of fuzzy nomenclature) are truly scientific theories and have no place in the science classroom. Children need to be taught science and this means scientific theories and the evidences behind them rather than the mythological unsupported claims of the religious.

Anon in Cardiff at 11:50:11 Thursday February 24 2005
Religion has a place in school and that place is the RE classroom. Neither creationism nor ID (introduction of the supernatural creator via the backdoor of fuzzy nomenclature) are truly scientific theories and have no place in the science classroom. Children need to be taught science and this means scientific theories and the evidences behind them rather than the mythological unsupported claims of the religious.

Julia Gaudelli in Guildford at 11:22:02 Thursday February 24 2005

Gavin Upton in Kent at 09:00:52 Thursday February 24 2005
Page down to comments from Tjaart Kruger and you will see why rubbish spouted by people such as mr Kruger has no place in British schools

Michael Hemingway in Kent at 08:48:04 Thursday February 24 2005

Nigel Atkinson in Middlesbrough at 08:46:32 Thursday February 24 2005

Al Johnston in Newcastle at 08:14:06 Thursday February 24 2005

Alan Saunders in Staines, Middlesex at 08:06:50 Thursday February 24 2005

Jason Ferguson in Scotland at 07:07:24 Thursday February 24 2005
About time this was addressed.

Rod Archer in Glasgow, Scotland at 00:29:22 Thursday February 24 2005

Stephen Miller in University of Bath at 00:16:38 Thursday February 24 2005
Chemistry Undergraduate

David Price in Isle of Wight. at 23:49:17 Wednesday February 23 2005
(Geology, Earth Sciences)

Peter Foster in Bristol at 22:54:09 Wednesday February 23 2005
Creation has a place in schools, in the RE class where many different religions and creation myths should be covered. Valid peer reviewed science should be tought in science class.

Doc Strange in Living in the Netherlands dreaming of fish and chips! at 22:11:44 Wednesday February 23 2005
Science is based on evidence and observation It is a strict discipline that it is verifiable. Religion is a belief with neither proof nor prediction. They do not belong in the same teaching environment. If religion is to be taught as a valid factual subject then it must include all religions...i.e. American red Indian...Pagan...Norse...Egyptian...etc. etc... all are equally valid all are beliefs and all are religions. If they are to be taught then as such it would require one dedicated lesson ...it would be a vast subject! And to only teach one set in favour over the other set is tantamount to racism and bigotry it would be, therefore, illegal! And to even think of combining it with science would be to condemn the students to the dark ages! It is a ridiculous suggestion...keep them separate... keep the kids sane!

carole in University of Manchester at 21:20:28 Wednesday February 23 2005

Penny Johnson in Carnforth, Lancashire at 21:08:24 Wednesday February 23 2005
Children MUST be taught about different world religions as this encourages tolerance of others, and also allows children to consider that a religion forced upon them by their parents may not be the only or 'true' religion. However this teaching must be kept separate from the teaching of science, which is based on evidence, observation, prediction and testing, and not on mythology passed down from past generations.

Michael Hill in Retired to France. at 20:56:39 Wednesday February 23 2005
Took early retirement from England and live in France. I still pay UK tax.

Chris Thomas in Birmingham, UK at 19:56:45 Wednesday February 23 2005
Only substantiated facts and scientific method should be taught in the science classroom. Information about ALL of the world's religions should be taught, to increase awareness, understanding and tolerance, especially in a multi-cultural country such as ours. But leave the religious brainwashing (for that is all it is) to the personal choice of the parents.

Leonard Woodrow in Retired UK citizen living in Spain at 19:49:59 Wednesday February 23 2005

Mark Langford in Suffolk at 18:27:41 Wednesday February 23 2005
Teaching Creationism (or it's watered-down relation "Intelligent design") as "fact" in a Science lesson is appalling. To do so is to stand in front of the classes and teach them lies. Evolution is not "just a theory", it is an observed FACT. To teach children that the bible is unqualified truth does immense amounts of harm to their education and cognitive abilities, robbing them of the ability to critically examine evidence. Teachers who do this - and Heads and Governors that knowingly appoint them - should be dismissed and prevented from entering into education again.

Les Forrest in Middlesbrough at 22:04:18 Sunday February 20 2005
Religion in Schools should be taught under the heading of history only; along with the teaching of other religions Students should be allowed to debate subjects from an historical point of view not what some decides today.

chris healey in west london at 13:18:42 Thursday February 10 2005
this is pure fraud - teaching a "faith position" (which is not supported by scientific data) and a "theory" (which is) as equal alternatives within a science class and "letting the children make up their minds" is an unqualified disgrace. to equate the two in this way is nothing less than to deny the scientific principle, and thus all of science, in order to try to create fake authority for a faith position.

Emma in Brighton at 23:44:10 Monday February 7 2005
The pupils who sit in your science classrooms are the same pupils who sit in RE classrooms. You can not ignore their questions - indoctrination works both ways. It is up to the individual to decide when they have been presented by both sides of the arguement. I am not suggesting that religion should be taught in the science classroom - but the refusal to mention it is not providing a balanced education which reflects today's society.

Paul Lounds in Notingham at 11:39:51 Tuesday January 18 2005
Religion should not be taught in schools in the way it currently is and there should not be faith-specific schools. What should be taught is simply an awareness of the existence of the FULL variety of world beliefs and faiths - it should be left up to the individual to choose what they wish to believe in.

Maria Seale in Leicester at 20:25:18 Monday January 17 2005

Matt Newsome in Coventry at 11:43:01 Monday January 17 2005
Nothing against voluntary faith schools, but not at the expense of replacing a state school, to be brainwashed by right-wing 'bushites'. Seems funny to write bush and brain in the same sentence. Also, is it not amusing or coincidental to see 'Bush' and 'shites' in the same word?!

Fergus Morrin in Leicester at 18:21:34 Saturday January 15 2005

Michael Barr in Colchester at 17:16:51 Saturday January 15 2005
Religion has it's place, and that isn't in science class. Science class should teach a good understanding of the scientific method, not religiously based dogma.

andrew thirsk in glossop derbyshire at 14:50:38 Friday December 24 2004
I strongly support this petition, leave religion out of science. (do people still believe in creationism)?

Matthew James McGee in Warrington, Cheshire at 12:28:07 Monday December 20 2004
Schools are meant to exist for teaching, not for indoctrination. If parents wish their children to learn that the Universe was created in 6 days then they are free to teach that to them in the home. Taxpayer's money should not be used to brainwash children.

Chris Hobson in East Yorkshire. at 15:32:40 Sunday November 21 2004
Since all religions are demonstrably untrue I don't think that they should be taught in school at all. If people want to fill their own childrens' heads with nonsense that is their own affair but I don,t see why I should have my own child lied to at my own expense.

'Slug' Appleby in On the doorstep of the kings academy Middlesbrough at 01:30:16 Tuesday November 2 2004
When Jasper Carrott believes everything he reads in the 'Sun' I will believe everything that was reported in the bible. At the age of eleven I had the freedom of thought to work out that there were serious discrepancies over the number of fish and loaves of bread at a given incident from one 'Biblical reporters' version to the next. Along with other evidence such as the existence of dinosaur bones, freshwater fish and the question of how Noah got the Orang utangs to stop fighting with the Polar bears never mind rescuing countless varieties of wildlife which would have took a thousand Darwins several lifetimes to complete in countries that hadn't been discovered when everyone thought that the world was flat.... After all this my conclusion was MY conclusion and I was free to reach it and abide by it. By brainwashing our next generation into mindless automatons they are trying to deprive them of the ability to think and work this out for themselves and on a subliminal level recruit for their cause. Do not allow them to rob our children of the freedom of thought that I was so grateful to have. They must be stopped.

Mark Sandy in London at 11:49:54 Friday October 15 2004
Allowing 'creationism' (I won't dignifiy it by referring to it as 'creationist science') to be espoused in science classes in state funded schools would be an act of fascist barbarism. This also highlights for me why children should not just be taught the facts of science but high science works as a discipline, the status of theory in science etc.

Ben Willott in Portsmouth at 12:43:13 Tuesday October 12 2004
Mr Kruger, You seem happy to deride evolutionary biologists for using so many qualifiers, and yet the article you link to is contains the words "may" and "possibly". What criteria are you using to accept some qualified theories and not others? There is nothing to prevent creationists from producing theories, but they have yet to back up those theories with evidence - and where is the evidence? An evolutionary biologist can rely on a huge supply of fossils radio-carbon dated to millions of years ago. Where is the evidence to suggest that the earth is only 6000 years old? There is none as yet, hence your and creationists reliance on glib proclamations, accusations of conspiracy, and the good old fallacy of misrepresentation (rocks, honestly Mr Kruger). Back to the topic of this petition, I fully support it.

Brian Jordan (Ph.D) in West Yorkshire at 10:18:22 Saturday October 9 2004
My wife caught an MRSA infection. Methicillin is more recent than Reg Vardy, and an S. Aureus strain evolved and became resistant to it. Darwin 1 Creationists 0. Now lets evolve some resistance to Vardy and his mind-rotting nonsense.

Alan Bellis in East Yorkshire at 00:38:33 Thursday October 7 2004
I would like to respond to Tjaart’s smug, largely incomprehensible & silly arguments that he has given below. Firstly, there is no such thing as an “evolutionist”, this is just a negative term used by religious extremists who want to paint a distorted picture of the scientific community they are opposing. Tjaart should stop trying to rewrite the English language. Secondly, scientists oppose the teaching of creationism in schools because there is no evidence for it & it imparts beliefs that are hostile to modern science. Somehow, Tjaart has managed to take these facts & twist them around to show that the objection to the teaching of creationism is actually a sign of uncertainty by the objectors! The mind simply boggles at the logic. He almost seems bemused by the fact that anyone would go to the trouble of objecting, after all, why would anyone get so excited about blowing 150 years of scientific advancement straight out the window? Incidentally do these lack of standards apply to other disciplines besides science; are we to take it that “anything goes” in schools these days? I have read plenty of books on evolution over the years & it is obvious to me that the evidence for it is clear & persuasive. A large proportion of this evidence is based on well-understood geological information & associated fossils, which have been accurately analysed & dated. I have no doubt that if scientists are speculating on a new piece of evidence, then they may use phrases such as, “we think that”. However, to claim that this is the norm or insinuate that this somehow undermines evolutionary theory is just plain rubbish. Readers may be confused by Tjaart’s reference to the speed of light. As he has explained his position so badly, I will take the trouble to explain it for him. It is the contention of some creationists that a universe that is 14 billion years old, can be shown to be a lot younger if it were possible to show that the speed of light was different in the past. This theory has been completely discredited by the scientific community. The article Tjaart quoted in support of his claim did little to help him. The authors spoke of a “hint” of a change in a physical constant associated with the speed of light, of 1 part in 100,000. They also talked about this being most evident 12 billion years ago. This is a bit more than the 6000 – 10,000 years that young earth creationists wishfully assign to the age of the universe! I am giving up trying to decipher Tjaart’ comments, they are just getting more & more bizarre, for instance he says, “evolutionsist (sic) will have us believe we come from rocks”. Well, I suppose that makes a change from the slime that creationists like to babble on about. He seems to be claiming that scientists are attempting to suppress evidence of creationism. There is just one problem with this argument & that is, there in no evidence! Not a single piece – none, zero, zilch. Finally, I hold up Tjaart’s views as evidence as to why we have to fight like crazy to keep creationism out of schools. Do we really need our school children getting their brains fried with this nonsense? Alan. www.blackshadow.co.uk

Tjaart Kruger in Cambridge at 22:50:44 Tuesday October 5 2004
What is the problem with teaching just science? Nothing! But the way evolutionist hack back at the merest mention of Creation, shows probably a gnawing worm of worry? If you go and read all the pieces on evolution, count the times the word, "we think that", "we assume", "it must have been" crops up. Theory upon theory. But that's just it. A theory has not been proven yet. E=mc2. Nice theory. Seeing that c is a constant (speed of light in a vacuum) it was a suprising to find out that it's not so c afterall. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991158 . What is wrong with a creationist making a theory? Same ingredient's, real science, with a theory of what might,could,will. What is the scary part in that? Evolutionsist will have us believe we come from rocks. Next time, just have a look at a rock. Oh, and add the magic ingredient that makes all their theories work fit, Billions and billions of years. Maybe there is evidence the earth is young. Why would evolutionists go crazy to try and stop that? Evidence is evidence. I do not decry that I am a expert scientist. But even the layman can see there is definite spanners in the works as far as evolution is concerned. And they are concerned. Hence half the responces on this page. If everyhting is based on science, what is the matter? Regards, Tjaart

jill collinson in Northumberland at 14:47:55 Monday October 4 2004

Andrew Hugh Butler in Manchester at 09:08:07 Thursday September 9 2004
Keep religious rubbish free from pure sciences. If we don't then our modern science based society will suffer in the long term.

Michael Bruff in London at 23:52:07 Saturday September 4 2004
Whilst it's highly unlikely that the deranged Creationist view will ever gain more than a tiny fraction of the support here that it has in the USA, this is a trend that needs to be nipped in the bud, *now*. It's appalling that any school partly or wholly funded by the state should be permitted to promulgate this claptrap, and scarcely less so that our leaders refuse even to criticise it on the grounds that such schools' GCSE results are excellent.

Gordon Leel in Peterborough at 16:29:20 Friday August 13 2004
Just ask a bible literalist how all the world's biodiversity fitted onto the Ark and see what they say! Darwin 1 : Fundamentalists 0

Chris W. Hughes in Chester at 20:34:11 Thursday August 12 2004
If Christians have trouble understanding the strength of feeling on this issue, they should consider how they would feel if the only state school their children could get into were to be taken over by a fundamentalist Muslim who proceeded to appoint teachers and governors sympathetic to his philosophy and encouraged them to teach his beliefs in science classes.

Alun Lewis in Tring, Herts at 13:54:48 Thursday August 12 2004
I thought your readers might be interested in an excerpt from the Forum Against Islamophobia and Racism’s (www.fairuk.org) recent Muslims on Education Paper that I recently stumbled across. The Paper was launched at the House of Lords on June 9th by Baroness Udin - in the presence of David Millband, no less. Lurking amongst the usual special pleadings for a faith-based approach is a section that I thought might be of interest to your mission - the 'killer' is in the second para: ------------------- 4.4.1 Though not mandatory for independent schools, many Muslim schools follow the NC (National Curriculum) in its core aspects with modifications in order to accord with the teachings of Islam. In some cases the NC needs little modification, as with Mathematics and Information Technology. In the Science subjects (Physics, Biology and Chemistry) however there is likely to be a change in emphasis so that the processes of elevating deductive logic is de-emphasised and other forms of receiving knowledge are given their respective emphasis. In the Humanities, a more substantial change to the NC may be apparent. As with the teaching of History, a less ‘Eurocentric’ approach might be in evidence with Islamic history given special emphasis. In addition Qur’an studies, Arabic and other Islamic subjects may become major elements within the curriculum. ------------------_ How exactly can you teach Science by de-emphasising deductive logic ? Call me pre-Modernist, but surely it stops being science ? I'd like to learn more about these 'other forms' of receiving knowledge and examples of where they have proved relevant and useful in science, engineering and technology - Kekule's Serpent aside..... Looks like we’re back to the standard truth by revelation rather than rationality argument……..

sally blackwell in Reading at 00:15:48 Sunday August 1 2004

Jo Brodie in London at 14:40:34 Friday July 23 2004
"...As for Science vs Religion, I'm issuing a restraining order. Religion must stay 500 yards from Science at all times." Judge Snyder - The Simpsons (Lisa the Skeptic) From the Institute of Biology Creationism and evolution: questions in the classroom http://www.iob.org/default.asp?edname=810.htm&cont_id=29 Resource for science teachers - choose creationism or evolution links.

Thomas Cogley in Kent at 22:05:11 Wednesday July 21 2004
You teach science in science lessons that's been proved by scientists. Creationism is a religious view held by a part of one religious group. Why should it be taught in science lessons?

Alan Saunders in Staines, UK at 20:27:05 Wednesday July 21 2004

Graham Bannister in Surrey at 13:41:53 Friday July 16 2004
The teaching of creationism in Science is indoctrination, and will potentially pave the way for further dangerously extreme religious "education". It must stop now.

Gordon Sinclair in Barnsley, South Yorkshire at 12:00:41 Tuesday July 13 2004
A recent development in this country is the introduction of pre-enlightenment, fixed-doctrine beliefs which emanate mainly from North and South America. A feature of these individuals and groups, especially those from the United States, is that money and influence accompanies the beliefs which are spread in a highly organised way. Those attracted to these particular simplistic fundamental beliefs are usually people who feel more comfortable with an easy-to-follow system of thought which tends to be accompanied by a desire to indoctrinate others. This also provides a useful means of wielding power. Sir Peter Vardy's setting up Creationist Academies, with the assistance of the Christian Socialist Movement, is an example of a new alarming process.

James Coils in Hartlepool, Nr Middlesbrough. at 12:05:53 Wednesday July 7 2004
The teaching of religion should be a matter for parents to address, and should not be a part of any formal education program, especially if, as in this case, the teaching of religion conflicts with the hard facts available to us.

Jeremy Henty in Cambridge at 22:28:50 Thursday July 1 2004
This petition is good, but it doesn't go far enough because it does not state what the current state of science is. We need to state that creationism of any sort is not science, and that there is currently no scientifically respectable alternative to neodarwinism. The proponents of Intelligent Design (among others) are desperately trying to convince the public that Darwinism is scientifically dubious. We need to point out that this is false.

Kay Wilkinson in Conisbrough, Doncaster at 23:27:17 Wednesday June 30 2004
I'm the Chair of Consibrough & Denaby Parents Action Group, we are a group of parents who got together through the actions of our local Council asking the ardy Foundation to take over our schools. They put in £2 million take over hte whole running of the school, they are a Christian funermentalist Group who belive that "Creatinism" should be taught alongside Science as as something of equal worth. We are fighting this all the way. If anybody needs more info about our campaign please go to our website on www.cadpag.co.uk

John O'Brien in North Yorkshire at 15:30:27 Monday June 28 2004
If creationism gets a foothold in Britain it will result in a generation of children devoid of intellectual curiousity and the capacity for rational thought. When the answer to every awkward question becomes "God works in mysterious ways" both religion and science are worse off.

Mervyn Jones in London at 16:15:25 Saturday June 26 2004
As a trained geologist and parent there are few things that make me angrier than the propagation of religion in the name of science

Barry Giddings in Aberystwyth, West Wales at 18:10:18 Wednesday June 23 2004

Norma Giddings in Aberystwyth, West Wales at 18:09:46 Wednesday June 23 2004

Ian M. Scott in West Wales at 16:30:29 Wednesday June 23 2004

Robin Hayman in London at 20:14:26 Tuesday June 22 2004
Evolution is falsifiable - therefore it is a scientific theory. Creationism is not falsifiable - therefore it is not a scientific theory. It should not be taught as such.

Ula Cartwright-Finch in London at 20:11:33 Tuesday June 22 2004

Glynis Scott in Mid Wales at 18:41:36 Tuesday June 22 2004
The idea that the Vardy Foundation (or any other rich person) could influence or run schools is appalling. I can hardly believe we have a prime minister who is foolish enough to think that indoctrinating kids with creationist drivvle is a good thing. What century does he think we're in?

David Carmel in London at 17:23:07 Tuesday June 22 2004

James Macdonald in London at 13:55:27 Tuesday June 22 2004

Jessie Ricketts in London at 10:04:38 Tuesday June 22 2004
Are you sure this is the 21st century? I can't believe this is even an issue.

Simon Jordan (DPhil) in Hertfordshire at 19:21:11 Monday June 21 2004
Vardy's own texts make plain the essential links between questioning minds and scientific discovery. Teaching biblical "Truths" which are beyond human investigation is incompatible with this. Indeed to accept "Facts" without question is to reject one of our most important, nay divine, gifts: the ability to study and question the beliefs of others.

Alex Ioannides in London at 17:22:59 Monday June 21 2004
Meta Physics is not the concern of science.

Alex Fradera in London at 14:56:28 Monday June 21 2004
Don't let it happen. Seriously. Too much to lose.

Charles Knight in Manchester at 17:14:38 Sunday June 20 2004
It is impossible to teach creationist science in schools as there is no science involved! Let's stop this one in it's tracks - if you want to believe in fairies and the like, that is your business, it has no place in the classroom.

Michael Abbott in Cambridge at 19:24:17 Thursday June 17 2004

Chris Michael in London at 18:02:07 Wednesday June 16 2004

Paul Browning in Birmingham at 15:30:29 Wednesday June 16 2004

Robin Levett in Bromley at 15:17:47 Tuesday June 15 2004
I would add that not only is creationism (in all its manifestations - including ID) a religion, it is the religion of a small minority that worships an interpretation of the Bible rejected by the major Christian churches.

Jim Donovan in CHELMSFORD at 15:01:27 Tuesday June 15 2004
Schools are for teaching students not for recruiting believers. Just the facts please.

Dan Elphick in Southampton at 11:29:36 Tuesday June 15 2004

Ian Saunders in Ruscombe (Twyford), Berkshire at 10:44:44 Tuesday June 15 2004
It's time we started teaching science and rational thinking in religion lessons, methinks.

Simon Watt in London at 10:19:02 Tuesday June 15 2004

Matthew Whitehouse at 09:48:40 Tuesday June 15 2004

Jeremy Punnett in South East at 09:44:34 Tuesday June 15 2004
This is the beginning of the end.

Luke Heighway in London at 09:27:41 Tuesday June 15 2004

Jim Stowe in Swindon, Wilts at 08:52:57 Tuesday June 15 2004

Geoff Arnold in Boston, Massachusetts. (Expat Brit, formerly of Chesham, Bucks.) at 06:31:52 Tuesday June 15 2004
Science is a seamless web of methodology and evidence. Creationism isn't just incompatible with evolution; it's incompatible with the science that brings you toothpaste, television, and (unfortunately) atomic weapons. If Blair does not understand this, he is unfit to be Prime Minister.

Paul King in Cambridge at 23:13:46 Monday June 14 2004
Any government with a genuine commitment to education should recognise that science classes should teach science. Science classes should not teach religious beliefs opposed to science.

Tim in Dorset at 23:11:07 Monday June 14 2004
Teaching impressionable kids that ancient legends about mythical deities are somehow true is not a good idea in any subject, but science ..... this is a sick joke.

JOHN GOATHAM in Sittingbourne Kent at 21:25:47 Monday June 14 2004
In a rational world no comment would be needed

Nelson Cunnington in Cheltenham at 21:13:08 Monday June 14 2004
"Creation science" isn't science. I'm not sure it's even very good religion.

James Forrest in Leicester at 20:38:30 Monday June 14 2004

Ian Darling in Twyford, Berkshire at 18:57:07 Monday June 14 2004
Not only should be not be teaching pseudo-science such as young-earth-creationism, we should be increasing the level of good science teaching.

Lance Knobel in Dulwich, London at 18:51:56 Monday June 14 2004
Fortunately, the vast majority of UK schools agree with the petition. It's vital, however, to ensure that the few outliers are isolated and shamed. Let's strengthen secular state schools and diminish the role of faith schools.

Andrew Groves in Los Angeles (British Ex-pat) at 16:49:40 Monday June 14 2004
As a British scientist working in the US, I can see the damage that creationism is doing to US science education. It would be a tragedy if this was repeated in Britain.

Eddie Rios at 16:07:34 Monday June 14 2004

malcolm rogers in Halesworth, Suffolk. at 15:59:14 Monday June 14 2004
Teach the young about science and about religions, do'nt brainwash them with a single point of view. In other words, teach without indoctrination. And do'nt vote for a political party led by a practicing adherent, which counts out both Labour and Conservative.

Steven Tett in Portsmouth at 15:28:55 Monday June 14 2004

Chris Shore in Cambridge at 14:30:50 Monday June 14 2004
I am an evangelical Christian but even so, I do not support the teaching of any particular religious point of view in schools, whether masquerading as science or not. Religion (other than comparative) should not form part of teaching in any schools.

Alan Braggins in Cambridge at 13:05:09 Monday June 14 2004

Dafydd Wyn Evans in Cambridge at 12:16:49 Monday June 14 2004

John Cox in Cambridge at 10:14:31 Monday June 14 2004

John Dallman in Cambridge at 10:07:03 Monday June 14 2004
If our current government is doing /this/ to make friends with US fundamentalists. it's time for a small revolution here.

Q Quatro at 08:27:00 Monday June 14 2004
It should be fairly clear that a) one should not vote labour, which supports this nonsence, and b) we should do all we can to oppose this violation of truth

David Large in Warwickshire at 08:20:27 Monday June 14 2004
Once there is scientific evidence to back up any religious claims over the origins and development of life, then by all means teach it as science. Until then, keep the unsubstantiated garbage out of the science classroom, and don't interfere with the free will of children.

Roy Thearle in Whitstable at 23:48:27 Sunday June 13 2004
Schools should be for teaching, not indoctrinating

Anton Bliszko in Banbury at 08:21:09 Sunday June 13 2004
Why the hell is religion being taught in science classes? They'll be teaching kids about the tooth fairy and santa next. Stop wasting my taxes on this primitive nonsense

Rod Davies in London at 21:43:12 Saturday June 12 2004
Maybe it should also say that we don't want astrology and witchcraft taught in science classrooms either.

Nicholas Sharratt in Devon at 11:35:50 Saturday June 12 2004
Religion should only be taught in school as part of social studies, there should be no indoctrination.

Tim Simpson in Hampshire at 00:21:38 Saturday June 12 2004
I'd like to believe that this petition isn't necessary, but I've learned not to trust that the current government will act in the country's interest.

Richard Wilson in Leeds at 19:39:42 Friday June 11 2004

m.osborne in Bristol at 17:03:20 Friday June 11 2004

Helen Bush in Cambridge at 16:59:06 Friday June 11 2004

Carl Jackson in Nottingham at 16:30:28 Friday June 11 2004
This petition should not even be necessary. The statement above goes without saying.

Ian Robinson in Belfast, UK at 16:01:33 Friday June 11 2004
Religion has no place in the science curriculum. If it must be included in schools then RE or comparative theology classes are where it should be discussed.

Ian Robinson in Belfast, UK at 15:58:39 Friday June 11 2004
Religion has no place in the science curriculum. If it must be included in schools then RE or comparative theology classes are where it should be discussed.

Chris Stapleton in Portsmouth at 15:23:46 Friday June 11 2004
I'd be happier if they removed religion from the curriculum altogether.

Clive Durdle in London at 14:59:19 Friday June 11 2004

Paul Jenkins in Oxford at 12:50:06 Friday June 11 2004

S. Foord in Cambridge at 12:29:00 Friday June 11 2004
Religion has no place in science. Science is an important subject and there isn't time (even in the current dumbed down curriculum) to waste on stupid things like religion. If religion has to be taught in schools at all it should be comparative religion of all faiths past and present - to put things in their proper context rather than pretending any given local faith has any validity.

Robert Stevens in Frome, Somerset at 12:17:33 Friday June 11 2004
It is unfortunate that Britain lacks America's constitutional separation of Church and State. That is why this is able to happen. But surely schools SHOULD have an obligation NOT to teach proven falsehoods as if they were facts?

Andrew Ian Adcock in Cardiff at 10:30:58 Friday June 11 2004
I completely agree with the wording of the petition. Trying to teach 'creationist' ideas is a pathetic diversion of educational resources that are scarce enough as it is. Keep religion apart from science - no good can come of it!

Martin J Burn in Cambridge at 00:26:55 Friday June 11 2004
What exactly is the problem with keeping science in the classroom, and christian religious indoctriantion in churches? Do we really want to become an insignificant scientific backwater and world-wide laughing stock? Teaching invisible, magical explanations instead of natural reality in schools is nothing short of child-abuse. Let's try and promote flying amongst the stars -- not flights into skyscrapers.

Richard Parsons in Surrey at 21:56:24 Thursday June 10 2004

Martin Ross in London EC1 at 21:31:50 Thursday June 10 2004

James Paul in Glasgow, Scotland at 19:16:55 Thursday June 10 2004
Human curiosity compels us to ask questions about the nature of our universe and for millennia we satisfied this need with notions of gods - in all shapes and sizes. In these "enlightned" times we no longer seek a god to explain phenomena like thunder and lightning, yet some people claim that writings from the days of the thunder god should be central to our understanding of topics such as biology and geology. Creationism is a relic from the days of the thunder god and to support its modern incarnation is to do Humanity a great disservice.

Steve Forden in North! at 18:07:10 Thursday June 10 2004
Lets not go back to the dark ages.

Sharon in Hertfordshire at 17:58:58 Thursday June 10 2004
I went to a CofE Junior school in the 1980s, where we had lessons entitled "Scripture and Life"[Bible stories] and "Focus and Observation"[Bible stories that explain the natural world]. The Bible should be left for Religious Education, "Godidit" is not a satisfactory scientific explanation of the evidence of the history of life on Earth.

Julian Gold in East Anglia at 16:20:53 Thursday June 10 2004

Stephen Coffey in London at 16:14:54 Thursday June 10 2004
"prayer has no place in public schools, just like facts have no place in organised religion" nor do lies have a place in science lessons, except perhaps as a lesson in critical thinking, and it must be remembered that if equal timme is to be given to every creation account the system would still be biased towards judeo-christianity (rather than just toards BS) as ew belief systems simultaneously maintain two (contradictory) creation accounts

Joe Dunckley in University of the West of England, Bristol at 15:52:28 Thursday June 10 2004
Dear Mr Blair and Mr Clarke, Schools and education are about more than just good exam results. Just because "Academies" get good grades, doesn't mean creationism can be overlooked. Kids from Emmanuel and King's may be able to answer GCSE science questions, but to become a scientist you have to know what science is, how it works and how to spot what is and what isn't scientific.

carl at 16:25:45 Sunday May 16 2004
could you help me find some one

ingrid Brooke in Sheffield at 20:09:14 Saturday May 15 2004
I am a science teacher at a school currently under the threat of take over by the Vardy/Emmanuel Foundation. I feel extremely strongly that it is time the wider public was made aware of this insidious threat to our secular educational system. Are people aware that it is not just science, but EVERY curriculum area that this foundation feels able to introduce its fundamental Christian ideas into?

Ian Ramsay in Glasgow at 22:03:04 Thursday April 22 2004
The lie that is 'creation science' must be kept out of our schools.

Alan Bellis in Goole - East Yorkshire at 14:54:29 Thursday February 12 2004
If people do not oppose them, the situation will just get worse. Its that simple. See www.blackshadow.co.uk

J.A. Greenhow B.A. in Penrith, Cumbria at 14:38:02 Friday November 21 2003
Science does not ask to be taught in religious education lessons - therefore why should religion be allowed into science lessons? Creation "science" is nothing of the sort - and I shudder to think if the ridiculous and detestable situation that is plaguing the American education system should gain a foothold here. Why in this day and age of science and understanding people should not only cling to primitive superstion and beliefs but try to supplant real knowledge with them is beyond my ken.

Keith Duncombe in Nottingham at 10:09:58 Tuesday October 7 2003
The Bible is an interesting historical text, it is not, and never has been a science text-book.

James McCabe in Liverpool at 20:24:18 Monday October 6 2003
I can't believe state schools, funded by taxpayers can be allowed to teach creationism as some viable alternative to evolution. This is criminal and negligent in my mind. Check out internet infidels for some great evolution/creation discussions and watch as all creationism arguments are trashed. I like the Arthur C. Clarke quote "I would defend the liberty of consenting adult creationists to practice whatever intellectual perversions they like in the privacy of their own homes; but it is also necessary to protect the young and innocent."

Mark Wolstenholme in Leeds at 16:09:28 Monday October 6 2003
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Everyon is NOT entitled to their own facts." Creationism clearly contradicts the FACTS and therefore should not be taught as science. What next? Are the creationists going to try to teach the "Babel theory of language development" in Modern Language lessons?

Kevin Saldanha in London at 15:28:12 Monday October 6 2003
Keep your delusional brainwashing within the confines of your own homes! Don't force feed your God-lies down children's throats in the science clasrooms.

Paul Kelly in Newcastle-upon-Tyne at 15:27:02 Monday October 6 2003
I am becoming more and more terrified by the way in which evangelical organisations, modelled on those which have paralysed science education in large parts of the USA, are trying to foist faith-based creation "science" onto the curriculum in UK schools. I hope that our politicians will discover the courage to protect the teaching of real science in our schools, and I would like to see the basic tools of rational thought and logic being given more attention rather than the current system of "teaching to tests".

Simon Coleman-Smith in Chandler's Ford, Hampshire at 14:55:49 Monday October 6 2003
By all means let's teach creation in science classes. It is a great way to teach the difference between science and non-science. On the other hand, which creation 'hypothesis' to choose? Greek, Maori, Inuit, Shinto, Maya, Navaho? If you allow one into the science classroom, then they all have a place. On what grounds might any be excluded? So just pick one as an example... say, the Judaic one... and thereby teach the difference between scientific answers and mythological ones. Teach kids, not what science SAYS, but instead, HOW TO DO science, and they will be able to discriminate science from non-science for themselves.

Peter Hearty in London at 16:43:16 Tuesday September 16 2003
With a second creationist school being foisted on unwilling parents, this time in South Middlesborugh, it's time to start a nationwide campaign against this manifest injustice.

kulwinder Dhesi in London at 15:48:56 Wednesday September 10 2003
Science classes should be for science - teach religion in church

Kevin Reid in North east Scotland at 03:30:04 Wednesday September 10 2003

Mick Phythian in York, UK at 19:57:39 Friday September 5 2003
If we have to teach religion it should give the non-theistic life stances, such as Humanism or Buddhism the same chance. Separate church/state & church/education!

Nigel Bedrock in Houston, USA (ex-UK) at 15:27:04 Sunday July 6 2003
It is highly dangerous to teach belief as fact. We need to teach children how to think, not what to think so they can reason and come to their own conclusions. Here in the US you can demolish people's arguments for the Noachian flood but as a last resort they say they believe it happened as written in the bible because 'it is written' in the bible. If we go down the route of teaching 'creation science' as fact we'll end up like the USA where almost half of college students believe "Cavemen had to protect themselves from marauding and the dinosaurs" and the earth is 10000 years old. Children need education, not indoctrination.

Allan Hayes in Leicester at 13:58:14 Saturday May 17 2003

Nick Pullar in London at 14:07:00 Monday May 12 2003
I am convener of Skeptics in the Pub: http://www.skeptic.org.uk/pub. Check out our news page for info on stories like this! http://www.skeptic.org.uk/news

Richard Sanderson in London at 12:41:14 Monday May 12 2003

dr thompson in dorset at 23:05:48 Wednesday April 2 2003

dr thompson in dorset at 23:05:44 Wednesday April 2 2003

Imogen Howarth in Cambridge, Cambs, UK at 19:55:10 Sunday December 8 2002
Having read the papers of Stephen Law et al on the Humanism web site, I agree strongly that the teaching of Creation should be kept within the realms of RE, and certainly not be slowly intertwined into Science, where it will mislead and confuse children. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic, through Catholic schools, and a regular attendee of church services. Not once do I remember any grey area proposed between faith beliefs, which rightly have their place in any society, and scientific fact. I was able, from my teenage years, to begin to form my own interpretation of the world and its origins, and my standpoint is now one of Humanism. Perhaps, I would not have been able to do this had I been taught that the Roman Catholic (or any other God) was intrinsically mixed up in empirical science. What Emmanuel College propose to teach has no greater plausibility or scientific basis than the existence of father christmas, and I sincerely hope that they have earned themselves another OFSTED inspection in the near future, in order to question the Headteacher's motives.

Sarah Hughes in Hampshire at 19:35:00 Saturday December 7 2002
Although I am aware that faith schools exist, I had no idea Creationism was being spread around college classrooms in the UK. The US, yes, but not here! Church and State should remain seperate, in ALL areas

Kelvyn Taylor in Surrey at 12:59:49 Sunday November 17 2002
Until the creationists come up with peer-reviewed scientific proof for their claims, their ideas should remain firmly in the church where they belong.

Martin Wilson in York at 16:13:14 Wednesday September 25 2002
While I am against faith schools of any kind, I think we need to take special note of how easy it has been for a group of religious extremists to take over a state funded school due to politicians keenness to remove schools from public accountability. We need to pressure our political representitives to ensure that taxpayers money is not put into the hands of people who would lie to children about the validity of science whilst enjoying all the benefits of a technological society. I have a simple answer to people who are anti-science: hand over your car keys, your house keys and the key for the central heating, your TV, video, stereo, packaged and frozen food and I will take them to the nearest charity shop for you.

James G. Boakes in Harrow, London at 18:49:28 Sunday September 22 2002
Scientific literacy is essential for the intellectual wellbeing, national security & economy of any country. It beggers belief that at the beginning of the 21st century religious fundamentalist have gained political influence in Britain.

David Pollock in London N16 at 13:5:26 Monday September 9 2002
See my website www.learning-together.org.uk for full arguments about this issue and the whole case against religious schools.

Ian Seckington in Twyford, Berkshire. at 19:18:55 Monday July 29 2002
If we, as a nation, allow this kind of rubbish to spread, the scientists of the future will no longer be standing upon the shoulders of giants, but will have been trampled under midgets' feet.

Jenny Blewer in Essex at 12:8:50 Sunday July 7 2002
I support the seperation of church and state in America..the sooner we can implement something similar here, the better.

Adrian Gainsford in Southend On Sea , Essex at 11:51:44 Wednesday July 3 2002

Gavin Phillips in Leicester at 13:57:4 Tuesday July 2 2002

Mr Graham Stevenson in St Albans, Hertfordshire at 1:34:13 Monday July 1 2002
It is highly disingenuous for creationism to be taught as part of science. I would support the removal of any loophole in the law that allows this to take place.

Norman Pridmore in sleaford england at 13:27:30 Friday June 14 2002

Dawn Rodgers in West Yorkshire at 16:30:46 Thursday June 13 2002
I see no problem with teaching creationism within a religious education, but it is ridiculous to suppose that it is a 'science', and therefore should be kept with the theology or Philosophy classes instead. Even 'psudo sciences' do not get taught in any classes in this country...

David J Green in London at 16:20:57 Thursday June 6 2002

Stuart Parker in middlesbrough at 21:36:20 Wednesday June 5 2002
I will pass this to Sir David Attenboroughhes back in the uk mid august

Julie Sandford in Middlesbrough at 12:27:14 Wednesday June 5 2002
My children are to go to a school being built "owned" and governed by those responsible for Emmanuel College in Gateshead. I am deeply concerned, as are others that the Christian Institute will have undue influence over the entire curriculum, and that parents, with only one seat on the governing body, will have no comeback.

Emma Napier in Cambridge University at 15:12:44 Tuesday May 21 2002
I studied human evolution as part of my degree at Cambridge University and certainly wish that I had been given the opportunity to study more about evolution at school. Evolution is fact, the theory is how. If certain uneducated and fanatical members of the public really want creationism to be taught then it should be done so only in the context of religious education. Scientific creationism is a self contradictory term and is by no means science and shouldn't go near a science classroom. Debate is healthy but the reason they are given any time at all is purely political. I would rather children weren't exposed to their nonsense at all.

Julian Pedley in Farnsfield, Nottinghamshire at 9:17:12 Tuesday May 21 2002
I believe creationism is a theological subject that has no place in science classrooms.

Norman Paterson in St Andrews at 15:21:34 Monday May 13 2002
Religion in science classes? If we also get science in the synagogue, church and mosque. (You might want to get the apostrophes in the petition statement under control, by the way. :-)

Matt Gillie in London at 10:49:23 Friday May 10 2002
Since Jedi is now a recognized UK religion, I hope Emmanuel college will be teaching it's pupils about the force as well.

Darren Lee Nuttall in Sheffield at 21:22:12 Saturday May 4 2002
It is disgusting that religion is taught as science. Religion is belief, science is fact. As a science teacher I have been asked on many occasions by my pupils what I think happened at "creation". I give them the big bang theory and evolution. I am personally not religous so there is no way I could bring myself to teach religion as science. If pupils want to know about religion then they should ask their RE teachers or church ministers.

Colin Frayn in Cambridge University at 10:2:21 Friday May 3 2002
I've been following this subject for quite some time. Whilst I have no problem with people holding untenable unscientific viewpoints - that's just personal belief - I *do* strongly resent them trying to teach such ludicrous theories to the next generation of impressionable youngsters as if they are anything other than unsubstantiated fiction. That has a place in RE, but not in Science.

Jon Harrop in Chemical Laboratory, University of Cambridge at 1:57:48 Friday May 3 2002
The National Curriculum should require teaching of the philosophy of science in science lessons and teaching of some of the many creation theories from different religions in RE. Biology lessons should be required to cover Darwinian evolution for GCSE level but should also mention the existence of evolved forms of the Theory of Evolution, namely neo-Darwinism and The New Synthesis.

Dr. Nat M. Queen in Birmingham at 11:59:12 Wednesday April 24 2002
Unscientific 'creationism' and similar myths have no place in science classrooms or, for that matter, in any other school classrooms. Children should not be indoctrinated with such nonsense.

Tim Stephenson in Hull at 20:22:25 Sunday April 21 2002
I feel it is important that so-called "creation science" is excluded from the British educational system.

Dave in Coventry at 13:9:12 Wednesday April 17 2002
It's imperative that we keep these idiots out of our state schools. For those who are not already members, can I recommend joining the National Secular Society (www.secularism.org.uk) which campaigns tirelessly against faith schools, as well as other worthy causes.

Sue Leyland in Hunmanby, Filey, North Yorkshire at 20:3:31 Friday April 12 2002
I would go further and urge government to replace RE in schools with Philosophy, which would include religions, humanism, atheism, deism, how different people live their lives and which would link in nicely to PHSE. Collective worship should be replaced with a collective assembly which is not religious.

Gavin Gandy in Reigate Surrey at 14:45:40 Thursday March 21 2002
Religion should be taught separately under an appropriate subject title such as "Religious Studies" and not passed off as a science. The views I express are my own personal views and not necessarily of the Company I work for.

Paul Rocks in London at 11:38:49 Thursday March 21 2002

John C Tighe in Maidenhead at 11:8:18 Wednesday March 20 2002
I know the issues and fully support the petition.

Marilyn Mason in London at 12:8:13 Monday March 18 2002
I just read your statement/petition and am happy to add my name

Katherine in London at 23:55:29 Friday March 15 2002
Educate *about* religion by all means, but only in the context of social science. I'm disgusted that Tony Blair will not give a clear denunciation, when asked, of this equivalence of creation myths with scientific evidence.

Neil Mackay in scotland at 2:45:18 Friday March 15 2002
Dogmatic faith has no place in any schoolroom and should certainly not be allowed to masqeurade as science.

Juliet in Warwick at 23:44:39 Thursday March 14 2002
Why this creation myth? Some of the others are much more fun and just as ridiculous.

Dr Mark T. Clunes in Dundee at 20:36:13 Thursday March 14 2002
Creationism has no place in scientific teaching - I have no problem with religion but masquerading extremist views as widely accepted fact is wrong.

Dr Tim Byard-Jones in Didcot, Oxon at 19:22:19 Thursday March 14 2002
Religious doctrine belongs in religion classes, and nowhere else in the curriculum. True science education should leave pupils with an understanding of the scientific method, and able to accept the implications of that maturely.

Dr. Ian Walker in Glasgow at 17:9:24 Thursday March 14 2002
Teaching myths and legends alongside genuine science is a recipe for confusion.

Michael Rosefield in Sheffield at 15:55:50 Thursday March 14 2002
Faith-based school. Why not have a faith-based government, too?

Matt Eccles in West Yorkshire at 15:52:12 Thursday March 14 2002
Schools are for teaching, not preaching.

Richard Barron in Dundee at 15:5:20 Thursday March 14 2002
I find the idea of faith based schools morally abhorrent.

Melanie Torrance in Aberdeen, Scotland at 10:22:15 Thursday March 14 2002
I am completely against the teaching of creationism as part of science classes in any school in the UK unless it is wholly funded by the parents of the children attending it. No taxpayers money should be used to "promote" religion or indoctrinate children.

Adrian Barnett in 2, Richmond House, Lancaster LA1 2NH at 9:22:0 Thursday March 14 2002
I was both outraged and saddened when I heard that a state-funded school was to teach creationism. Parochial creation myths have no place in a science class whatsoever. Should we also teach the "stork theory" of human reproduction for "balance"? There is little difference.

Ben co-founder & 'Brains' of the "Science, Just Science" Campaign
Despite repeated attacks on evolution the theory has remained unassailable thus far. The entire scientific body accepts evolution as fact just as they accept that the sun is a star and black objects don't reflect light. This is impossible unless the evidence has failed to prove any irreconcilable problems with the theory and there is significant supporting evidence.

James co-founder & web-designer of the "Science, Just Science" Campaign in Kent at 10:8:9 Wednesday March 13 2002
I'm a seasoned pro-evolution & science debater and I consider that the ONLY thing that should be taught in a science class is science. Evolution is not, as the "science teachers" of Gateshead City Technology College would have their charges believe, a faith ... it is a major scientific theory that defines the process by which all species develop from pre-existing forms of life and the evidence to support it is based upon geologic, palaeontologic & taxonomic evidence (and a host of evidence & methodologies drawn from other scientific disciplines). The theory of evolution permeates the majority of other scientific disciplines and aids significantly in binding the whole of science into a single cohesive unit much like the interlocking pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. In order to remove evolution from science (as would be required to declare it a faith) one would, of necessity be forced to tear science apart like so much matchwood ... that 140 years of peer-reviewed challenge has not yet destroyed evolution is testimony to the fact that it is a fully paid up scientific theory in every sense of the word!