Re: Creationism to be taught on GCSE science syllabus

At 12:24 PM 3/13/2006, Pim van Meurs wrote:

>False alarm (http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/03/brits_to_teach.html)
>
>At OCR, we believe candidates need to understand the social and
>historical context to scientific ideas both pre and post Darwin.
>In our Gateway Science specification, candidates are asked to
>discuss why the opponents of Darwinism thought the way they did and
>how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of
>interpreting empirical evidence.
>Creationism and 'intelligent design' are not regarded by OCR as
>scientific theories. They are beliefs that do not lie within
>scientific understanding.

@ Notice below that my subject was the two comments which were *in*
the thread -- NOT what you focused on. LOL ~ Janice

>Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>NOTE: This is the second try. I'm re-sending this because it
>hasn't shown up on the list since I sent it over two hours ago.
>
>In light of recent discussions, some of you may be interested in the
>two comments I've linked you to below, which are in a thread that
>was origionally posted on 3/9/06. Comments are still continuing
>today (3-13-06) and the thread has been transferred into what is
>called "the smoky back room" because the conversation has become
>very heated. :)
>
>~ Janice
>
>
>Creationism to be taught on GCSE science syllabus
>The Times of London ^ | 10 March 2006 | Tony Halpin
>Posted on 03/09/2006 9:55:14 PM EST by Greg o the Navy
Received on Mon Mar 13 12:36:11 2006