C of E Newspaper

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

C of E Newspaper

Postby psiloiordinary » Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:57 pm

This page turned up in my feedreader;

http://www.religiousintelligence.org/ch ... nt-design/

I can't see the original article the letters comment on. Can any of our members help me out?

Also wonder if we know any of the names of the folks desperately claiming ID is science despite all the evidence.

Thanks,

Psi
User avatar
psiloiordinary
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:03 am
Location: Yorkshire

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:19 pm

psiloiordinary wrote:This page turned up in my feedreader;

http://www.religiousintelligence.org/ch ... nt-design/

I can't see the original article the letters comment on. Can any of our members help me out?

Also wonder if we know any of the names of the folks desperately claiming ID is science despite all the evidence.

Thanks,

Psi


Thanks for that, Mark; it looks to have thrown up a gem. When we researched who was involved in C4ID, I came across a name I forgot (I think I later mentioned it on email). Well the link you gave threw up his name, Antony Latham, a GP. And there he is, plugging C4ID!

Just what I wanted!

Here is his letter:

Sir, I wish to make a few comments on David Williams’ article ‘Intelligent Design under question’.
The Dover trial of 2005 in which the ID movement ‘lost’ was conducted by a judge with no scientific training. Much of his summing up was taken from the words of the anti-ID lawyers. Very little light can be shed on the ID debate based on this trial.
A few clarifications are in order referring to the Williams’ article:
Michael Behe’s writings include many more examples than is cited by Williams – the blood-clotting system, the immune system and the bacterial flagellum are but the tip of the iceberg. His latest book, The Edge of Evolution, is a scholarly investigation of the inability of mutations to bring about significant change in proteins. His conclusions are devastating to neo-Darwinism.
Concerning the flagellum: the statement that ‘intermediate forms have been found which are far from useless’ is misleading. The only candidate produced is the ‘Type 3 secretory system’, which resembles the flagellum base and contains about 10 of the 40 proteins of the flagellum. It has a totally different function, is likely to be younger than the flagellum in terms of life’s history and to conclude that this proves some sort of intermediate evolutionary step is simply false. The flagellum is irreducibly complex in that it is useless unless complete.
Intelligent Design theory does not out rule micro-evolution and the role of natural selection with small changes. Macro-evolution is not the same thing. Nor does it out rule Common Descent from earlier organisms. It also does not rule out an Earth of 4.5 billion years age. The British based Centre for Intelligent Design website at www.c4id.org.uk contains helpful information for anyone interested.
Intelligent design theory is science. There are many existing scientific disciplines which look for design in a scientific way: forensic science, archaeology and the SETI programme, to name but a few. It seems at least odd that biological systems are to be excluded from this.
Williams’ third last paragraph gives me some hope. He rightly shows that as Christians who believe in a creator active in all creation, then to exclude teaching about this (and, in particular, to exclude any evidence for it) is ‘destined to be erroneous’.
Dr Antony Latham
Isle of Harris
Scotland
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6160
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:23 pm

psiloiordinary wrote:This page turned up in my feedreader;

http://www.religiousintelligence.org/ch ... nt-design/

I can't see the original article the letters comment on. Can any of our members help me out?

Also wonder if we know any of the names of the folks desperately claiming ID is science despite all the evidence.

Thanks,

Psi


And here http://www.c4id.org.uk/index.php?option ... r-articles is Latham's name on the C4ID web site!
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6160
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby Peter Henderson » Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:47 pm

I can't see the original article the letters comment on. Can any of our members help me out?


You may need to order a back issue Mark, if you're not a member:

Ordering a back issue
We only keep PDF copies of the last 4 editions of the paper online.

If you would like to read an article that is more than 1 month old, you have 2 easy options.

1. Access the article online: Join the website and search for a copy of the article posted online. Starting from 2010, nearly all published newspaper articles will also appear online.

2. Request a PDF back issue: If you prefer to read your paper as a PDF, you can request a back issue from the form below. Back issues cost £1 each. Payments must be successfully completed before you receive your back issue via email.

Email us at subs@churchnewspaper specifying which issue(s) you wish to receive


Unless Michael can help you out.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4341
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby cathy » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:28 pm

it looks like the C4ID site is currently closed for maintainence so maybe Lathams name is being removed? Can anyone else find anything remotely scientific on that site cos I can't. If I'm honest there is more science style stuff on the AiG site. It may be missing huge chunks of relevant detail or be factually inaccurate but at least it's there. There is nothing at all on the C4ID site.
cathy
 
Posts: 3662
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:34 pm

cathy wrote:it looks like the C4ID site is currently closed for maintainence so maybe Lathams name is being removed? Can anyone else find anything remotely scientific on that site cos I can't. If I'm honest there is more science style stuff on the AiG site. It may be missing huge chunks of relevant detail or be factually inaccurate but at least it's there. There is nothing at all on the C4ID site.


I checked it a couple of hours ago and it was up.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6160
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Jan 06, 2011 7:41 pm

I clicked on the C of E Newspaper website but couldn't read the Andrew Williams article without subscribing.

Yet a minute earlier I did manage to open this highly dubious article from earlier in 2010 (from someone who thinks science has made no further progress on origins since 1859): http://www.religiousintelligence.org/ch ... -sceptics/
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8185
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby Brian Jordan » Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:09 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:Yet a minute earlier I did manage to open this highly dubious article from earlier in 2010 (from someone who thinks science has made no further progress on origins since 1859): http://www.religiousintelligence.org/ch ... -sceptics/
Could this be the explanation?
Posted by Editor on Thursday, September 23rd, 2010
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4179
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby GrumpyBob » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:11 am

That CofE website is rather slow running on my Firefox - not sure if this is due to all the anti-webtracking addons! The links to be a day member don't work, but do on Chrome. Is it worth £2?

R
GrumpyBob
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:37 pm
Location: The back of beyond

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby GrumpyBob » Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:22 am

The issue of e-Skeptic magazine dated 22nd December 2010 features an article on the 5th anniversary of the Dover court case, by Richard Zak Williams, entitled "The Trial of the (New) Century. Dover and the 5th Anniversary of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District".
Coincidence?

Robert
GrumpyBob
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:37 pm
Location: The back of beyond

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby cathy » Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:04 pm

Dr Anthony Latham seems to have just written yet another article fro C4ID called mind the gaps. It looks like a run through of philosophical views of human consciousness, free will and determinism (hence has nothing to do with the ID/evolution debate) up to present day. It's non creationist refs are all to philosophy and psychology works rather than anything to do with the relevant sciences of evolution, biology etc etc, and the whole thing looks irrelevant to the debate so I'm not sure why he wrote it? He's certainly linked to c4id though. In the origianal article that Roger linked to he refers to a book called the goldilocks enigma by Paul Davies. I've read it, it most certainly does not support creationism nor ID and in one chapter explains why they are a load of old b@@@@@@s. The guy is an atheist I think and the book was actually about his theory of multiverses. I think that is misleading!!!

C4ID have also got a new piece on the complexity of the brain about some research at Stanford. They do link to the original article which is about-wait for it-the complexity of the brain and its billions of neurons and synapses!!! Nothing about ID or evolution. Wonder how the original authors would feel about that? Anyway c4id after swooning over said complex brain (obviously not a creationist one) went on to say "yet there are scientists on TV every day saying life just popped into existence when the right bunch of chemicals appeared". That is just plain lying. No scientist on earth has or would say that. So C4ID look to have abandoned their attempts at being honest by just saying nothing of substance already and have resorted to misleading people. Do they not actually comprehend what they're doing is wrong?
cathy
 
Posts: 3662
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby Michael » Sun Jan 09, 2011 8:50 pm

I suppose I should have posted this earlier.

There are two main CofE newspapers , the main one is the Chruch Times which covers a wide range of perspectives.

The Church of England Newspaper is far more evangelical and conservative and even ran some creationist articles in the early 80s - indicating when YEC had infiltrated the coe. It is independent of the the church as is the CT.

I take the CT rather than the CEN

There is also the English Chruchman which is small in content and circulation (laus deo) which is horrendously fundie

Also note that there are journal watchers who send it YEC letters whenever they see anything. They are also known to write to the person themselves as with one fellow priest from E Anglia who wrote a nasty letter to me asking why I was an atheist.
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Re: C of E Newspaper

Postby Brian Jordan » Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:07 pm

Michael wrote:Also note that there are journal watchers who send it YEC letters whenever they see anything.
How true! I probably got into all this thanks to a vicar from the South coast who years ago wrote to the Yorkshire Post about something which (I forget now) was quite local or maybe hadn't even been mentioned in the paper. My initial reaction was just to resist the Southern Hegemony but then... :)
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4179
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm


Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests