Creationism and Intelligent Design in AQA biology exam papers

In june 2009, a British examination board (AQA) featured this caper of a question in their GCSE Biology paper:

 AQA received a lot of criticism for the question because of it's misleading nature. It implies that Creationism and Intelligent Design are genuine theories within the field of biology. It also implies that this nonsense was being taught as part of the curriculum. Is it necessary to learn about alchemy to better understand chemistry, or to include astrology in physics and cosmology exams? No, so why is it necessary here? It's quite possible  that the word theory was being used in the sense that Muammar Gaddafi has a theory about how he is a  fashion god in charge of one of the happiest countries in the world. However, this is not an acceptable use of the word in a science paper.

Following the exam, the Daily Telegraph printed a story about the bizarre question. AQA replied with a swift response :

"Merely asking a question about creationism and intelligent design does not imply support for these ideas. Neither idea is included in our specification and AQA does not support the teaching of these ideas as scientific.

In the examination question, information was given to candidates and they were asked to relate evidence to conclusions. The use of the term 'theory' was intended in its common, everyday sense. However, we accept that in the context of a science examination this could be misleading and we will be addressing this issue for any future questions."

It seems they paid attention to the criticism because their 2010 Biology paper did not include any mention of Creationism or Intelligent Design. New Humanist magazine contacted AQA to see if these topics would feature in their 2011 paper. Their spokesperson responded by saying:

"The subject team have confirmed that future exam papers will not contain any questions on creationism or Intelligent Design."

The Intelligent Design Colouring Book

Hey Kids! It's the birthday gift you've all been waiting for... The Intelligent Design Colouring Book, and (according to the cover) it's 100% Fact free! YEY!!! Check out the description below:

A child’s life is full of both joys and challenges—the infinite wonder of learning, the literal and figurative scraped knees of everyday life, and, of course, deep, penetrating theological terror.

That’s why Pastor Brett of the Mega-Pheasant Heights Assembly Church has created an activity book that will divert those long lazy hours of idle youth into a soul-saving good time. Inside are crafty puzzles, mazes of wrath, and connect-the-dots! Also, the mysteries of God’s creation are revealed and explored, including, but not limited to: why God sometimes does not answer your prayers; why heterosexual monogamy is demanded of us; and why listening to scientists will end with your corporeal destruction and eternal damnation. You will learn the nature of other “religions” as well as how best to crush them. And then there will be juice boxes.

While tradition states that the path to heaven is paved by knowledge of scripture, the doing of good works, and the conversion of heathens, it has recently been revealed that no one can obtain their eternal reward without first obtaining a copy of The Intelligent Design Coloring Book!

It's quite obviously a parody, but if you're still not convinced or have a complete lack of faith in mankind, check out the author's bio:

Before joining the Mega-Pheasant Heights Assembly Church in 2010, Pastor Brett Pirkle headed up the Intelligent Design think tank at American Family Mission. A proponent of corporal punishment, he claims that the Holy Spirit channels God's love into his fist before he corrects the evildoer. The jury did not see it this way.

Possibly creationism's best ever attempt to explain feathered dinosaurs

Almost every creationist argument is based on the assumption that Genesis is an account of actual events, and that the bible is the word of God and therefore the only truth. This is one of the main reasons why all their attempts at science have failed, because they only look for 'evidence' which is remotely compatible with their own assumptions. Alternatively they look for 'evidence' (a term we should use very loosely in this case) that contradicts their own grotesque caricature of the theory of evolution, often based on misunderstanding, deliberate misinformation, and complete ignorance of reality.

The idea of dinosaurs with plumage has often ruffled the feathers of the creationist movement. They've never really tried to explain why dinosaurs have feathers at all. All previous attempts by creationists to explain can be summarised by at least one of these points :

• In Genesis- birds were made on the 5th day, but God filled the land with animals on the 6th so birds must have come before dinosaurs. Look, it's in the Bible - which is the word of God because it says so in the Bible- therefore it's true.
• When I don't inspect it closely, it looks more like a bird than a dinosaur. It's a bird.
• Evolution is only a theory.
• I don't know much about the natural world at all.

 However, after searching through answersingenesis.org I finally found an attempt at an explanation that tickled me.
Dinosaurs ate Birds. Birds have feathers. Dinosaurs therefore ate feathers. If you completely ignore every piece of scientific evidence which suggests that dinosaurs had feathers and completely ignore the context in which these these sort of observations should be made- it makes perfect sense.

If you want to know more about evolution, two books I'd highly recommend are Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters and Why Evolution Is True.

Anti-Evolutionist Parody

This is a great parody of the sort of 'logic' that is parroted by advocates of Intelligent Design and Creationism. One of the biggest of these is the Discovery Institute. There are still many people who think that evolution means that humans came from slime, or that a cat gave birth to a dog. Once again this video's best asset is it's comedy value.  Enjoy :)

Creationism lives on in US public schools - science-in-society - 20 October 2010 - New Scientist

Creationism lives on in US public schools - science-in-society - 20 October 2010 - New Scientist

I know it's frightening isn't it? Get 'em while their young is the prefered method of persuasuion for the desperate.

Formula for Denial: Creationisim, Holocaust Denial and Climate Change Skepticism.

Opposition to current scientific and historical knowledge in not a new phenomenon. There have always been independent thinkers who have voiced their objections. However in recent years the opposition has received more publicity and more support as a result. Yet what we see is not a flood of independent thinkers, but a wave of parrots. They all spout the same drivel in order to support their views despite the fact that this drivel has been contested and dismissed publicly and professionally over and over again using up to date and well reasoned arguments. Here are some of those arguments that are still used today:

"It's only a theory!"
"If we evolved from apes, then why are there still apes around today?"
"The temperature from satellites shows a cooling trend."
"The Gas chambers were only used for delousing clothing and blankets"

However this constant repetition of misinformation is not the only thing they share in common. I've made a list of 11 other criteria which most of these are founded upon:

1.  They concentrate on their opponents' weak points, yet rarely say much about their own position.
2. Errors in scholarship/science are argued to imply that conclusions made by scholars and scientists are wrong.
3. When these errors are corrected, the denier's argument does not change and correction is usually overlooked or deemed irrelevant. Majority of denial movement does not even hear about the correction.
4. Deniers often ask for evidence that they claim is missing. When this is presented to them they raise the bar and ask the more or change the definition of what they are asking for.
5. Deniers imply that there is a conspiracy behind the opposition e.g. corporate, atheist, political. They claim this conspiracy is preventing them from spreading the 'truth'.
6. Deniers imply evidence used by opposition is fraudulent. Even when found to be authentic, fraudulence is still implied.
7. Majority of 'evidence' used by deniers is out of date, has been proven false, is unreliable (e.g. the author or time period is unknown) or is based on gaps in current knowledge.
8. Well known figureheads of opposition to denial movement are deliberately misquoted or quoted out of context to imply that they are supporting deniers claims.
9. Deniers either misrepresent or fabricate debate between scholars and scientists to imply that opposition is in crisis.
10. Spokespersons/leaders of denial movements aren't scientists or scholars and don't have any affiliations with that field at all. Instead they are scientists from an irrelevant field, businessmen/women, lawyers, religious figures, actors etc. Some even have fake or purchased credentials.
11. Majority of Support for denial movements is swayed by reasons which have nothing to do with evidence such as: religious and cultural reasons, emotional explotation, convenience, vested interests.