We will try to publish your comments etc. but please try not to make them libelous or inflammatory. 

No comments will find their way onto the website without your permission, and names etc. will be withheld if you wish. No e mail addresses will be published.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FQP/is_4722_134/ai_n9487585

Look folks, can we get £350,000 together - that seems to be the new 
lower limit? Seriously. Anyone fancy approaching the lottery and 
setting 
up a SECULAR school which only teaches secular beliefs?

Or maybe start a charity? The NSS makes a lot of rumblings, and I 
belive 
in it, but I don't see it actually doing much!

Marc
www.marcdraco.co.uk

Dear Mr Cowan,

Your reply of 2nd March on the CADPAG website was recently brought to 
my 
attention. The first thing which struck me was your lack of knowledge 
of 
evolutionary biology in one realm and theological knowledge in the 
other. I strongly suggest you read basic works by Mayr, Kenneth Miller, 
and this tome:

Peter Skelton (editor). Evolution: A biological and palaeontological 
approach.

You miss the point that many scientists hold religious beliefs but 
recognise that they comprise two separate realms: biology teaching 
belongs in the science classroom and religious instruction in the RI 
classes. So far all you have made are assertions which fly in the face 
of a hundred and fifty years of solid academic research, and do not 
present any evidence to the contrary.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory, and I for one do not believe you 
have the expertise to critique molecular biology, palaeoanthropology 
and 
archaeology - to name but three of the disciplines.

Unfortunately for creationists, and fortunately for school children as 
creationism is a form of child abuse (through deliberate brainwashing 
and denying knowledge), science is not a democracy. No school child has 
the capability or extent of knowledge to be able to adequately critique 
evolutionary theory. If you think so, then you should really ask why 
universities exist...for revolving doors and secret societies? That'd 
just be getting into the realm of the paranoia.

As for me insinutating that you lied..., my wording was clear. 
Creationists lie about the biological record.

What do you expect to happen next? Are you really prepared to have 
Islamic and Hindu creationism thought in the same class as your version 
of creationism? No? Now that's a surprise. You should also ask Behe, 
one 
of the founders of modern "intelligent design" what he thinks of young 
earth creationists. You creationists cannot even decide on a form of 
creationism, let along being able to present the scientific theory of 
creationism?


> I was making a general comment about the P.C. brigade wanting to oust
> Christianity from planet Earth. 

Right, so the Roman Catholic Church would like to get rid of 
Christianity? I wish you could realise how ridiculous that sounds.

So, what is the scientific theory of creationism?


> Has just one "missing link" ever been found from any species 
> anywhere? 
> One
> fossil with say, a half-formed wing?

If you knew anything at all about basic biology you would not make such 
incredulous statements. Evolution does *not* argue for that.


> No, Alan, the real reason is that the truth is suppressed to make it 
> look
> nonsense

In which case you must regard me (a Christian) as an agent of Satan 
meeting with others behind the boiler in the basement. If you had any 
idea of how much academics enjoy arguing with each other, you would 
have 
a clue how ridiculous and uneducated (biologically) you sound.

> The ancient Greeks were also evolutionists, 

Actually, modern evolution emerged in the 19th century. The explanation 
offered by the ancient Greeks differs fundamentally.

Your comments that people cannot think critically are insulting. Your 
arrogance in presuming you are superior is sickening. Enjoy your 
matrydom. Meanwhile, evolutionary scientists will continue working on 
the medication you take when you go to the materialistic doctor with 
your materialistic illness, and those technicians using evolutionary 
principles to better the design of the very computer you type on.

> This is what one scientist (Dr. Robert Lee. In 1981, he wrote an 
> article for
> the Anthropological Journal of Canada) said about Carbon 14:
> 
> "The troubles of the radiocarbon dating method are undeniably deep 
> and
> serious. Despite 35 years of technological refinement and better
> understanding, the underlying assumptions have been strongly 
> challenged, and
> warnings are out that radiocarbon may soon find itself in a crisis
> situation. 

Considering this was written 24 years ago, doesn't it occur to you that 
there have been subsequent huge advances? Radiocarbon dating - 
something 
I have been taught in - certainly is not in any crisis whatsoever.

> I take the Bible as truth. 

My next door Indian neighbour has as much right to her different 
religious beliefs as you do - no one disputes that. What you have no 
right to do is to impose your belief system on defenceless children 
which will have no effect but to return us to the Dark Ages. If you 
feel 
you can live without medication - produced by evolutionary principles - 
I can only encourage you to do so.


> I am not an expert in Creationism,

I know.

> How do you explain, for example, that levels of 
> salts
> washed into the oceans indicate the age of them to be in thousands, 

It doesn't. The content of sea water makes C14 dates appear older than 
what they are. Core isotopic analyses alone disprove this lie.

> There are numerous similar examples on the Web site I gave above.

Try reading http://www.talkorigins.org if you are unwilling to pay 
money 
to educate yourself or unwilling to drive to the local library.

> The notion of studying "theology" seems to me similar to studying 
> science,

No, scientific-minded scientists critique.

> You are right, I have explored evolution very little, 

And yet you claim to be able to pronounce on it? This is astonishing. 
Get the plank out of thy own eye.

-- 
Mikey Brass
MA in Archaeology
"The Antiquity of Man" http://www.antiquityofman.com
Book: "The Antiquity of Man: Artifactual, fossil and gene records 
explored"

- !ke e: /xarra //ke
("Diverse people unite": Motto of the South African Coat of Arms, 2002)

Dear Mr Cowan,

Regarding your recent posting, there are a number of inaccuracies which 
require a response.

> The only reason most of Sir Peter's opponents favour (with apparently 
total
> blindness) evolution as the only possible reason for "intelligent"
> life on earth, is that they were told by others, who were told by
> others, and so on. 

There is a misconception that only practising academics have the 
quality and expertise to 
expose and decry creationism and "intelligent design". The flipside of 
this is, of course, that 
those putting forward intelligent design are virtually not accredited 
within the relevant 
biological fields themselves. Phillip Johnson, for example, is a 
retired lawyer. There cannot 
be one set of standards for "ID" and another for the people who accept 
the reality and validity 
of evolution. It is very easy nowadays to educate oneself on 
evolutionary principles and 
practices: http://www.talkorigins.org, http://www.ncseweb.org, amongst 
others.

> I wonder how many contributors on this page
> actually understand the first thing about evolution and, equally
> valid, have ever tried to understand the Biblical perspective. 

I have excavated in Israel, in Biblical Archaeology. Then again, one 
could ask you how 
deeply have you studied theology - as deeply as those leaders of all 
the mainstream Christian 
Churches who accept evolution.

> Have you studied or experimented in evolution in any way at all, 

Yes - but I am doubtful you have. Where are you biology university 
qualifications?

> You are all jumping on the P.C. bandwagon,
> that says we must live in a country devoid of belief in the Almighty
> in case it upsets anyone.

You are arguing that evolution = atheism. This is a lie and by saying 
so you are breaking the 
Ten Commandments. I strongly suggest you investigate why the vast 
majority of Christians 
have no problem with evolution, why the mainstream Churches do not, and 
read some works 
like those by the biologist Kenneth Miller ("Finding Darwin's God").

> Considering that the world is run by big business, what a burden
> Christianity is to them. Closing shops one day in seven could damage
> profits; 

It didn't to the White population back in the times of Apartheid in 
South Africa; it doesn't to the 
shop owners in Malta; it doesn't to many shop owners in the UK...

> Make no mistake about it, you are doing Satan's work for him.

As opposed to people who worship the book instead of God? People who 
break the Ten 
Commandments because they think their beliefs give them the right to 
lie for God?

Please base your critiques on science, on factual hard biological 
evidence, and not on your 
personal perception of the world around you socially which, as you 
yourself point out, is in a 
constant flux of change.

===========
Mikey Brass
MA in Archaeology
"The Antiquity of Man" http://www.antiquityofman.com
Book: "The Antiquity of Man: Artifactual, fossil and gene records 
explored"

- !ke e: /xarra //ke
("Diverse people unite": Motto of the South African Coat of Arms, 2002)

15th October 2004

EducationGuardian.co.uk site and thought you 
should see it.

To see this story with its related links on the EducationGuardian.co.uk 
site, go to http://education.guardian.co.uk

Protest spikes plan for academy school in Doncaster
Press Association
Thursday October 14 2004
The Guardian


Plans for one of the Tony Blair-backed breed of privately sponsored 
"academy" state schools in Doncaster have been ditched after opposition 
from local parents. 

The school's headteacher, teachers, local parents' groups and the 
National Union of Teachers welcomed Doncaster council's decision to abandon 
plans. 

David Martin, head of the Northcliffe school in Doncaster, South 
Yorkshire, which was due to be replaced by the new academy, said academies 
were undemocratic, unaccountable and gave parents less say in their 
child's education. 

But the government defended its nationwide initiative, which aims to 
introduce 200 academies in the UK by 2010. 

The proposal for Northcliffe School, which is currently in special 
measures due to past poor performance, would have seen it replaced by a new 
institution funded by state and private money. 

In return for £2m towards start-up costs, sponsors can appoint the 
majority of governors and have major influence over the future direction 
of the schools. 

The taxpayer has to foot the rest of the bill, and each academy costs 
around £25m to build - more than double the cost of an ordinary 
comprehensive. 

Once built the academies are funded from the public purse, but stand 
apart from the rest of the state school system, autonomous of the local 
education authority (LEA). 

Mr Martin said today: "The main argument against it was the lack of 
local democratic accountability. I believe in working in partnership with 
the LEA, and that local people should have a say in their local school. 

"The vast majority of my staff were opposed to this plan and I would 
say they're very pleased with this decision." 

A spokeswoman for the National Union of Teachers (NUT) said: "It was 
parents' and teachers' campaigning that prevented this academy being 
opened. The government should take note of their unhappiness over such 
institutions being set up in their area." 

The government has set a target of 200 academies open for business or 
in the pipeline by the end of the decade. Many would replace failing 
comprehensives. 

A spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills said: "It is 
perfectly reasonable for either partner to decide not to progress [with 
the change to an academy school], and this matter is entirely for the 
sponsor and LEA. 

"We will, of course, continue to work closely with those concerned to 
explore options. The performance of academies speaks for itself on the 
impact they can have on raising standards. For example, the King's 
academy in Middlesbrough has achieved 34% of pupils achieving five or more 
A*-C GCSE passes - an increase of approximately 12 percentage points on 
the joint results of the two predecessor schools in 2003." 

Asked whether the decision in Doncaster was a blow to the scheme and 
whether it would prompt a rethink on the issue, a spokesman replied: "No, 
not at all." 

The Emmanuel Schools Foundation, which was the proposed sponsor in 
Doncaster, said the collapse of the plan for Northcliffe was a "missed 
opportunity both for the young people of the area and the community as a 
whole". 

The charity added in a statement: "In no way is this decision a victory 
for the campaigners. Far from celebrating, they should be reflecting on 
the opportunity they have denied their children for an education of the 
very highest standard."

Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited

13th October 2004

Congratulations from Leicester on your fine achievment in blocking the Academy. It heartens us all. We here are fighting proposals for a C of E Academy and an Islamic Academy. 

Allan Hayes

13th October 2004

Well done CADPAG for defeating Vardy!  You have done a tremendous job - 
excuse the Biblical reference but this was a real David and Goliath 
fight!
Hope you will now get the school and governance you need.

Jennie Street
member of Sheffield Humanist Society 

9th October 2004

Copy of the Code

9th October 2004

I read an article titled NEW ACADEMY DIRECTORS APPOINTED at http://www.doncastertoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=786&ArticleID=867003 and I thought it may interest you.

10th September 2004

Rebecca, Thankyou very much for taking the time to answer my questions in such a detailed manner. I must admit that I am shocked that city academies, although they receive considerable amounts of public money, are not bound by national curriculum standards. However, with a firm but fair inspection process geared to the upkeep of standards in schools, this should not be a problem. That rather leads me on to one final question - who should I contact concerning the schools inspection process - to find out what they do and do not assess, how they assess it, and what standards they are bound to upkeep? For example, do you have a contact of a person in OFSTED who might be able to answer my questions regarding the inspection of schools and city academies? Thanks and best regards, Nikolai

10th September 2004

10th September 2004

Dear all, I wish to address the message posted on 7 September 2004, beginning with, "I have been some of those people who have had comments posted on your website do not fully understand Christianity, the Vardy Foundation or both." I cannot speak for anyone else, only for myself. I am a Christian, as is the eminent biologist Professor Kenneth Miller. All mainstream Christian churches accept Christianity as being compatible with evolution and all also accept this one fundamental principle: religion has no place in a science classroom. Teach religion in religious instruction classes, teach science in science classrooms. To confuse this is to blur the issues and provide a conflagation which simply does not exist within the scientific community. I would call your attention to the letter which Richard Dawkins and the Bishop of Oxford co-authored condemning any attempt to teach the herasy of creationism in science classrooms. Regardless of anyone's personal religious beliefs, religion is religion and science is science. Biology classes must teach acceptable science and that is evolutionary biology. If there has been one lesson learnt through those of us who have had experience in dealing with the hotbed of creationism - America - is that creationists do not see issues a multi-layered. Creationists view the world in black and white - "them or us". with the Devil deceiving "them". Anyone who doubts this should take a read through Miller's account of a discussion held between himself and Henry Morris (one of the founders of modern creationism) in his book "Finding Darwin's God". You cannot work with creationists: you oppose them and keep their pseudoscience out of biology classrooms. This is a duty of everyone, regardless of religion or atheism, has to the scientific educational well-being of the children of this country =========== Mikey Brass MA in Archaeology student "The Antiquity of Man" http://www.antiquityofman.com Book: "The Antiquity of Man: Artifactual, fossil and gene records explored" - "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?" (Albert Einstein)

10th September 2004

To all concerned people and parents in the Doncaster area, Last year Kings School opened in Middlesborough, two of its pupils were my nephew and niece.My opinions on these "faith" schools are based on the experiences of my sister and her children. Consultation with parents about the changes were kept to an absolute minimum. The school required a very expensive uniform, including items that could only be purchased from school, and an extensive sports kit. My sister applied for assistance with the costs of this new uniform but the LEA were only able to provide a minimum grant of £30 for each child. The actual uniform complete would have cost over £200 for each child. This is surely an unaceptable burden for large families or parents in reciept of benefits. The LEA said that technically Kings was a private school and not under their control. The uniform is enforced rigidly, meaning children of parents unable to afford this huge cost are punished because their parents cannot afford to buy the complete uniform. Children of secondary school age also grow more rapidly than at any other time of their lives, so this is not a one-off payment but a continuing burden. These schools are also deliberately placed in relatively poor areas of high unemployment. The parents were initially told that the teaching in the school would be "broadly christian", which is very far from the truth. They take an extreme position regarding not only creationism, but the literal truth of the bible that is far more extreme than most british churches. My nephew, then 12, was told that he must believe in the literal truth of the noah's ark story. He had declared this to be nonsense that all species of creatures on earth could be placed aboard one ship, because the size of the ship required, also the food required to feed all those animals and birds. Nevertheless, the teacher insisted that he believe and because he refused to do so was given a detention. His mother contacted the school and put her point of view that this was unreasonable, and she refused to allow her son to be punished for his rational attitude towards this myth. The class teacher, obviously felt that this had undermined his dicipline, continued to victimise him at every opportunity possible, even encouraging boys to bully him. He was denied permission to get essential medication for diabetes and given a detention for "interrupting the class" by putting up his hand to ask to leave the classroom to do this. The school did not deal with the bullying at all. He was repeatedly given detentions for trivial issues, even three detentions for failing to do detention when he was not at school following a vicious assault by other pupils, which remained unpunished, despite the school knowing the identitiy of the bullies. The impression received by my sister was that because he refused to accept the school's literal interpretation of christian doctrine, this was a greater misdemeanour than vicious bullying. It is a chilling thought that 12 year olds can be punished for "thought crime" in this day and age. The schoolchildren are subjected to extreme dicipline, the corridors are full of silent children walking in single file, which is almost eerie. While not denying that more dicipline in schools is needed, brainwashing children is definitely not the way to go. The new schools are depersonalising glass constructions, with the resonance of fans set at a frequency to induce suceptibility to ideas. There are closed circuit cameras even in the toilets and showers. My niece wes not using the toilet all day because of these cameras invading her privacy. Shades of 1984, Big Brother is here in our schools, and I'm not talking about the TV programme. There are issues also, because parents still have the right under British law to remove children from RE and from parts of assemblies containing Christian worship. The "broadly christian" teaching here is not limited to RE and assembly though, encroaching on English, Science and Humanities subjects. What is being practiced here is definitely indoctrination of our children, sponsored by the British taxpayer. Blair backs this because he too is an evangelical christian. This aspect of the religious teaching was not explained to parents, when a previously good school with high standards, providing quality education, was taken over, merged with a poor comprehensive and handed over to Christian extremists. It is also of concern that these developments are taking place in "poor" areas with high unemployment, to minimise the protests of parents. Needless to say my sister removed both her children after a few weeks and they spent months at home while the LEA found them a new school. It was difficult because a lot of other parents had done the same, especially parents from ethnic minorities, virtually all the Sikh children were removed from the school within weeks because of problems with the "broadly Christian" teaching. So the school now does not represent the community, sowing the seeds of religious and racial disharmony in the future. I urge you all to campaign vigourously against this insidious indoctrination of our children by minority Christian extremists, supported by the Government at the expense of the British taxpayer. Yours faithfully, Joyce Howarth Bradford, West Yorkshire

7th September 2004

Dear nic2205,

Hi, Having been sent to an Emmanuel School for two years I completely understand your concerns - I can remember an assignment being set to write the story of Christ, and other stories from the bible for English?? This did not make sense then, and doesn't now. I really hope you do manage to keep control, or find a suitable sponsor who can free your children from this. Just one questions though, isn't the government supposed to be making the country multi-racial? How does a Christian school, or any single religion orientated school help to achieve this goal? Good luck.

7th September 2004

MICROCOSM

Almost as appealing to Leonard was Lambert's other chief initiative -

the link with the State system well beyond Totnes:78

Frankly I was not prepared to become head of a school solely for the

education of the rich. Apart from my own delicate moral scruples on

the matter, the conventional English boarding school which operates

as a sort of closed ghetto for children of one social, economic and

cultural group seemed to me to be profoundly non-educative,

confining instead of enlarging the experience of young people and

their awareness of their society and its diverse cultures.

The school eventually chosen for the link was emphatically not for the

education of the rich. It was Northcliffe, a mixed comprehensive without

sixth form in a grim mining town at Conisbrough in Yorkshire not far

from the other Elmhirst estate. Porn and Gwen Elmhirst played a leading

part in the experiment from the beginning. So did Sir Alec Clegg, then

Chief Education Officer for the West Riding and later a Dartington

Trustee himself. The West Riding put in some money, Dartington a good

deal more., In the first two years of the scheme about sixty pupils, all

eleven-plus failures, came to Dartington as full-time boarders and 400

others from Northcliffe for shorter spells. Dartington children moved in

the other direction, for short courses, and stayed at 'The Terrace' (a large

house bought by the Dartington Trustees very close to Northcliffe) which

was also a base for local children to live in and come to. Lambert and many

other people at Dartington agreed that the Yorkshire children brought a

new variety and stimulus into the school, which benefited the ordinary

middle-class children, and that the newcomers also gained in seIf-confidence

and adaptability.

'One can say already and with confidence that the progressive educational

approach applies as much to the working class adolescent and to the

less able child as to those presocialised and highly able.' Unfortunately

the main scheme did not survive the destruction of the West Riding

Education Authority by the wild reformers who did more damage to local

7th September 2004

Hi,

Some thoughts and observations on the post from Gary (6th September).

> This has been going on for years through the lie of Darwinism &
> evolution.

This statement is incorrect on many levels. Firstly the amount of 
evolution actually taught in schools is very minimal. Indeed it has 
been suggested, correctly in my opinion, that the biology curriculum in 
use in the UK should be revised to place more emphasis on the 
evolutionary foundations of the subject. As the geneticist Theodosius 
Dobzhansky said, "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of 
evolution".

Secondly, current evolutionary theory is no more a lie than the theory 
of gravitation, the theory of plate tectonics or the heliocentric model 
of the Solar System. Perhaps our esteemed ministry candidate also 
believes that these theories are some sort of lie that is being imposed 
on children by science?

The modern theory of evolution is known as the modern synthesis. This 
is because it is derived from evidence in many scientific disciplines. 
These include, but are not limited to, biochemistry, palaeontology, 
genetics, biology, anatomy, geology, and many others. The evidence from 
these disciplines would, singly, be highly supportive of the fact that 
populations of organisms evolve over time. Taken as a whole the 
evidence from these myriad areas of science is simply overwhelming. 
Life evolves. This observation is simply inescapable.

Why this fact should be so threatening to some, but not all, people who 
profess a faith in a deity is not a question I am equipped to answer. I 
do find it disturbing that such people who say they follow a doctrine 
that includes the commandment "You shall not lie" seem to think it 
acceptable to ignore the overwhelming evidence for the fact of 
evolution. I suspect that many don't actually understand what evolution 
is. Those that do are willing to lie about it for some reason.

>  Rather than getting into theological discussions (which
> usually tend to infuriate people for some strange reason especially
> those who have an aversion to religion-one wonders why it creates
> anger?)

You would do well not to get into theological discussions on this 
point. You would lose. Every time that religion has attempted to 
dictate how the Universe should be, in contradiction to the evidence 
delivered by the scientific method, it has lost. From the flat Earth, 
through the Earth is the centre of the Universe belief, to the humans 
are different from other animals assertion. All, and others, have been 
shown to be false.

>  I would recommend an excellent book by the Design Engineer
> Dr Stuart Burgess, BSc, PhD, CEng, MIMechE called Hallmarks of
> Design  (ISBN 1 903087 31-7)-It would be a welcome corrective to the
> evolutionary myths that are taught in our state schools!

Whilst I'm sure that Dr. Burgess is an excellent mechanical engineer 
I'm left wondering how this qualifies him to write about biology. Are 
any of his degrees in subjects related to biology or related fields? I 
would also encourage readers to read the above book (though I would 
caution against buying it - use the inter-library loan system to get a 
copy). It will show you the doublespeak and hand-waving away of 
evidence that is common in the creationist and intelligent design 
advocates camps.

After reading the above book readers should consider reading "Climbing 
Mount Improbable" by Richard Dawkins (ISBN 0-670-85018-7). Again this 
should be available from libraries. In this book Professor Dawkins, who 
actually has expertise in the topic at hand, outlines how animal 
characteristics which appear designed are in fact examples of designoid 
features resulting from evolution by natural selection.

>  When we see the decline in Christianity &
> Biblical teaching it is rather easy to see the correlation with
> rises in Drug or Alcohol abuse, teen pregnancies, over 20 000
> Abortions performed per month in UK alone, Divorce rate increasing
> drastically, self abuse, body piercing tattoos, pornography etc need
> I go on?

Please do. You are damned by your own words. A common occurrence with 
fundamentalists. We see the true colours of our esteemed ministry 
candidate coming to the fore here. The implication is that society 
today needs taken back into the control of the self appointed guardians 
of our morals. They think that by taking control of schools they will 
have a captive impressionable fertile ground on which to sew their 
stone age mythology. I recall that the last time we let religion 
dictate how we should think and act is known as "The dark ages".

> We must not forget that
> our Queen is defender of the faith which is Christianity NOT other
> false doctrines such as Islam, Buddhism, Romanist Catholicism,
> Materialism etc.

So basically anyone not a member of our correspondents particular sect. 
It's interesting how our minister candidate thinks he can get to choose 
who the true Christians are. I'm sure all those Roman Catholics he 
mentions above will be delighted to know that they have been wrong all 
these years. You're not really Christians. Why? Because Gary and his 
narrow sect say so!

I live in Belfast. I've seen the nonsense that goes on when religion is 
allowed to be used as a tool for division. Do the people of GB really 
want to sew the seeds of religious division by allowing people with the 
bigoted views of Gary to have any say in the education of children?

>  Secularism is just a fancy name for humanism more
> accurately known as paganism.

Not bad. Three separate outlooks, only 2 of which are actually belief 
systems, conflated to be the same thing. Just cause Gary says so? It 
must be true. After all Gary knows all doesn't he?

>
> I'd far rather put my faith in the divine authoritative word of
> God

Which is fine. Everybody can believe whatever particular fairy story 
they like. You have chosen to believe in the stone age one that 
originated in the middle east. I'll defend your right to believe this, 
whilst thinking it is nonsense. I do not however have any time for 
people of your ilk who wish to proselytise your myths to children by 
"buying" schools.


> than scientists whose promotion of nonsense such as evolution is
> absolutely riddled with holes.

This turns out not to be the case. I expect that our ministry candidate 
has a very shallow understanding of evolutionary theory.

>  It was only ever a theory & is not
> proven

This is actually true. Evolutionary theory IS only a theory. In much 
the same way that all the rest of science is only a theory. As theories 
go however, the modern synthesis theory has so much evidence supporting 
it that it is very unlikely that the basic postulates will change. Sure 
the fine detail will change as we learn more about the molecular 
workings in cells etc. but the basic fact that animals evolve over 
generations is unlikely to change.

It will never be proved as science does not prove things. What it does 
is provide the best explanations at a given time to fit the data we see 
in the universe around us. All the evidence we see in the biota on 
Earth points to evolution being a fact.

>  but never will since it is a religion itself.

This is simply not true and is one of the usual canards tossed out by 
creationists to try and muddy the waters. Evolutionary theory is the 
same as every other scientific theory in that it is subject to 
experimentation and falsification. It is the best explanation we have 
for the biodiversity we see on Earth today and in the fossil record.

>  Don't know
> about anyone else but I know I am not a descendant from an ape.

Both humans (Homo sapiens) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) are both 
descended from a common ancestor. You are, we all are, in fact 
descended from an "ape-like" animal that inhabited the African 
continent approximately 10 million years ago. Why you should find this 
so upsetting is a mystery to me. It doesn't make any of use any less 
human.

>  If
> you ever hear scientists prattle on about millions & millions of
> years ago then warning lights should appear to you as they are into
> fantasy land.

This turns out not to be the case. Many independent dating methods can 
be used to date fossils, artefacts, the Earth, The Solar System and the 
Universe. They are both independent and consistent in the dates they 
return.

> For another excellent book check out "The Answers Book" by Dr
> Jonathon D. Sarfati, Carl Weiland & Ken Ham. This book will allow
> you to take a brief overview of creationism & compare it with
> evolution theory.

Readers who want to get a handle on the three people mentioned above 
should search for their names at the Talk Origins web site. The 
"arguments" they put forward have all been dealt with. See -

<http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/search.html>

If you really want to learn about evolution then I suggest getting a 
copy of "What evolution is" by Ernst Mayr (ISBN: 0-465-04426-3). This 
will give you the actual science and not the falsehoods that Sarfati et 
al. try to pass off as evolutionary theory.


>  Personally I would teach both at school as
> theories & let the kids come to their own conclusion.

I'm at a bit of a loss to understand what creationist story should be 
taught in schools. I was under the impression that science classes were 
meant to be based around factual evidence. There is no factual evidence 
to teach in the Judeo-Christian myths that is not based on dubious 
ancient writings and personal revelation.

By all means teach your superstitions in church and Sunday school. The 
public education system is not the appropriate forum.

>  I am a
> qualified Manufacturing Systems Engineer & worked in I.T. but have

And how does this have any bearing on the topic at hand? Are we 
supposed to be impressed that you work in IT and therefore accept your 
ill-founded pronouncements on biological subjects?

> Evolution requires as
> much faith as creationism & has been itself an attempt to discredit
> Christianity & the Genesis account of creation.

This turns out not to be the case. Evolutionary theory flows as a 
logical consequence of the available evidence. It was not an attempt to 
discredit any particular ancient text. BTW as a ministry candidate you 
are aware that Genesis has 2 creation accounts that are contradictory?

> I hope you have time to view these excellent books & I'm sure
> they will answer many questions which you may have about both the
> theories.

I agree. They will show that evolutionary theory is the logical result 
of looking at the evidence whilst the creationist position is an 
attempt to force outdated, narrow religious dogma onto the general 
populace.


>  I do hope the school turns out a success for all the
> younger generations in your area for years to come.

I wonder why the so called Christian led organisation behind the school 
needs to have control as well? Surely if they were following the 
Christian teachings that would just donate the money as an act of 
charity and then let the parents run the school. Why this need to have 
control? Perhaps it is so they can push their religious agenda?

>
> Gary (Church of Scotland Ministry Candidate)
>

I ask again of the parents in this schools area and other areas. Do you 
really want to import the views of people who set themselves up as the 
arbiters of who is a real Christian and then have them poison the minds 
of your children with their stone age mythology?

Fight this religious take-over of your school with every legal device 
available.

Ian Robinson
Belfast UK

7th September 2004

To Whom This E-mail May Concern,
I have been some of those people who have had comments posted on your
website do not fully understand Christianity, the Vardy Foundation or
both.
Indeed, as I would guess not one of you opposed to these changes are
Christains. You are opposed to the changes that the Vardy Foundation
would bring but surely you could not object to them all. Surely if
Christain teachings would bring improved values and qualities into
schools then it is worth considering, is it not? You say, "Our children
deserve a new school of the highest quality,"
And Christains could not bring that? I myself do not agree with all the
teachings of the Vardy Foundation but surely working with them rather
than against them could produce results that are pleasing to both
sides.
The teachings that the Vardy Foundation is bringing are not new. Some 
of
them have been taught in schools for decades. Recently they have
started to fade out in the United Kingdom, and, if you will notice,
morals and standards.

As I say again, I disagree with some of their teachings but I believe
that the benifits outway the losses. And surely you can work with these
people to reach a solution that suits both parties.

6th September 2004

Dear nic2205,

i wish you all the best with your campaign. good luck

6th September 2004

Dear nic2205,

I have been following Vardy's attempts to take over the State system and the government paying him for doing so for some time now and I too am appalled by it. Apart from a totally distorted curriculum and the fact that they exclude pupils at a much higher rate that the rest of the country, they also don't have to put out to tender as would a normal State school. Hence the enormous amounts of money being paid to Peter Reed (one of the partners) for "training". Good Luck with your campaign. If I were you and it ended up with Vardy taking over I would encourage my child to transgress every rule going to ensure that they were kicked out and then the Authority would be duty bound to find another school. Kate Hudson

6th September 2004

I just read through your web page. You have my support. I found some of the comments - from people like "Gary " from the Church of Scotland" deeply insulting - his line "evolution is only a theory" is typical of the narrow minded bronze age thinking of the Christian fundamentalist. I would suggest that evolution may be a theory, but it has more EVIDENCE to support it than the idea that the Earth goes round the sun. I would to debate the issue with the Christian right, but all you get is qoute based arguments, not evidence based debate. Also - in face of arguments about the Church teaching morals - just remember - all of the advances in society and human rights have been IN SPITE of the church, not because of it. For example, only the Quakers stood up against slavery - the rest of Christianity used the bible to support it. 

Cheers 

Rob Sheffield

6th September 2004

Reply to letter from Gary, dated 6^th Sept 04,

 From Mike Brass. (Author of “The Antiquity of Man”)

 School children are required to learn the fundamental principles of
scientific analyses for a number of reasons, including which are
honing analytical skills and equipping them with a basic understanding
of the biological functioning of the world around them. If any of them
wish to pursue careers such as paleontology, archaeology,
palaeoanthropology, zoology, chemistry, biology, et al., they need to
have mastered the observed principles that life forms have and do
alter over time. Such speciation changes have been observed on
numerous occasions.

The mere mention of the word evolution conjures up images either of the workings of the natural world or of propagandist materialism in people’s
minds. To put it into perspective, the contrast is between changes in
allele frequency over time and observed speciation, and science force-fitted into
personal belief systems. Alleles are alternate characters in genetic material
and are integral to the process of speciation. Microevolution is the changes
in allele frequency within a species, whereas speciation is macroevolution
and alleles are not exchanged between populations under natural settings.
The difference in allele frequency grows the further back in time the search
for a common ancestor extends. The molecular clock, with its neutral proteins,
is related to this process and the timing of the chimpanzee, gorilla and human
split has been estimated through analysing the amino acid sequence
differences of the protein albumin. The creative process of evolution is
complex and installs a sense of wonder.

The common denominator of all creationist movements is the deep-rooted
conviction that only their religion is true and that their interpretation of a
particular religious tract is the most accurate. This has the effect of creationism
being a highly fragmented religious stream of thought seeking support for
their views in the geological and fossil records (natural science), as they
want the benefit of scientific authority without the responsibility of its method.
In order to accomplish their goal of preaching and brainwashing, creationists
seek to refute the ruling paradigm of evolution by whatever means possible:
from claiming evolution is merely a “faith” to actively promoting variant
forms of creation “science” in public arenas outside the realms of academic
journals. Readers are encouraged to visit the http://www.talkorigins.org
website where various creationist arguments are listed, explained and rebutted
in great detail; printed materials which cover this arena include Godfrey
(1983), Scott (1997) and Strahler (1999).

Mainstream evolutionary science does not pass judgement on personal
religious beliefs which are outside the realm of science, despite the protests
of some prominent atheists. All mainstream churches, including the Roman
Catholic Church and Pope John Paul II, regard creationism as unscientific
and do not view a conflict between the findings of scientists and the Christian
Bible. Saint Augustine, who lived before evolution became the dominant
theory, also disagreed with a literal interpretation of the Bible.
Anyone wishing to locate and read counter-arguments to Intelligent
Design are encourage to obtain a copy of this book:

Pennock, R. (ed.) 2001. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its
Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives.
London: MIT Press

Those readers curious to explore how a prominent biologist has
reconciled his scientific views and Christian beliefs, with his
reaction against the creationist movement as a whole, should read:

Miller, K. 1999. Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common
Ground between God and Evolution

How evolution is defined and recognised in the fossil and gene records is
not fully understood by the general public beyond generalities. Schools,
particularly in North America where the vast majority of creationist
organisations are based, need to improve the quality and quantity of their
evolutionary science teachings. The public know changes occur in nature,
yet this is normally where their understanding peters out. Evolution is
essentially the change in gene (allele) frequency over time, which began to
operate after life first began. The origin of life is the realm of the separate
scientific discipline of abiogenesis. Creationism attempts to link abiogenesis,
cosmology and evolution under the broad banner of “evolution” but, as can
be seen from the basic definition of evolution, that is nothing more than a
misinformed stab in the dark which reveals a distinct lack of knowledge
about the theory against which they are arguing. Evolutionary theories propose
mechanisms to interpret these changes. In this regard confusion arises between
scientists and the general public. As expressed eloquently by Dr. Eugenie
Scott, head of the National Centre for Science Education in America, “the
problem is that ‘theory’ and ‘fact’ are used differently in science and among
the public. In science, a theory is a logical construct of facts, hypotheses,
and laws that explains a natural phenomenon. To the general public, however,
a theory is not an explanation, but a hunch or guess. To teach evolution as a
theory in this sense is to teach it as something students don’t have to take
seriously” (Scott 1997: 278).

In “Abusing Science: The Case Against Creationism,” Kitcher (1982:
37) puts forward a wonderful definition of the scientific method:
“Theories are collections of statements. The observational
consequences of a theory are statements that have to be true if the
statements belonging to the theory are all true. These observational
consequences also have to be statements whose truth or falsity can be
ascertained by direct observation. Any theory that has a false
observational consequence must contain some false statement (or
statements). For if all the statements in the theory were true, then,
according to the standard definitions of deductive validity and
observational consequence, any observational consequence would also
have to be true. Hence, if a theory is found to have a false observational
consequence, we must conclude that one or more statements of the
theory is false.”

In other words, good scientific theories have observational predictions that
would falsify all or components of a theory should they prove to be
incorrect. Quality online introductions to evolutionary biology, detailing the
evidence for evolutionary change, are to be found at
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html and
http://www.ncseweb.org . Both websites contain numerous other
materials which will assist the reader both in understanding the
issues surrounding the creation-evolution "debate" as well as provide
a solid grounding in the overwhelming evidence for the fact and theory
of evolution.

There is a charge which needs answering in particular. Gary states, "When we see the decline in Christianity &
Biblical teaching it is rather easy to see the correlation with
rises in Drug or Alcohol abuse, teen pregnancies, over 20 000
Abortions performed per month in UK alone, Divorce rate increasing
drastically, self abuse, body piercing tattoos, pornography etc need
I go on?" How then does he explain the rampant drug (especially opium)
abuse which occurred in Victorian England ? How does he explain the
common behaviour of women and men having extra-marital affairs also
prior to Darwin ? How does he explain the exploitation of other human
beings, slavery, which were justified at the time through passages
from the Bible ? It appears moral decay is in the eyes of the
beholder.

I would like to end off by illustrating how the evidence for human
evolution is overwhelming and irrefutable, based upon anatomical and
genetic analyses:

The anatomical characteristics that link the australopithecines to Homo, and show their intermediate form between modern humans and the last common ancestor between humans and chimpanzees, include:
·The canines of the australopithecines do not project much further forward in relation to the other teeth than they do in Homo;
·Australopithecine canines also show a decrease in sexual size differences over time – the more recent forms are more like the condition of modern humans;
·Tooth enamel progresses to a more Homo-like thickness over time;
·Wear patterns on australopithecine teeth suggest a “crushing” action, similar to that of Homo;
·The cranial capacity of the australopithecines increases to a capacity range approaching that of early Homo;
·The australopithecine foramen magnum, which allows the spinal cord to connect with the base of the brain, is located more toward the base of the skull than in apes, yet not completely under the skull, as in Homo -, except for in the robust australopithecines (also known as Paranthropus) where it was just as in Homo; and
·The features of the tibiae (orientation angle, thickness and internal structure) shared by australopithecines and Homo reflect the demands placed on their bodies by bipedalism.

The anatomical similarities between chimpanzees and anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens) can be summarized as follows:
·In both species, the rib cage is broad from side to side and shallow from front to back; the rib cage extends back beyond the vertebral column;
· Both have a dorsally-placed scapula and shoulder joints facing outward to the side, giving humans a mobile shoulder joint; a hangover from our arboreal ancestry;
· The positioning and angle of the humeral shaft and humeral head and other joints in the forelimb are the same in both species


===========
Mikey Brass
MA in Archaeology student
"The Antiquity of Man" http://www.antiquityofman.com
Book: "The Antiquity of Man: Artifactual, fossil and gene records explored"

- "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?"
(Albert Einstein)

6th September 2004

Hi - all the best for your campaign against the takeover. How such drivel can still be preached in our schools is beyond me. Everyone familiar with this case should consider carefully where they buy their next used car from - if you see what I mean

6th September 2004

6th September 2004

5th September 2004

Questions sent to e bay

Dear nic2205,

Good luck with your campaign. It's deeply troubling that Creationism is edging it's way into school curriculums. Best wishes, Tris

Dear nic2205,

good luck in your campaign

Dear nic2205,

All power to your cause. I'm gobsmacked that the Christian Right Wing can so easily hijack an English school - probably with American money. Not surprised by Doncaster Council though - I used to be a Doncaster school governor and member of the local Labour Party. There were some good people, but, no names mentioned, also some self seeking wheeler dealers with no real interest in socialism or local democracy. Good luck John Wilson

Dear nic2205,

You have a lot of support nationally. Chin up.

Dear nic2205,

Good luck with your campaign. Unfortunately, I doubt that you'll succeed. When the bureaucrats decide to foul something up, they're immune to reason. In these times, any fool should be able to see that religious fundamentalists should not be encouraged, of whatever religion. Schools are for education, not indoctrination.

6th September 2004

6th September 2004

Hi,

My name is Gill R, I opposed the Thorne Academy.  Now called the Trinity academy. 

 Please keep up your good work, I have been following 

you carefully.  

The Trinity Academy is now underway across the road from me. 

Everything was done underhanded. But luckily we had it delayed by three

months.  We had no help from our local councillors, in fact they just love to 

take the highlight, and still get their pictures in the papers with 

it. The nice bit is, they have been under water for a very long time, it is a 

known fact that this area is a flood zone. We struggled because the 

parents and teachers all thought that this was going to be a good idea, and 

they were not willing to look at a broader view.  I stand and applaud you 

all for getting the people to listen to you.  If you need any further info or 

help,

please contact me at .

Best regards

Gill

6th September 2004

Hi

It’s good to see parents with genuine concern for the education of their kids. With regard to the so called brainwashing of kids: This has been going on for years through the lie of Darwinism & evolution. Rather than getting into theological discussions (which usually tend to infuriate people for some strange reason especially those who have an aversion to religion-one wonders why it creates anger?) I would recommend an excellent book by the Design Engineer Dr Stuart Burgess, BSc, PhD, CEng, MIMechE called Hallmarks of Design  (ISBN 1 903087 31-7)-It would be a welcome corrective to the evolutionary myths that are taught in our state schools!

Not only that, do parents not think that Television, Magazines, Hollywood blockbuster movies etc have a “Brainwashing” effect on their kids but we rarely hear of parents with objections to those-then again it begs the question are the parents already addicted to TV etc themselves. When we see the decline in Christianity & Biblical teaching it is rather easy to see the correlation with rises in Drug or Alcohol abuse, teen pregnancies, over 20 000 Abortions performed per month in UK alone, Divorce rate increasing drastically, self abuse, body piercing tattoos, pornography etc need I go on?

It is rather fanciful to be scared of Christianity considering the British Empire grew & prospered while the nation’s leaders promoted the spread of the faith worldwide. We must not forget that our Queen is defender of the faith which is Christianity NOT other false doctrines such as Islam, Buddhism, Romanist Catholicism, Materialism etc. Secularism is just a fancy name for humanism more accurately known as paganism.

I’d far rather put my faith in the divine authoritative word of God than scientists whose promotion of nonsense such as evolution is absolutely riddled with holes. It was only ever a theory & is not proven but never will since it is a religion itself. Don’t know about anyone else but I know I am not a descendant from an ape. If you ever hear scientists prattle on about millions & millions of years ago then warning lights should appear to you as they are into fantasy land. Thank goodness Columbus didn’t put his faith in scientists the way people (who are too lazy to study & think for themselves) do nowadays.

For another excellent book check out “The Answers Book” by Dr Jonathon D. Sarfati, Carl Weiland & Ken Ham. This book will allow you to take a brief overview of creationism & compare it with evolution theory. Personally I would teach both at school as theories & let the kids come to their own conclusion. I am a qualified Manufacturing Systems Engineer & worked in I.T. but have come to the conclusion that evolution is the theory which has been indoctrinated into the last few generation’s of schoolchildren worldwide (you may be one of these kids who took it all in but then again do we like to admit to being duped?). Evolution requires as much faith as creationism & has been itself an attempt to discredit Christianity & the Genesis account of creation.

I hope you have time to view these excellent books & I’m sure they will answer many questions which you may have about both the theories. I do hope the school turns out a success for all the younger generations in your area for years to come.

God’s blessings & prosperity to all who attend the school & their families I pray

Take care

6th September 2004

got this link

link

Yorkshire post link

5th September 2004

I first heard of Northcliffe in the 80.s when involved

with Dartington Hall School with which you had links.

Since then I have been head of a Church of England

high school and have taught in independent schools in

England and abroad.

 I think you parents are trapped between conventional

party politicians, and some teachers, who have made

parents very dependent on others when it comes to

educating their children, and private enterprise which

sees opportunities of getting its hands on public

funds which are, notionally, earmarked for education.

These opportunities are seen in the companies set up

to provide supply staff, advisors and consultants and

inspectors, all of which get involved to take cash but

take no further responsibility in the way that parents

and teachers do.

 Ideally, I believe that communities should own and

control their local schools through charitable, non

profit-making, fully-funded educational trusts, a

return to proper "public" schools. I have attached two

essays on the subject.

 If you mean business - and you have only one chance

with your children's education - you must consider

desperate measures, a boycott of the new school if you

are philosophically opposed to it.  Parents with

particular religious beliefs are allowed to opt into

faith schools but forcing them to accept what is

really religious coercion is morally repugnant and

totally unreasonable.

 You might consider occupying the school so that the

present teachers can get on with teaching but so that

others, be they the local authority or others who

would deny you that control, are unable to divert the

school from its basic purposes with your children. You

are entitled to educate your children yourselves and

organisations such as "Education Otherwise," which

helps parents to educate their children at home, would

probably be a valuable source of help.

 Demand full funding for your school. This is what

grant-maintained schools had and the present

government is considering this system for

"successful" schools along with greater freedom about

what they teach. Why should your kids be denied these

advantages - that's what the Blair boys had. 

 If the Labour Party win the next election they will be

more difficult than they will be now, with an election

in the offing.

 The Conservatives ought to support this approach now

on good conservative principles and, in opposition,

they should be sympathetic about difficulties

inflicted on you by a Labour government. 

 Whatever you try will be difficult. You may find

yourselves having to take tough decisions about

admissions and the upholding of discipline, for

example, but you could find the outcome very

satisfying for the community. You would doubtless

learn much, and you would be doing your children a

huge favour. Once the children realise what you are

doing for them, they are likely to prove surprisingly

supportive and cooperative - they never lose their

capacity to surprise the older generation.

 Legal help, such as that offered on your letter page

might be very welcome, and there are other law firms

that specialise in education; one advises the school

which the Blair boys attended.

You will also have to work very closely with the

people who actually teach your kids. They are

employees of the local council and have a tradition of

supporting lea control. You would certainly need to

provide them with much practical and moral support.

 You might get to the stage where you could raise

financial support to establish a trust to benefit your

kids, their school and nothing or nobody else.

Summerhill School, the country's smallest and poorest

independent school, for "drop-outs" and "failures,"

saw off a government attempt to close them down

because of "technical" inefficiencies and they continue

the good work that I have seen there. Look at their

website.

I wish you well. Please approach me if I can be of any

practical help; I enjoy teaching and encouraging

others to do so.

 Good luck.

 Peter Inson.

 3rd September 2004

 ** Message ** Thought you may want this fo the news page ** Parents 'auction' school on eBay ** Parents angry at a religious group sponsoring a city academy are auctioning it for £2m on the internet. < http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/education/3624198.stm > ** BBC Daily E-mail ** Choose the news and sport headlines you want - when you want them, all in one daily e-mail < http://www.bbc.co.uk/dailyemail/ >

24th August 2004

20th August 2004

I was wondering whether the reply to the letter that you sent to Tony 
Blair was
what you actually received from him. Ie. did the prime minister really 
write
that? That he could possibly advocate let alone have written such 
archaic
nonsense is astounding to me.

 I have been looking through your campaign website after hearing about 
the
details of this proposed action through the British Humanist 
Association and
the letter written in part by Richard Dawkins. Let me say that I can 
only
applaud your defence against a proposed takeover which is at the very 
least
totally shocking in a progressive, liberal state and which I find 
abominable.
It would appear that British schools are to be freely sold down the 
river in
return for a small grant from any direction. I put this down to Tony 
Blair's
shockingly backward beliefs, more and more of which are being revealed 
and
which he feels free to implement in the country's government without
consultation.

 If I have addressed this letter to the wrong place then please forward 
it to
where it should go. Let me add that I have no direct interests in the 
problem
as a university student living in edinburgh, save that of a very 
concerned
individual. Concerned both for the plight of your childrens' educations 
and the
direction that this country is taking.

reply I will see if I can find a reply and post it on the web site

29th July 2004

** Message ** thought you may want this for the site ** Concern over Bible-based lessons ** A fundamentalist Christian foundation's views on teaching based on Biblical principles are criticised. < http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/hi/education/3920629.stm >

Ed you can download the document that they have removed from their website here

27th July 2004

20th July 2004

19th July 2004

In my message of 13 June I included the URL of the Emmanuel College's
statement on Christianity and the Curriculum
(http://www.emmanuelctc.org.uk/curriculum-candc.htm).
It seems that this documentation has been removed. In case this is so 
and you do not have a copy I attach the material in Word form.

Best wishes,

Allan 

ED Thanks Allan I have put the document on the front page of our site

After the recent consultation this document was referred to a number

times, it is sad that they have removed documents that give parents an insight

in to how their kids will be taught or should I say indoctrinated..

17th July 2004

further links! http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/2565_the_evolution_of_creationism_12_7_2000.asp 

http://www.botany.org/newsite/announcements/evolution.php 

clive

17th July 2004

Hi, I am a parent of child at King's Academy in Middlesbrough. I do not wish to be identified as my child still has to attend this school. I won't go into details but suffice to say, don't give up the fight. Our campaign didn't have chance to build up steam before we were overwhelmed by politics, PR and plans already laid. Whilst our previous schools were not perfect, they were certainly not failing, and in fact, improving. Make sure that you have a proper say over the type of school you get to replace yours, if indeed they need to be replaced at all. Now we have no "choice", Tony's favourite word. Oh...and defend your teachers, they are precious. Good Luck

15th July 2004

15th July 2004

15th July 2004

As I pointed out in my letter about the Mayor of Doncaster, I think the whole idea of basing the school rebuilding program on alleged weaknesses of a schools results is giving local authorities a strong incentive to go around trying to pick fault. Well they have even less reason to pick on you now.

13th July 2004

May I add my support to what you are doing! I attach a discussion thread at Internet Infidels and a few web links you may be interested in. Please feel free to forward this information to relevant people. 

The weblinks about creation stories may be very valuable tactics as schools should be teaching about all creation stories. 

I also attach a link to newcastle education service about what schools should be doing in terms of best practice in terms of ethnic minorities. You can strongly recommend that lessons should ask where children are from and what their creation stories are. 

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=91216 Internet Infidels 

http://www.webenglishteacher.com/creation.html Creation stories from around the world 

http://emtras.newcastlelea.org/ Newcastle Council - The white book on the newcastle webpage is the one for school governors. 

http://www.hagshama.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=200 (Discussion about the two stories in Genesis)

Clive Durdle MSc BA (Econ) Dip Soc Studs FCIH Durdle Door Consulting

13th July 2004

Who are You kidding?

I am a school governor from Hoyland and taught in Secondary Education in West Yorkshire before becoming head of Hoyland Adult Education Centre in the 70s and 80s. I am a member of Sheffield Interfaith, where most members are of beliefs which are post-enlightenment.

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 and which tends to be accompanied by a desire to indoctrinate others.
This also provides a useful means of wielding power.

At the moment both the American and British government politicians at the centre of power are attracted to these groups, probably for different reasons. One of these reasons is the better enablement of control of their population. They realise that there is an attraction to finding ways of bringing order into the community through religious obedience.

I believe that there is a better way to bring about happier and better balanced individuals.

For those in education, this is through the excitement of discovering new vistas; not through indoctrination, but in discovery using the full capacity of our brains and personalities.

Schools and other institutions do need to change and many are changing to give our young people the means to achieving a satisfying life. A fairness in distributing life improvements must benefit all our population, without strings attached.

The communities of Conisbrough and Denaby have shown a great deal of enterprise in discussing and taking action around the proposals for a Vardy Creationist School for the community.

I urge you to turn this proposal down and persuade our government to give the best educational opportunities for your young people without bringing in the thought system which should have died out in the bronze age.

Give us modern education of the best standard for Conisbrough and Denaby without the thought police!

Gordon Sinclair.

9th July 2004

9th July 2004

From Northcliffe Kids?

They say its needed but it isn’t wanted

They say its all about inclusion but they exclude and exclude and exclude

They say its all about choice but they deny the rights

They say its all about money and it is –

NOT NEED, NOT INCLUSION, NOT CHOICE.

Say NO! to the Vardy Takeover of Northcliffe.

4th July 2004

Dear CADPAG

I am mailing you in response to your email message sent to Phil Ingham.
Phil is currently away on university business in China and has
forwarded your message to me.

The situation regarding your school is indeed a cause for considerable
concern. Representing a university department with an international
reputation in genetics research and a commitment to producing biology
graduates at the highest level, I am appalled that schools in our
region might be become involved in teaching intellectually dishonest,
creationist nonsense of the kind which appears to be proposed by the
Emmanuel Foundation. I would be happy to help you in this regard and
suggest that you call me to discuss possible ways that we might help
Yours sincerely

Professor Carl Smythe

Professor Carl Smythe
Chair of Cell Biology
Centre for Developmental Genetics
Department of Biomedical Sciences
University of Sheffield
Firth Court
Western Bank
Sheffield UK
S10 2TN

29th June 2004

 Do the Ends Justify the Means? 

The Mayor of Doncaster, Martin Winter says he is committed to excellence >in education, which is laudable enough. However, by recruiting the Vardy >Foundation in this quest, we are forced to ask, do the ends justify the >means? To answer this, it is worth considering the following information & >some of the questions it raises

1) The Vardy Foundation is run by people who tend to believe in an >extreme form of Christian faith, which insists on a literal interpretation >of biblical texts. Such people are known as, "Fundamentalist Christians" & >they believe in creationism, which is the belief that the known universe, >all 15 Billion light years of it, was created some 6000 years ago as >described in the Bible. There are variations on this belief but this is the >most common. Another name for these people is therefore "Creationists" >Creationism is in total conflict with most of modern science, for example >astronomy, biology, geology, evolution, cosmology, physics & a lot more >besides. It has also been rejected by most of the mainstream Christian >denominations. However, that has not stopped the Vardy Foundation from >teaching creationism in their schools & worse of all, in science classes. >This has caused a lot of public debate, but it should be made very clear >that in scientific cycles, their arguments have failed entirely. As >creationism was getting such a hammering, the creationists decided to do a >rebranding, they ditched all references to the Bible, threw in some flash >sounding (but meaningless) scientific phrases & came up with "Intelligent >Design". However, it does not matter what they call their beliefs, they are >unscientific & should not be taught alongside science in any school. Martin >Winter says he wants to improve standards in schools. Perhaps he could >explain how he believes allowing religious extremists to teach Anti-Science >nonsense in his boroughs classrooms is improving standards. Because from >what I can see his actions will have the very reverse effect & lower them >(The odd thousand years or so). 

2) The children in these schools are daily exposed to the threat of >biblical damnation & hell-fire if they do not heed the Vardy Foundations >fundamentalist teachings. We do not beat children into learning anymore, as >it is physical abuse. I would wonder why Martin Winter then feels this >teaching method is okay, because it is considered by many to be a form of >physiological abuse. I have no doubt he would say that it is something he >does not support. In that case what is he doing supporting its >reintroduction back into the borough's schools? 

3) Not only have they corrupted morning assemblies & science classes, >but their extremist influence also extends across the entire curriculum, >with just about everything repackaged in biblical wrappings. For instance, >in History, they have written that during WW2, God intervened to stop the >Germans on the French coast. This is a bazaar interpretation of events to >say the least. Does Martin Winter believe that the Germans stopped on the >French coast because God intervened to save our Anglo Saxon skins or >because a body of water 21 miles wide at its narrowest point & called the >English Channel prevented them from advancing any further? What version of >events does he think should be taught in the boroughs classrooms? Does he >believe that teaching the Vardy Foundations versions of events is improving >standards & if not why is he supporting them? 

4) Because the Vardy Foundation is committed to spreading their >biblical message in the classrooms (where their teachings are liable to do >the most damage), they need to staff their schools with people who are >like-minded. This means they will give priority for teaching positions to >those with similar religious views to their own, not necessarily >fundamentalists but religious all the same. For instance, the new principle >at Trinity Academy in Thorne used to be a History & RE teacher. Before the >Vardy Foundation took over, anyone regardless of religion or lack of it >could have applied for (& assuming they were good enough of course) got >that position. Now atheists, agnostics, Hindus etc need not apply. There is >simply no way round it; this is discrimination on the grounds of religion. >They would naturally enough claim that as the school was now a religious >school then it is obvious that they would prefer to employ people of a >compatible "ethos". Well, aren't we just lucky that we don't have religious >based councils or hospitals etc, because by that logic the only people who >would be allowed to work in this country would be the suitably pious. The >point is that they should never have been allowed to implement a policy >that would result in this sort of discrimination. Unfortunately this >Government has left loopholes in the law which allow this sort of practice >to continue. What is worse, Martin Winter (head of a Labour Council who you >thought would be sympathetic to issues of workers rights) is actively >encouraging its spread by allowing creationists to take over one school & >now inviting them to take over another. Should Martin Winter be supporting >this sort of behaviour? 

5) The government is handing control of more & more schools over to >religious organisations such as the C of E & in this case the Vardy >Foundation. Yet no one has ever given one good reason why schools should be >run by religious organisations in the first place. What is it about the >beliefs of the pious that entitles them to take control of large chunks of >the nation's multi-billion pound educational budget? Perhaps Martin Winter >would like to give us an explanation, seeing as he is supporting this >policy. 

6) The Vardy Foundation has strong associations with an organisation >called the Christian Institute, who have a passionate dislike of >homosexuals & transvestites. They were responsible for the publicity stunt >where donor sized cards were sent out with the wording, "In the event of my >death I do not want my children being brought up by homosexuals" on them. >What chance do you think a gay teacher would stand in one of these schools? >I thought in this day & age that discrimination on the basis of sexual >orientation was frowned upon. Well it is in most parts of the country, but >thanks to Martin Winter, not in Doncaster. Perhaps he could explain why he >is supporting homophobic practices within local government? 

7) There is evidence that teachers in these schools are subject to an >overbearing & authoritarian style of management, which in a recent case was >referred to by the NUT as, "a violation of their liberties & rights". I >doubt if Martin Winter would find this acceptable, so why is he supporting >people who do? 

8) In addition, the Christian Institute's, views on social issues are >very right wing (Those at their website almost amounting to a manifesto). >Yet we live in country, which is politically biased to the left, a bias >that in Doncaster extends down to a local level. Should Martin Winter be >supporting & empowering people who seem to hold views that are >unrepresentative of the electorate? Is it right for him to be encouraging >people with political agendas to be running any school (regardless of what >their politics are)? 

(9) There is concern about the issue of the school governors who will be >largely chosen by the Vardy Foundation with minimum involvement from local >people. These of course will be chosen from the ranks of their supporters & >can come from anywhere. It is hard to find details about these people, >however in Middlesbrough it is reported that one of them is Rev David >Holloway, Vicar of Jesmond Parish Church and founder of the Christian >Institute (who pulled the card stunt mentioned above). In Middlesbrough, >there are seven governors, of which only one represents the local authority >& only one other the local community, the rest are chosen by the Vardy >Foundation. Furthermore, the local community representative has no real >authority & can simply be over-ruled at will. Given that Martin Winter is >supposed to be representing the local community, the question naturally >arises as to what he is doing implementing policies that have an adverse >affect on the ability of local people to make decisions about educational >matters in their own schools? Perhaps he should try asking the Vardy >Foundation to improve this situation (Rather than lamely accepting it)?. >After all, if they were really as reasonable as they like to make out they >are, the Vardy Foundation should have no problem with this. 

(10) Sometimes politicians say or do things that leave me seriously >doubting their sanity. An example of this is David Blunkets threat to close >down "Failing Schools". When I first heard this, my thoughts turned to our >local school here in Goole. What would happen if he closed this down? Well, >the 1200+ pupils would have to travel daily to schools anything up to 15 >miles away. These of course would have to find some way of coping with the >massive changes such a move would make. This would be incredibly disruptive >to all concerned & given that these problems are resolvable, it would also >be completely unnecessary. After all, would David Blunket take his >expensive car to a scrap yard just because it had a flat tyre? Recently >there has been a new twist on this policy; rather than closing down the >offending school, you knock it down & then rebuild it! (& just then when >you thought it couldn't get much sicker than this - give it to a bunch of >loons). Coulby Newham School (Taken over by the Vardy Foundation in >Middlesbrough) was apparently less than 25 years old when it was replaced. >In Goole, the main school is nearly a century old & according to East >Riding County Council, "one of the worst school buildings in the county". >The rebuild costs are estimated at around £20 million & it could be years >before anything is done about it. Surely it is only fair that the vast sums >of money needed to finance these large projects should be based on some >objectively arrived at criteria that assesses the state of repair of ALL >the countries school buildings then allocates resources based on this >criteria, instead of totally irrelevant factors such as the strength or >weakness of a particular management (which I believe is encouraging local >authorities to deliberately pick fault with schools) or an affiliation to >one or other of the hundreds of thousands of religious sects currently on >the go? Does Martin Winter think it is fair that his department should be >allowed to push it's way to the front of the queue like this? 

11) Here are a few things that help schools achieve; Good Teachers, >Good Managers, Good Facilities, a Good Reputation, Bright Pupils, Motivated >Parents etc. The religious beliefs (or lack of them) of the staff & pupils >are completely irrelevant. (The Vardy Foundation just love to bash on about >their so-called "ethos".) This raises the question that given the >controversy over the teaching by the Vardy Foundation of Creationism, why >is it that they do not remove or tone down these more contentious issues? >Has Martin Winter considered asking them to do this? After all this would >be one way of resolving this issue. Personally, I would not hold my breath, >the Vardy Foundation like to downplay the more extreme nature of their >plans, but they are no more liable to be interested in removing creationism >from the syllabus than an alcoholic would be in drinking vodka & coke >without the vodka. 

12) Finally, I think it is about time that people were a little more >questioning of the Vardy Foundations assertions of superiority. Surely, >Doncaster's Schools have staff that are competent, hard working, dedicated >& need help or praise rather than being demoralised with these constant, >demeaning & unfair comparisons. Emmanuel School, Gateshead has done well, >but that is not so surprising when you examine some of the reasons for it. >Not even the Vardy Foundation are promising this level of performance in >Doncaster, which raises the question as to just how much better these >schools are going to do under them compared with the existing management >who have committed themselves too (& were achieving) higher standards. The >returns are only liable to be marginal & cannot justify the many problems >(only some of which I have highlighted here) such a move would create. >Perhaps Martin Winter would like to consider other means of improving standards that do not involve exposing children to the nonsense of  "creationism". 

 At the beginning of this article I asked a question; "Do the ends >justify the means"? Well, I personally have no problem in answering this, >because as far as I am concerned the ends are just as horrible as the >means, but you can make up your own minds. > > > 

Alan.

29th June 2004

Dear Sirs, 

As a long-time admirer of the Britains cultural institutions, not least its schools and universities, I am deeply disturbed by the plans for creationist teaching at Northcliffe comprehensive. At a time when we enjoy a true revolution of biological insight, wholly based upon experimental scientific evidence, it is a serious step in the wrong direction to revert to dogmatic, non-experimental evidence for life processes and their natural history. 

Modern molecular biology and genetics have overwhelmingly supported the evolutionary principles initiated by Charles Darwin. The proposed alternative, creationism, does not rest upon experiments and systematic observations which is the only time-proven approach to aquire lasting insight. 

Per Andersen, 

ForMemRS Neurobiology, 

University of Oslo, 

Norway.

29th June 2004

I have responded to the Dawkins-Harries article with the following letter to "The Sunday Times" Regards Geoff Chapman Dear Sir, After reading the article jointly written by Dr Richard Dawkins and The Bishop of Oxford (Sunday Times, 20th June), I am puzzled by four things:- (1) How Bishop Harries - who is supposed to be a defender of the Christian faith - can join forces with an atheist, who repudiates everything that even a liberal theologian like him believes, in order to attack the beliefs and motives of Sir Peter Vardy, a fellow Christian. The phrase "strange bed-fellows" comes to mind. (2) How it can possibly be "dangerous" to teach young people that they were created by God, as an alternative to being the products of mindless, chance evolutionary processes. How can belief in creation possibly harm anyone? (3) Why these two gentlemen insist that evolution is not a "faith position" when many well-known evolutionists have admitted that it is. For example, in his introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's Origin, Prof. Harrison Mathews wrote, "Belief in the theory of evolution [is] exactly parallel to belief in special creation... a satisfactory faith on which to build our interpretation of nature", and in his book The Dogma of Evolution, Professor L T More wrote, "Our faith in the idea of evolution depends upon our reluctaice to accept the antagonistic doctrine of special creation." (emphases added). (4) Sir Peter Vardy's schools teach both creation and evolution, so why are Drs Dawkins and Harries so opposed to allowing young people to think for themselves on this issue? If, as they claim, evolution really is supported by "mountains of scientific evidence", why do they regard the teaching of creationism as such a threat? Yours faithfully Geoff Chapman (Director) Creation Resources Trust, Mead Farm, Downhead, West Camel, Yeovil, BA22 7RG

26th June 2004

Dear CADPAG, 

I have seen information in the media about your Action Group's opposition to the proposed Vardy Academy which would replace Northcliffe School. I have now also looked at the material on your website. From what I have seen, it would appear that you have not developed a legal dimension to your campaign. 

I am a solicitor specialising in judicial review and human rights cases for individuals and groups opposed to decisions & policies of local authorities, government departments & quangos. I have a great deal of expertise in bringing cases, using legal aid, on behalf of communities to oppose unpopular decisions, from planning decisions which would result in cut sports & leisure facilities through to opposition to closures of hospitals, residential homes etc. You can get a feel for our kind of work from our website at http://www.leighday.co.uk 

I have discussed your campaign with David Wolfe, a barrister with whom I work on a regular basis, who has a great deal of specifically education related experience. We would both be keen to expore with you how legal action could assist you in achieving your aims. If you were interested, we would need more material & could then meet up with representatives of your group to discuss how to take things forward. This would of course be without charge. 

If we can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Yours sincerely, 

Richard Stein 

Leigh, Day & Co Priory House 25 St. John's Lane London EC1M 4LB

25th June 2004

The word "Appalled" has become a cliché, but it's difficult to think of another word that conveys my reaction to the proposals to turn Northcliffe Comprehensive into a Vardy Academy. I first came across the issue when I read the article jointly written by Richard Dawkins and the Bishop of Oxford printed in the Sunday Times of June 20th. I feel that this makes a very strong case against the Vardy Foundation. Regardless of one's own philosophical or faith position, the fact that Dawkins and the Bishop can together make a coherent and compelling argument against these academies is tremendously revealing. Reading the recent history of Northcliffe, and the government and Ofsted machinations surrounding it, together with Emmanuel College's web site, makes me feel like I live in some kind of Kafkaesque alternative reality. I fell away from the (fairly weak) religion I grew up in at about the age of eight because it simply began to stop making sense, for the same sort of reasons that Father Christmas didn't make sense. Since then I have been a passionate seeker of the truth, and a fascinated student of why many people, maybe most people, need a belief system. I became a Physics teacher for the early part of my career and developed a passion for education, and for communicating a curiosity and an understanding for the way the physical world works. Now at the other end of my career, I am happy to be a parent governor of a large and very successful comprehensive school where the Chair of Governors is a committed Christian. I respect him, his philosophy, and the work he does very highly. I happily spend the time of day with my local vicar. I even sent my children to the local village school, which is Church of England aided primary - largely because it is an excellent school, not wears its CofE basis very lightly, and is 20 feet from my front door. It's perfectly possible for an "evangelical" atheist such as me to rub along with others who have faith, and are even driven to do what they do by their faith. I admire their public works even though I disagree with their motivation. The Vardy Foundation is an entirely different proposition. Their ethos is proclaimed to be Christian, but their proposition is that everything in The Bible is "a Truth" and therefore unassailable, whereas every observed event or logical deduction that disagrees with their faith-based world view is "a theory" or "a competing faith position." Ladies and gentlemen, this is unacceptable rubbish. A belief in a faith, if you need one, is parallel to an understanding of the way the world works and is in no way an alternative to it. Evolution is a fact that can be observed every day in a test-tube of e-coli, or "experienced" in the emergence of antibiotic resistant bacteria in hospitals. Let Mr Vardy believe what he wishes, let him even set up a religious sect, but to take over an improving school by making a one-off token financial contribution, reducing local democratic supervision, and dictating an anti-truth curriculum is utterly unacceptable and must be fought off by all possible means. Despite his recent elevation to knighthood for services to business and education, Mr Vardy is little more than a successful car salesman with a lot of cash and some dangerous delusions. Would we let him do this if he were a follower of L Ron Hubbard, because his views make as little sense as those of the founder of Scientology. 

Yours, David P J Smith 

Saffron Walden 

Essex

25th June 2004

I assume you have seen this

http://www.coulbynet.free-online.co.uk/frames/SMCA/history.htm

25th June 2004

25th June 2004

Dear friends,

I’m delighted that you are campaigning against Vardy’s creationist academy. The US teachers’ journal Rethinking Schools has some interesting articles at http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/12_02/12_02.shtml

Best wishes

Richard Hatcher

Director of research

Faculty of Education

University of Central England

25th June 2004

23rd June 2004

Dear all,

 

go to www.tes.co.uk , search Coulby Newham School, read my letter, and then browse other stuff.

 

Also search Hansard for Blair opening the King's Academy.  I await his apology.

 

Good luck!

 

Gordon Potter MA, MEd, NPQH.

 

ED Gordon was Deputy Head of Coulby Newham. See letter below I have not found the information on Hansard yet!

Letters extra: Putting the record straight

Having read the article about the King’s Academy in Middlesbrough (TES, 12 December) and having been deputy headteacher at Coulby Newham School which the Academy replaced, and which featured prominently in the article, I think some truths need to be established. Coulby Newham was a successful school. Its Ofsted reports of March 1995 and December 2000 revealed a well-managed school where most of the teaching was good, very good or excellent, and where pupils were happy and secure. Most importantly, in September 2002, HMI reported that the school was even better than at its last inspection. It provided a good quality of education, a good climate for learning and good management and leadership. Standards had improved by encouraging pupils to work harder and to better effect. HMI commented on the calm atmosphere, the shared humour and the mutual respect between staff and pupils. Pupils were keen to learn and followed instructions willingly. The school was succeeding in steadily raising pupils’ attainment. Indeed in the value-added statistics for the 2002 examinations Coulby Newham was the second highest attaining school in Middlesbrough (beaten narrowly by the selective Macmillan College). Most significantly HMI stated very clearly that the new school (ie the King’s Academy) should adapt aspects of Coulby Newham’s good practice. HMI recommended that "a major contribution to the establishment of the new school would be to identify those things that are done well at Coulby Newham, and why they work well, so that the new school can consider how to transfer and adapt the aspects of good practice to which many of its pupils will be accustomed, within its intended practices and structures." Finally, the current year 11 at the Academy includes Coulby Newham School pupils who achieved outstanding results in key stage 3 SATs. Gordon Potter Washington

 

22nd June 2004

I am a local resident who has been following both sides of the campaign for the Academy. I have not yet made up my mind either way but am concerned about something that I have just read in the Yorkshire Post. I was told by the local Vicar, at a public meeting, that the bus to the Academy in Middlesbrough was being funded by the Braithwate Trust. I also received a flyer from the 'YES' campaign advertising the same fact. Yet the Yorkshire Post yesterday has a quote from the Vardy Foundation saying that the transport was funded by the Foundation.

"The Foundation said it provided a free bus for parents in Doncaster to visit the King's Academy in Middlesbrough but only five people took up the offer" (Yorkshire Post, Monday 21st June 2004)

I find it quite odd that two groups from the 'YES' campaign cannot get their story straight.

I look forward to the Consultation meeting where I hope many of my unanswered questions will be addressed before I make up my mind.

P.J

22nd June 2004

I would like to make a point about the consultation information packs 
sent out to parents, I was on the march on Saturday and was surprised to 
learn from many resident of Denaby that had children at Northcliffe 
school that they had not received a consultation pack from DMBC.  Given 
the track record of the council in consultation matters (re: the election 
of a Mayor) if consultation forms are not returned to the council will 
they be counted as a yes to the Vardy school, as happened when non 
returned forms for the  mayors election was taken as a YES vote. 
 
How independent will the consultation by?  Would the people of Denaby 
and Conisbrough not have more faith and trust in the outcome of this 
consultation if it was carried out by a independent party of behalf of the 
council and the resident of are two communities.   
 
Having been involved with the running of a local school for many years, 
I think the only thing the community has to thank Mr Vardy for is that 
it has made people think and talk about their childs education.
 
a Conisbrough resident. 

22nd June 2004

22nd June 2004

22nd June 2004

I came across your website today. I have read about the plans for the Vardy Academy. I have to say I am truly amazed at the some of the things being said and written by those who oppose the plans. They fear children will be "brainwashed" by creationism. The fact is, pupils will be taught both creationist and evolution. What could be fairer than that? Apparently, these people don't mind the fact that in many schools pupils are being brainwashed by evolutionism. They think it will harm children to tell them that they were created by God, but not to tell them the evolved from primeval slime! What a twisted mentality! What these by the intervention of atheist Richard Dawkins, The British Humanist Association, and the National Secular Society. Pupils and students have the right to be allowed to consider both side of thsi issue, and think for themselves. That is what the Vardy Foundation intends. Geoff Chapman West Camel, Somerset (You are welcome to publish this letter on your website you so wish

22nd June 2004

21st June 2004 

News Stories

18th June 2004

To the Community of Conisbrough & Denaby

I would like to thank all of you for your support and in believing in the future of Conisbrough & Denaby. We have come a long way since we first started this campaign.  We have proved that working as a Community we can change the course of events even though they at first seemed to be cut and dry. 

I would personally like to respond to the letters from Aiden Rave and John Mills.  Firstly Mr Rave, we chose to “ignore” the information you gave us because contrary to belief we have minds of our own and we have the capability to judge for ourselves when we are being stitched up.  I would also like to point out that as a Community of self-confessed genius’s Ha Ha I never had any interest in running for Council. This decision was made because of the way we were being treated as a Community by our LOCAL Councillors.  May I also point out that the CADPAG team and myself have never told any lies concerning this campaign. We have only ever told the information that we have found during our research, something that may not have happened if your Party hadn’t called Political Purdah on this matter. 

Who are you to say that I used the education of our children as a political football when you don’t live in Conisbrough or Denaby, never went to a local school in Conisbrough or Denaby and don’t send your children to local schools in Conisbrough or Denaby.  I do live in Conisbrough, my parents were born in Denaby and all 3 of my children attend local schools in Conisbrough.

Secondly Mr Mills, just to clarify the difference between my election campaign and our campaign against the Vardy Academy proposal, I DID NOT RUN FOR COUNCIL TO FURTHER MY POLITICAL CAREER. I RAN FOR COUNCIL TO FURTHER THE CAMPAIGN AND THE RIGHTS OF EVERYONE IN CONISBROUGH & DENABY. I’m sure that it doesn’t take a genius to work that out.

Lastly I would like to point out that 853 people of Conisbrough and Denaby voted for me. That’s 1 in 8 of the people who voted. Just to confirm that Mr Rave you had 1460 votes, that’s 607 more than me so realistically I only needed 305 of those votes and you would have lost your seat. Now tell me Mr Rave and Mr Mills I didn’t achieve what I set out to do?  No I didn’t think you could.

Just one final thought. Good luck for the march tomorrow and don’t let the rain put you off.

On behalf of the CADPAG team

Kay Wilkinson

Chair

17th June 2004

I am a pupil at Northcliffe Comp and feel very angry about what happened outside our school today. 

There were a group of people giving out leaflets supporting the Vardy Academy. I do not object to them giving out leaflets but they were arguing with some of us and telling us our school was 'crap'. They would not let us give our opinion and said we didn't know anything about it. They tore down one of the posters that had been put up about the march from a lamp-post and then when some parents from another school walked past they accused 'Northcliffe kids' of doing it. How could they tell such lies when we had seen them do it? 

Everyone has a right to campaign one way or the other and they should not behave like this. Some of us were very upset about they way they treated us. They were not setting a very good example to the kids who were around. They were saying that the CADPAG website is full of lies. I do not feel this is true. If they bothered to read it they would see that you have got letters on supporting the Academy and that it states that anyone has a right to express their opinion on your site. I hope these people do not try and spoil our march on Saturday. We have got rights and we should be allowed to express them but I hope in a more adult way than the people outside our school today. 

A Northcliffe pupil

16th June 2004

15th June 2004

14th June 2004

Hi,

I'm on the committee of Sheffield Humanist Society - affiliated to the BHA that your website links to. I'm also a member of the Council of the National Secular Society, which also has an obvious interest in this issue - I don't know if you've had any contact with them. Anyway, as the nearest Humanist group to Doncaster, I thought I would let you know that we will do all we can to publicise your campaign. Obviously you will have parents/teachers/others involved who are religious, as well as non-religious, so we have no desire to do anything which would alienate anyone. But since this issue dovetails with many humanist concerns, we will do what we can from our perspective out of solidarity.

I note there is a petition on your site, which I will distribute at our meetings and events - we do have members in Doncaster, and I guess residents are the people you need to reach most of all.

I have some info on the Vardy Schools on the SHS website already (under 'campaigns'), and will add links to your own campaign.

see: http://www.sheffieldhumanists.org.uk.

I will mention it in our next newsletter, due in the next few weeks.

There's a possibility I may get an opinion column in The (Sheffield) Star soon. I was planning to talk about education/schools
anyway, so if it actually comes off I will mention your own campaign too.

If there are any other ways we can help, do let us know.

Cheers,
Dan J Bye
Editor, Sheffield Humanist newsletter

To CADPAG, 

I'd like to express my support for your battle to keep your school free from religious indoctrination and pseudo science. Young people have the right to make up their own minds about religious faith in a neutral environment which provides information, not instruction and dogma. This environment cannot be provided by an organisation with an axe to grind - and the Vardy Foundation is poised with very large and very blunt Old Testament axe behind its back. 

Dr Chris Newell

13th June 2004

Best wishes in your fight. (1) With regard to the totally unacceptable attitude of the Vardy schools to science you might be interested in the following remarks from leading figures in the Emmanuel Schools Foundation -John Burn and Nigel McQuoid(Schools Director, the Emmanuel Schools Foundation): "schools should teach the creation theory as literally depicted in Genesis." 

-Steven Layfield, Head of Science at Emmanuel College, Gateshead,: "The feasibility of maintaining an ark full of representative creatures for a year until the waters had sufficiently receded has been well document". "Science teachers may care to try some or all of the following: ... Note every occasion when an evolutionary/old-earth paradigm (millions or billions of years) is explicitly mentioned or implied by a text-book, examination question or visitor and courteously point out the fallibility of the statement and, wherever possible, give the alternative (always better) Biblical explanation of the same data." - Gary Wiecek, Vice Principal, King's Academy, Middleborough 

"As Christian teachers it is essential we are able to counter the anti-creationist position ... It must be our duty ... to counter these false doctrines with well-founded insights." - Paul Yeulett, senior assessment co-ordinator and maths teacher, Emmanuel College: "A Christian teacher of biology ... will oppose it [the theory of evolution] while teaching it alongside creation." (2) How their obsessive fundamentalist attitude permeates all subjects is shown by the attached file on CHRISTIANITY AND THE CURRICULUM from Emmanuel College, Gateshead They removed it from their website, which is now being reconstructed, but it can still ( 21.27 June 11) be reached directly at http://www.emmanuelctc.org.uk/curriculum-candc.htm 

This is not a small matter. We have determined people in responsible positions, employed by a wealthy foundation. Moreover, these schools are City Academies which apart from 10% of start-up funding are entirely paid for out of taxes. Allan

9th June 2004

Could I suggest that you get parents to use the BBC messageboards to publicise and argue your case to a wider public that is worried by the Vardy take-over of our schools. There is useful information for anyone interested in this issue by the Campaign for Secular Education, including definitions that you might find interesting and possbily useful. It is on: www.c.s.e.freeuk.com SL

7th June 2004

Dear CADPAG,

I share your concern about the way things seem to be developing at your school.  It is, indeed, unfortunate when people confuse faith with science: both are important but neither should be used to suppress the other.  The situation becomes dangerous when the faith of one minority sect is used to indoctrinate children at school.

It is also worrying when the LEA, by their actions, seem to have abrogated their responsibilities to provide an appropriate balanced education at your school; this places both the parents and the teachers in an invidious position.  I believe you should insist that the LEA and the school governors respect the clear distinction that should be drawn between education, training and indoctrination.  These points should be made forcibly, urgently and repeatedly to the Doncaster Council during the consultation process that they have promised to the Community.  Parents and staff should be encouraged to lobby remorselessly each and every individual member of the Council.

It is far more effective in these situations to take individual action than to send generalised leaflets or round-robin letters of protest.  It is also prudent to keep the language civil and to avoid recriminations.  Rely on reasonableness and the children's long-term welfare rather than invective.  Unfortunately, the current local elections will be over before such a campaign can gather momentum, but it is not too soon to begin lobbying the individual members of the new Council as soon as they are elected on Thursday.  Only by continued pressure will you keep the matter high on the Council's agenda.  Parents and councillors in other wards should be reminded that "this could happen to you, too".

Please feel free to quote any part of this letter if you feel that it would be of help.  Good luck with your campaign.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Norman Greenwood(FRS) University of Leeds

5th June 2004

Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 16:53:17 -0400
Subject: Northcliffe Comprehensive School
From: Brigid Hogan
To: CADPAG

Dear Ms Flint, (local MP)

I was recently contacted by ******** in your constituency of Conisbrough, Doncaster (for parents website
see http://www.cadpag.co.uk). They were extremely concerned by the
plans of the local education authority to change the school into an
"Academy" with the help of a donation from a fundamental christian charity
called The Vardy/Emmanuel Schools Foundation. they had evidence to suggest
that this charity would strongly influence the teaching of biology in the
new school, expecting equal weight to be given to biblical creationism as to
the scientific theory of evolution. If this fear is correct, and the local
education authority does not act vigorously to prevent it, then it will be
tragedy for British science education. Currently, creationists and advocates
for "intelligent design" are actively influencing the teaching of biology in
the United States, a trend that scientists here are trying hard to
counteract. See for example, books and statements on The National Academies
of Science website at www.nas.edu.
Why do I care about this? I was fortunate enough to have a wonderful science
education in a state high school in the UK. It inspired me to become a
scientist and I am now both a Fellow of the Royal Society and a member of
the US Institute of Medicine. The British educational system is one of the
best in the world, and students in your area in particular deserve the best
science education possible. The theory of evolution is one of the most
important and central unifying concepts in biology. Creationism and
intelligent design have no foundation in fact, and spending time on the
material in school is about as silly as seriously discussing flat earth
ideas and UFO sightings. From what I understand, the pupils in this school
need all the help they can receive in prepare themselves for the future. I
urge you to do all you can to change the policy of the LEA and keep this
foundation out of the picture.

Yours sincerely,
Brigid Hogan Ph.D. FRS
Chair, Department of Cell Biology
Duke University Medical School
USA

18/04/05

6th June 2004 

As a former pupil at Northliffe school i'll admit that I, like your organisation, was dismayed to learn of the possible take over by the Emmanuel Foundation. I received a first rate education from the school, however, as the recent Offsted report showed standards have obviously fallen to such a dramatically low rate where parents and pupils have been receiving letters discussing the poor quality. Therefore it is obvious to all that something must be done, so I was completely astonished to find the uproar and negative reaction to a few rumours about the Emmanuel Foundation takeover. The 'concerns' voiced on your website do not appear to hold much ground, you state that the company will appoint teachers and that this is a problem, how? What if the teachers they appoint are better, there is a major shortage of teachers in this country, a major corporation like Reg Vardy will appeal to the best teachers as they possibly provide the best wages. Your concern that the new school will have a 'negative impact on the community' holds no basis, what if the system at Northcliffe means that more pupils are going on to further education and that more students are getting higher grade. In other areas these types of schools have earnt upwards of £500000 in donations meaning that the facilities at the school are the very best, how can this be a bad thing? Although I can understand many peoples reservation and anger at the rumours i believe that people should wait until the information becomes more than gossip and we know some actual facts about what is going to happen.

JW

6th June 2004 

You may be interested in a spoof website which was created the last time that the Vardy Foundation's unique educational perspective was foisted upon an unwilling community. 

http://www.angelfire.com/alt/bumblism/satanist.htm 

I also gave a couple of talks to the South Place Ethical Society on the scientific case against Creationism. These are available at: http://www.hearty.plus.com/creationism.html 

They might give you a bit of an idea as to what your children are possibly being let in for. 

All the very best wishes in your fight. 

Regards Peter H

18 April, 2005

18 April, 2005

I have followed the debates surrounding Sir Peter Vardy's previous ventures with increasing concern. If his foundation simply wants to support education then it would donate the money with no strings attached. Obviously they are not proposing to do that. It is extremely worrying that they want to put their own people into the schools and have a big say in running them on a daily basis. Why? I can think of no reason other than thay they want to spread their Christian fundamentalist ideas. Let us be absolutely clear that so-called 'creation science' is not real science and the evidence for 1) evolution and 2) the vast age of the Earth is so overwhelming as to be effectively established fact. I am a scientist working in these areas on a daily basis, so I am well acquainted with the many and varied lines of evidence that support these ideas. But children, who are vulnerable to all sorts of strange beliefs, need to be informed in a careful, balanced way. That is real education. They should not be taught manifest nonsense just because ignorant private individuals have the financial clout and connections to foist it upon them - especially by hijacking schools that are funded overwhelmingly with public money! If I was a parent at this school I would be horrified by this development. However it is not just the people of Doncaster who should be seriously worried. Given the chance, these creationists would take society back into a dark age of ignorance and credulity, so the issue is important for all of us. 

Professor Paul N. Pearson School of Earth, Ocean and Planetary Sciences Cardiff University

1st June 2004

we are all against the Vardy Takeover and we will help the protests as much as possible. 

L (in charge of posters) Northcliffe Pupil

6th May 2004

6th May 2004

I am a 14 year old girl who goes to Northcliffe Comprehensive and I am not happy about the changes that are been put into consideration : I Think that the school is on it's way upwards and that in the last couple of years the school has worked very hard to improve the grades , punctuality , attendance and general attitude of it's pupil's : I think that as the school is definitely getting better, it's such a shame to stop this progress: We have worked very hard to get better as we know that the schools reputation isn't one of the best: Also I am not a very strong believer of god but I respect the opinions of other people and I don't appreciate the beliefs of others to be forced upon me: Why Not give money improving the schools that are already in Conisbrough instead of Wasting money in making one that nobody agrees with , Why Should a Person put a relatively small amount of money into the school and have total control over it : WHY SHOULD THEY BE ABLE TO EXPERIMENT WITH OUR LIVES?? ? I don’t want to go to a school where I am brainwashed and forced to think what someone else wants me to believe: I understand that I am only a child but I no what I think I hopefully I will be listened to, Please can you not include my email address on the site? Thank you For Listening because the council obviously aren't.

Northcliffe Comprehensive Pupil

2nd May 2004

1) Why has the Mayor asked the Vardy Foundation to take over our school(s)? He should have asked the parents first. Has he asked any of the other groups that have set up other academies?

2) Why have the council just spent god knows how much on the extension to Rowena? This may be knocked down. The same may be true of the sports hall at Morley Place? What a waste of money!

A Parent