The World Around Us Web Site
'By Roger Stanyard
Introduction
If you ever come across a web site called The World Around Us (it's at http://www.worldaroundus.org.uk), beware. It is a creationist site set up by an openly creationist organisation at the centre of the British creationist movement, Genesis Agendum.
It purports to be a site on science claiming to help science students and teachers. It is nothing of the sort. It is a fundamentalist religious site set up and run by the same bunch of young earth creationist zealots who have spent years trying to undermine science education in Britain.
It contains no valid science at all, is full of misrepresented science and is intended to bamboozle teenagers studying science. For a full analysis of the website page by page see World Around Us an analysis by Professor Paul S. Braterman, MA, DPhil, DSc.
The web site, of course, hides the beliefs of the people behind it. They think the world is only 6,000 years old, that the story of Noah's Ark is absolutely true and that anyone, religious or not, who questions their position is wrong. They believe that the core of biology, the whole of geology, and vast amounts of physics and chemistry are completely wrong because they contradict their particular brand of Biblical literalism. (1)
They also believe the history books are wrong, archaeology wrong, geography wrong, mathematics wrong and, indeed, mainstream theology and religious belief, wrong.
Unfortunately for them, they have no scientific alternatives. The key issue they object to is evolution, a scientific explanation of the differences between species which has been thoroughly tested by the scientific method and not found wanting. Such a rigorous explanatory framework is known in science as a theory. (The scientific meaning of the term theory is not the same as its common usage – the latter suggests that it is something which is unproven and speculative, somehow divorced from the practical, real world.)
The site implicitly advances the claims of so-called Intelligent Design Theory. This is a cover for creationism.
Intelligent Design is simply not an alternative explanation. There is no such thing as the scientific theory of Intelligent Design tested by the scientific method. It is not even a hypothesis as it is far to vague to test. Intelligent Design can explain anything, which means that it explains nothing.
Intelligent Design is based on a series of miracles in which a deliberately unnamed supernatural being or aliens (code words for God) somehow redesigned unspecified parts of genetic code and inserted it into the nuclei of unknown cells by methods unknown and unexplainable, at an unknown time or times, using unidentified species. Conveniently for its proponents, the process cannot be seen in operation today. It makes no predictions that have been, or can be, followed up and is not falsifiable, which invalidates it as a scientific theory.
Indeed, there is overwhelming evidence to show Intelligent Design is something altogether different from science. It is an American invented device to get around the US separation of church and state to cover up the real beliefs and political and social objectives of the Religious Right in the USA. It is a vehicle to bring ultra-right wing politics into American school education. Many mainstream Republicans (let alone liberals) in the USA are deeply concerned about it.
(The relationship between creationism and Right wing politics has largely yet to manifest itself publicly on the mainland of the UK. The most important political proponents of creationism are Democratic Unionist Party popularists. That does not fit comfortably into a simple left-right classification.)
Many people involved are ideologues who dismiss anyone who is both religious and accepts mainstream science as “compromisers”. So Intelligent Design is not the mainstream Christian position on science; it is largely the position of fundamentalists who have been described as worshipping the Bible (Bibliolatry), rather that what normal practising Christians (and Muslims and Jews) do – worship God.
Their aim is to undermine science and convince students that their brand of religious fundamentalism should be believed. Its target is teenagers and young people. Its objective is political and it is deeply sectarian. Nearly all of the people behind it appear to be Calvinistic evangelicals outside of the main denominations in Britain today.
The organisation directly behind the site is called Genesis Agendum, a long established group of creationist proselytisers and speakers. Many of its speakers form the core leadership of the British creationist movement and are deeply involved in other creationist organisations including Biblical Creation Ministries, the Biblical Creation Society, Truth in Science, Answers in Genesis and the Centre for Intelligent Design. Many also have a track record in lobbying the government to allow creation into science lessons.
The World Around Us web site lies at the core of the increasingly well organised creationist movement in Britain and is central to its strategy: Deception by Design.
Follow the Money - Who has paid for the web site?
Nobody knows. The web site says “We acknowledge with gratitude two anonymous benefactions which have made possible the professional design of this website.”
It does seem rather odd that Genesis Agendum has, after a decade and a half of financial insignificance, suddenly found substantial sums of money and seems to be linked to another new organisation, the Centre for Intelligent Design seems to have found significant sums as well. The link is suggested in timing of launch and the apparent promotion of The World Around Us during Michael Behe's tour of Britain in November 2010.
It appears that during the financial year ending March 2010, Genesis Agendum received close to £25,000 as a one-off income. The World Around Us web site may have used some of this funding (we at the BCSE estimate that the web site cost it around £5,000 - £8,000 to set up).(1)
We suspect (but may be wrong) that the major balance of the donation(s) were used to send a copy of the creationist textbook Explore Evolution to school libraries (and science teachers who asked for it), The copies were given away despite an Amazon full retail price of £48.95 (USA $39.95) a copy (as on Amazon, new copies, December 2010 – second hand copies were available for £2!). It is way over-priced for a school textbook. £18 (US$27) has been suggested to to us as an uppermost realistic price,
If we are right (a big if), the exercise was done on behalf of Truth in Science. There may be good tax reasons for this arrangement which was perfectly legal – Truth in Science is not registered with the Charity Commission (any of the three in the UK) and therefore could not claim up to 28% of the value of the donations as tax refunds. Genesis Agendum is registered at the Charity Commission for England and Wales. There is, of course, a supposition here by us - that the doners (or some of them) were UK taxpayers.(2)
In any event,the timing of the launch of the web site followed closely on the distribution of Explore Evolution in the six months up until March 2010. The two complement each other.
The reason why we suspect that the money was used to finance the Explore Evolution textbook is that it was the only financial large cost we are aware of incurred in the year to March 2010 by the UK creationist organisations associated with Genesis Agendum. Moreover, our American associates advise us that Explore Evolution is central to the Intelligent Design movement's core strategy since 2007. We rightly predicted in 2007 that Truth in Science would be involved in distributing it to schools and we note it was on sale (price £10) during the C4ID sponsored Michael Behe tour of Britain.
The September 2010 launch of 'The World Around Us'' conveniently coincided with the launch of the Centre for Intelligent Design (C4ID) across the UK on 14th of that month.
The latter looks to be a British version of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. C4ID has publicly stated that it does not intended to try to get education into school science lessons.
It is a claim which should be treated with a huge degree of scepticism given that, in less than a month of its launch, one of its trustees. John Langlois, advocated on 9th October 2010 to the local press in Guernsey (where he was a long standing senior politician), that Intelligent Design should be taught in schools there.
The entire purpose of Intelligent Design is to get creationism into the school classroom.
The second piece of evidence of C4ID's ambitions in education comes from the November 2010 tour of Britain of Discovery Institute senior fellow Michael Behe (see Michael Behe in Britain). This tour was organised by C4ID to promote Intelligent Design.
"The British Centre for Science Education and its associates attended four of his speaking events and learned at one that The World Around Us web site was heavily being promoted to schools as was the textbook Explore Evolution so that students could use its contents to challenge in science lessons.
We subsequently found the evidence that The World Around Us web site was, indeed, being pushed to schools by its backers through the Schools Mail Server service According to the web site of School Mail Server, it cost £300 to sent the email to all schools in the UK (price as at January 2011).
This went out on 10th September 2010, just four days before C4ID formally and publicly launched.
Let's take a look and see what this 10th September email said about the web site:
“Heads of Science and science staff are invited to view the new virtual museum The World Around Us.”
“A teacher and student resource, it can be found at www.worldaroundus.org.uk. Its objective is to stimulate students’ curiosity and encourage them to consider alternative explanations based on recently published evidence from scientific and historical journals." [The Intelligent Designers very, very, rarely get their creationist work published in peer reviewed journals.] "The site also considers the strengths and weaknesses of the scientific method, including the influence that different world-views can have in interpreting scientific evidence. Dealing with topics that often make the news headlines, the site is provocatively subtitled “towards a post-Darwinian view” but it does not draw conclusions.”
It wouldn't, would it? Given that creationists believe, absolutely, that the world is six thousand years old and anything that contradicts their interpretation of the Bible is blasphemy.(1)
Just ask them a simple question; if, as they say, evolutionary biology is wrong, what is their explanation of the differences between species? Specifically, what is the scientific theory of creationism (or Intelligent Design) and how can it be tested with the scientific method? After all, they say their position is solely based on science and they have repeatedly told the courts under oath the same tale. Or were they just lying?
“....It has been prepared by a group of scientists, historians and educationists who practise or have practised in the mainstream of their subjects. These include archaeology, biology, chemistry, geology and physics. All have personal research experience, a number holding research degrees in one or other of these subjects from British universities. Some have taught at university as well as secondary level.“
Big deal. This is what is called argument from authority. It's bogus rhetoric that no self respecting scientist (or anyone else who grasps what they were taught at university) could ever accept and none have for centuries.
The BCSE is aware of no practising scientists in Britain in the key sectors of evolutionary biology or geology who accept creationism.
Note there is absolutely no mention whatsoever that the people behind it are well known young earth creationists or that it is promoting Intelligent Design and no mention that they are Biblical literalists (an anathema to most Christians).
In fact there is no mention, by name, at all, of who has written the content on the web site or whose views it represents.
Why are they hiding all this from every teacher, student and parent? (4)
It stinks.
Breaking the Rules
Let's also spell out, in no uncertain terms, the legal position. There is a complete ban on teaching creationism or Intelligent Design in science lessons in public sector schools in England and Wales. They are encouraging teachers to break the rules. Any teacher who does so can be fired. No warning at all is given to teachers about the legal position.
Despite all the grand claims about the backgrounds of the people who produced the site, we are unable to find anyone involved in Genesis Agendum, either as trustees or speakers, who teaches in state schools anywhere in the UK.
In other words, they are telling others to risk their careers while not being prepared to do it themselves.
These are not people who have any stake or interest in state education. They are attempting to manipulate others to do their dirty work – religious evangelism. They couldn't even be bothered to approach Religious Education teachers (most would see straight through the smokescreen and deliberate evasion).
Have they sent it to head teachers who are directly accountable to their governors and parents? Nope, They've been avoided as well. Imagine a head teacher trying to explain to a parent that young Johnny has failed his science exams because he has written creationist answers after listening to the people behind Genesis Agendum. As a Royal Holloway College academic pointed out to us in 2007, creationist students are frequently unteachable in the sciences.
One thing you can be sure of – the senior academics who have been involved in Genesis Agendum (and there are some) are not risking their own careers by teaching creationism in the university courses they run. No siree Bob! Indeed, Leeds University has had to introduce courses to undo the damage caused by creationists to their students' understanding of science.
Of course, there is nothing to stop the fundamentalists setting up their own universities teaching creationism – as has repeatedly been done in the USA, If, as they claim, there is widespread support for creationism or Intelligent Design in Britain, the likes of the Bob Jones University,
Oral Roberts University Regent University, Liberty University and Patrick Henry College would have no problem in setting up their own campuses in Britain and finding academics to run them.
The World Around Us Web Site
The web site has been very professionally designed – a Leamington Spa company, Big Picture Interactive, put it together. However, it is not a technically complex site. Presumably. all of the content was supplied by Genesis Agendum people and its associates and therefore, probably, not involved a financial cost.
The content, spread over 24 pages, is craftily presented using various deceptions:
1. No mention is ever made of creationism or Intelligent Deign anywhere in the entire web site. That's not an accidental omission. It is a deliberate and thoroughly dishonest exercise in deception.
2. There are four sections flowing one from the other, building up to claims of a crisis in science. Needless to say, no such crisis exists except in the fantasies of creationists.
3. Impressive lists of citations of mainstream scientists are provided, suggesting that they somehow agree with creationists. All of them think creationists (and Intelligent Design advocates) are spectacularly wrong.
4. Some citations of “creation scientists” are included in the lists, suggesting to the unaware that they have the same recognition as mainstream scientists. They don't.
5. Not one of the “scientists” claimed to have provided the content is named. How convenient - there are no practising scientists in Britain in the key fields of evolutionary biology or geology who accept creationism or Intelligent Design.
6. Nor is any evidence given of their published “creation science”. How convenient as this is usually confined to self published vanity creationist journals where peer review is banned except by fellow creationists The game is to avoid be challenged.
7. The site claims that a “paradigm crisis is emerging” in “mainstream science”. It isn't. Mainstream science does not consist of a bunch of fundamentalist Biblical literalists and completely ignores those that are. There is no “crisis” in geology, biology, physics or chemistry.
8. There is no evidence on the web site to show that the authors of each section is qualified to make the claims given. The opinions of a biochemist on geology are basically pretty worthless; as are those of an engineer on evolutionary biology.
9. It is laid out in such a way as to make it exceedingly difficult to refute point by point in any coherent manner.
Here is the studied opinion of one of our BCSE members (a school science teacher by profession) on the web site:
“I'm not sure how any teacher could do much of a review on it because currently creationism and ID are not part of the national curriculum. Ofsted have said they should not be taught as science. ASE (Association for Science Education) says ID does NOT have any scientific underpinnings or explanations and therefore does not qualify as science.
As part of the teach the controversy controversy creationists/IDers in England have tried to sneak it in under how science works (which allows for discussion of bad science (eg Wakefield/MMR) or ethical issues arising from science eg stem cell research, GM foods) but as there is NO scientific controversy (just a limited religious one) and as ID has no scientific underpinnings it cannot even sneak in there as bad science. Teachernet (once there try under science resources then resources covering more than one discipline, it was hard to find their guidance) says pretty much the same -"creationism and ID are NOT part of the national science curriculum....though there is scope to discuss them in RE to develop a knowledge and understanding of Christianity and other religions".
Under further guidance it says pretty much the same as ASE only more kindly - "creationism and ID are sometimes claimed to be scientific theories. This is not the case as they have no underpinning scientific principles or explanations...and are not accepted by the scientific community as a whole." It does however go on to say that "any questions that arise in science lessons could provide opportunities to explain or explore why they are not considered to be scientific...respond positively by addressing what makes a theory scientific and promoting knowledge and understanding of the scientific consensus around evolution, big bang etc..", rather than telling them they're numptys, I assume.
It also says tellingly "Any resource should be checked carefully before it is used in the classroom" to check it is NOT promoting them as science or that it doesn't make spurious scientific claims. Obviously Teachernet does carry a general disclaimer that since May 2010 the information may no longer be valid but as far as I'm aware [Michael] Gove [currently Education Minister in the British Government] has not changed policy on creationism and therefore these guidelines should stand. As an RE [religious Education] resource ,I'm not sure how good it is either as they'd be looking at it from the what some Christians believe rather than the science - hence it would need more theology than science. And the science is still wrong. I'm not sure how many RE teachers would be creationist. I'd guess they'd need a sophisticated understanding of the Bible in its historical context so probably not very many.
If a child should get hold of it as a resource, it is full of factual inaccuracies. I'm not sure how easily they'd find it anyway. Most kids, if looking for something generally, [such as the] melting point of aspirin, will tend just to type that into Google (and lift it straight from Wikipedia) so unless it comes up under a general search for say DNA or something they probably won't find it. If looking for stuff specifically for exams they will go to specific sites - Knockhardy or Advancing Physics - and expect very specific guidance to the relevant key stage and exam board and type of questions. Compared with sites my school use or recommend it's not that good. A bit dry and non-specific.”(5)
“Further Resources”
The web site provides a list of further resources. This gives the game away as to the real motivation behind the site. It suggests that the books listed are “peer reviewed”. They are not; this is a frequent scam of Intelligent Designers. Because virtually none of their work has been peer reviewed, they are desperate for scientific credibility so twist the meaning of the term.
Books on science are basically rarely peer reviewed before publication; the term normally applied to papers in learned journals. The main “claim” to these books being peer reviewed covers Darwin's Black Box (Michael Behe, 2006); that claim has repeatedly been thoroughly rubbished.
The “list of resources” lists a series of books which it states are mainstream. Far from it; they are not even remotely “mainstream” by any reasonable definition of the term. The books have no standing in science because (with one exception) they are all pushing religious viewpoints – Intelligent Design and creationism. The authors are either well know (notorious) Intelligent Design advocates or creationists. The authors are Stephen Meyer, Michael Behe, Bill Dembski, Jonathan Wells (all fellows of the Discovery Institute), Richard Milton (an ambiguous advocate of Intelligent Design), Vij Sodera (a young earth creationist) and Steve Fuller, an apologist for Intelligent Design.
(We do not include the books by David Swift and James le Fanu in the above as having no scientific merit. We are not aware what their precise position is on either Intelligent Design or creationism although le Fanu appears to be open on Intelligent Design. Le Fanu is a medical doctor who, amongst other activities, writes for the Daily Telegraph. Swift is an environmental scientist.)
The web site also lists a number of books that it suggests include a “religious dimension”.
These include Stuart Burgess (2001) Hallmarks of Design: Evidence of Purposeful Design and Beauty in Nature, Day One, Epsom, Surrey. Burgess is a young earth creationist and he is not scientist. He is a mechanical engineer. He's been actively involved at the heart of the British creationist movement. Burgess has told the BBC that his real interest in teaching children creationism is to stop them using evolutionary theory as an excuse on the day of judgement. Day One is the publishing arm of what was once better known to the public as the Lord's Day Observance Society. It is nowadays under the influence of creationists.
Paul Garner (2009) The New Creationism: Building Scientific Theories on a Biblical Foundation, Evangelical Press, Darlington. Garner is a young earth creationist who runs Biblical Creation Ministries and is a trustee of Genesis Agendum. Evangelical Press is a creationist publisher with links to Truth in Science.
John Lennox (2007) God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? Lion Hudson Plc, Oxford. Lennox is an Oxford don specialising in mathematics who advocates Intelligent Design. He's from Northern Ireland.
Norman Nevin (2009) Should Christians Embrace Evolution? Inter-Varsity Press, Nottingham. Nevin, a retired medical geneticist, is not only the editor of this book, he is also President of the Centre for Intelligent Design and champion of Truth in Science. The book is a crude attack on Denis Alexander, currently director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion at Cambridge University, who has written a book (Creation and Evolution: Do We Have to Choose? (2008), Monarch, Oxford, UK, ISBN 978-1854247469) claiming mainstream science and religion are compatible.
Nevin's position is that you cannot be a Christian unless you are a creationist. The book includes a chapter by the particularly obnoxious fundamentalist pastor, David Anderson, author of the BCSE Revealed web site and blog.
Whilst these references look, initially to the casual observer to be innocuous, there is no doubt about the fundamentalist nature of The World Around Us when we look at the next set of suggested resources. They are the web sites of Truth in Science, long exposed by the BCSE and the national press as a young earth creationist organisation targeting teenagers in science lessons, the Biblical Creation Society run by Paul Garner who just happens to be a trustee of Genesis Agendum, the New Creationism blog site which also just happens to be owned by Paul Garner, and ID Update, the blog of Colorado-based Access Research Network. This has close links to the Discovery Institute.
Overall, the list of further references looks to be innocuous to the casual observer but any knowledge of the books and web sites and the people behind then quickly identifies them as being (with two exceptions) of a deeply fundamentalist and extreme Christian viewpoint.
The Objectives of Genesis Agendum
Intelligent Design is a political movement.
As has been firmly established by the US courts, Intelligent Design is a religious not a scientific position. However, through the leak of the Discovery Institute's Wedge Document, it has long been clear that the Intelligent Design movement has a covert political agenda to socially re-engineer society along conservative, evangelical fundamentalist lines.
This seriously raises the question as to whether Genesis Agendum's trustees are breaching Charity Commission rules on political activity. Whilst they allow some degree of political activity, in such areas as lobbying, charities registered are not allowed to be primarily political in nature.
The World Around Us is openly promoting books by Discovery Institute senior fellows some of which appear to be at the core of the Wedge Strategy and its chief architects. These in particular are Stephen Meyer, Michael Behe and Bill Dembski but we must add that it appears that the prime funder of Intelligent Design is the billionaire recluse Howard Ahmanson. He has, for years sponsored the advocacy of imposing a monstrous cacophony of Biblical Law on society including the execution of adulterers, apostates, non-believers, gays and children who are disrespectful of their parents. If implemented, It would leave few people in Britain alive. We will also raise here the politics of Intelligent Design's chief strategist and the main person behind the Discovery Institute, Phillip Johnson.
According to the American philosopher Barbara Forrest, “Johnson rejects secular law, government, and academia. In 1999, he predicted that legal changes would follow ID’s “increasing penetration into the academic world and …increasing unity in the Christian world”: “We …avoid the ‘G word.’ Everybody knows that’s coming. Of course it’s not going to stop there….Eventually there will be changes in the laws”.
Forrest suggests that this is theocratic dominionism or reconstructionism, a far right Christian form of dictatorship (with, I add, with the reconstructionalists in charge). She adds that Dembski “is also broadly aligned with the goal of making Christianity a regulative principle governing every aspect of life.”
It is beyond the scope of this report to detail the extreme religious right in the USA (our wiki has much to say on it) but any research on Internet will show up just how extreme much of the American Religious Right is.
However, Forrest gives further insight such as “In 1999, speaking at Christian Reconstructionist D. James Kennedy’s “Reclaiming America for Christ” conference, Phillip Johnson urged attendees to reclaim the intellectual world “while we’re recapturing America”. The now-deceased Kennedy, a staunch ID supporter, produced a 2006 anti-evolution documentary featuring CSC fellows Michael Behe, Richard Weikart, and Jonathan Wells as experts (Coral Ridge Ministries 2006). CSC fellow Charles Thaxton was among the “conference faculty” at a May 2006 CR conference held by American Vision (AV), one of the most extreme CR groups (American Vision 2006, p. 2). Journalist John Sugg describes AV leaders Gary North and Herbert Titus: “Their imposition of a theocratic state would not, by their standards, be tyranny. Public schools …to them are tyrannical” (Sugg 2006). The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) labels AV a hate group because of its virulent anti-gay attitudes (Southern Poverty Law Center).”
The movement has frequently been described as the American Taliban (its advocates scream back this is a lie). There is a massive amount of well documented evidence and research which shows that it is part for what Forrest describes as the “far right”.
For further reading see The non-epistemology of intelligent design: its implications for public policy, Barbara Forrest, Synthese, Volume 128, Number 2 / January 2011
However, despite promoting the works of people involved in the Discovery Institute, the World Around Us is completely silent on the underlying politics, neither disassociating itself nor warning vulnerable teenagers at which it is pitched.
As the British Centre for Science Education has long reflected, creationism and Intelligent Design are political issues – even here in the UK. People who have been and are involved in Genesis Agendum have been active political lobbyists for their cause. Alastair Noble if the Centre for Intelligent Design is involved in an organisation, CARE, to get fellow Christians elected as politicians and promoting creationism is widely regarded as an unstated policy of the Democratic Unionist Party.
Philosophy
Genesis Agendum has told teachers that “Among the topics included are the big bang theory, the origin of life, a universal common ancestor, biological evolution and deep time. The authors approach these from a Christian perspective and look beyond the purely materialistic philosophies currently influencing science and the historical sciences. They are not alone in questioning Darwinian philosophies and those with other world-views are included among the resources listed on the site.”
This is standard creationist boilerplate – that it is philosophically illegitimate to distinguish between science and religion and therefore there is a scientific equivalence between creationism and mainstream science. It has been exposed in the courts. (I've no idea what the heck “Darwinian philosophies” are, btw, and I've no idea what these other “world-views” are – presumably they include non-Calvinistic religious beliefs.)
The Intelligent Designer advocates have been trying to push this rubbish for years – indeed, they have tried to get it legitimised in the courts, notably the landmark (2005) trial. They asked to rule on it.
For example, in a pre-trial memorandum, they said that their “evidence will show that IDT [Intelligent Design Theory] is a scientific argument, advanced by scientist [sic] relying on evidence and technical knowledge proper to their specialities,” and that ID’s reliance on supernatural explanations “does not place [it] beyond the bounds of ‘science.’ Quite the contrary, IDT’s refusal to rule out this possibility represents the essence of scientific inquiry.”
They lost spectacularly. The Judge ruled that Intelligent Design was not a scientific position but a religious position.
The BS that has come out of the Intelligent Design movement since is astonishing; I've seen them claim that there could not have been a fair trial because the Judge was Lutheran and didn't go to church every Sunday (Steve Fuller, a Genesis Agendum speaker who was also and expert witness for the defence at the trial), Judges shouldn't rule on matters involving science (this is absurd – it implies forensic evidence cannot be accepted in trials), the trial doesn't matter because everyone has forgotten about it (Michael Behe's wishful thinking in Britain in November 2010), it doesn't apply in the UK (it does - the arguments that led to the decision are universal), the ruling is illegal because the US constitution does not state there is separation of church and state (let them go to the courts on this).....
[Note. For a detailed discussions of the Intelligent Design movement's absurd responses, see "Can’t philosophers tell the difference between science and religion?: Demarcation revisited” by in Synthese, Volume 178, Number 2 / January 2011. Pennock worked for the plaintiffs for the Dover trial and the paper is well worth a read to understand the philosophical issues which are complex.]
Who is behind Genesis Agendum?
According to a search on the web site in December 2010 the following were list as trustees of Genesis Agendum: Messrs Paul Watts, Paul Garner, Arthur Jones, John Peet, Jeff Lowe, Peter Senior and Jonathan Chambers.
Not all these people are known to us but Paul Garner and John Peet run welcome-to-the-bcm-website? (an offshoot of the Biblical Creation Society) and Arthur Jones is involved in Truth in Science.
One well known creationist name, Geoff Barnard, is missing from the list. He was listed in 2007 as a trustee but not so in 2010. Barnard is involved in Truth in Science and Biblical Creation Ministries and has helped with the launch of the Centre for Intelligent Design
However, until 2009 Genesis Agendum confined its activities to lectures promoting creationism. It is that which reveals the extent of its full connections with the core leadership of the creationist movement in Britain. It is a platform for them. (Its lecturing activities seem, at the time of writing, to be dying.)
We've drawn together a list of such speakers from its web site at http://www.genesisagendum.org.uk/Lectures.html and it is a gallery of the leading creationist activists and lobbyists including Andy McIntosh, Stuart Burgess, Bill Worraker, Nick Fuller, Paul Garner, John Peet, Sylvia Baker, David Tyler, Nancy Darrall, Colin Reeves, Edgar Andrews (all these people have been involved in political lobbying to get creationism into school lessons), Marc Surtees, Richard Milton, Philip Duce, Peter Williams, Andrew Rowell, and, astonishingly, Steve Fuller who is not a creationist but seems to be a glutton for punishment in defending the proponents of Intelligent Design.
Other speakers have included ( in the USA, , now of in the USA, Paul Lawrence, David Ellis, and Jim Bimson.
As we say, nearly all of these people are involved in other young earth creationist organisations – those involved in the Biblical Creation Society include Sylvia Baker, Colin Reeves, Nancy Darrall, Edgar Andrews, Marc Surtees, David Tyler, Bill Worraker, Stuart Burgess, Philip Duce, John Peet and Paul Garner. (Source, Biblical Creation Society web site at http://www.biblicalcreation.org.uk/bcs_publications/bcs071.html)
Those involved in Truth in Science include Andy McIntosh, Stuart Burgess and Paul Garner. Geoff Barnard is also involved in Truth in Science. (Source, Truth in Science web site at http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/191/82/)
Andy McIntosh and Stuart Burgess have been involved in Answers in Genesis (BCSE resources) and Andrew Snelling works for it full time. We suspect there are other connections with Answers in Genesis and Creation Ministries International.
Stuart Burgess and Colin Reeves are now listed as working with the Discovery Institute's . (See http://biologicinstitute.org/people/]]
The there is the political lobbying – see our report on Estelle Morris and the letter lobbying to allow creationism to be taught in science lessons. This was lobbying at the highest level, direct to the Cabinet minister responsible for education. The following involved in that lobbying have bee associated with Genesis Agendum: Andy McIntosh, Edgar Andrews, Stuart Burgess, Sylvia Baker, Nancy Darrall, Nick Fuller, Paul Garner, Arthur Jones, Jeff Lowe, John Peet, David Tyler and Bill Worraker.
There is absolutely no doubt that one of the prime objectives of Genesis Agendum is influencing education and that it is a religious organisation. According to its submissions to the Charity Commission its objectives are:
“To advance education in particular in the field of the study of the origin and history of the universe as they relate to the Biblical record including by encouraging, examining and interpreting research and by establishing and operating an institution or institutions to further such purposes and to facilitate relevant education and educational research, enquiry and the exchange and dissemination of relevant views and information.” (Original statement was all in upper case.)
In no uncertain terms, young people are amongst its targets; its Charity Commission entry states its targets are “children/young people”, “elderly/old people” and the “general public/mankind”.
There seem to have been four stages in the development of the creationist movement (my model is based on the conclusions of Nick Matzke, formerly of the US National Center for Science Education and currently a graduate student of biology at Berkeley.
Round 1: was the “Fundamentalist” era between the 1920s and the 1960s. This was largely an American phenomenon as creationism was virtually unknown in the UK (except for the tine Evolution Protest Movement which was old earth creationist). The era in the USA ended with the Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) legal case in the Supreme Court. It ended the ban on teaching human evolution in state schools in Arkansas.
Round 2: Matzke describes this as the “Creation Science” era and suggests that it started in 1969. It ended in 1987 with another Supreme Court ruling in Edwards v. Aguillard which ruled that “creationism” is a religious, not a scientific position. The start of the the era was paralleled with the publication of the British edition of the Morris and Whitcombe creationist book, Flood Geology (1987). That lead to a revival in creationism partly centred on the fundamentalist Metropolitan Tabernacle in London but even by 1987, creationism was basically unknown in Britain.(6)
Round 3: This centred on Intelligent Design, “invented” about 1987, to get round the Edwards v. Aguillard ruling. It spectacularly ended in 2005 when the Judge in the Kitzmiller v. Dover court case ruled that Intelligent Design was religious, not a scientific position. However, between 1987 and 2005, the creationist movement in Britain remained wholly young earth creationist. It wasn't until after the court case that the British creationists began using Intelligent Design as a smokescreen to deceive politicians and the public alike.
Round 4: Matzke thinks this was followed by a fourth era which began in 2007 with the launch of Explore Evolution. This era involves attacks on evolution but only implying creationism and/or Intelligent Design, without making direct reference. The British creationist have rapidly caught up with the Americans, though, with the 2009 publication of Explore Evolution, its distribution to school libraries by Truth in Science and the launch in 2010 of The World Around Us web site. The 2010 launch of the Centre for Intelligent Design fits with this model as well.
We may do well, therefore, to conclude that the British creationist movement has learned from the USA and changed to a new strategy of which The World Around Us is a key result, coordinated with Truth in Science's distribution of Explore Evolution and the launch of the Centre for Intelligent Design. The creationists, like certain species of butterfly, have evolved mimicry, and hide behind an imitation of current science.
However, behind it are the same old young earth creationist names that got together in the late 1990s to become activists to undermine the teaching of sound science. What is now of deep concern to the BCSE is where the apparently substantial funding is coming from.
Footnotes
(1) A few of the young earth creationists in Britain subscribe to the idea that the world may be up to 100,000 years old. Known as “recolonisers” they have been described by Answers in Genesis as compromisers. See http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0307recolonisation.asp They are associated with Noah's Ark Zoo Farm near Bristol (see http://www.earthhistory.co.uk/) and some are involved in the Biblical Creation Society. See http://www.recolonisation.org.uk/
(2) That is our best guess; it is possible that the two benefactions only provided funding for the web site with the other £25,000 used for purposes not yet disclosed by Genesis Agendum. It appears that the web site was not launched until September 2010, indicating that it was funded after the year ending March 2010 accounting period where the £25,000 was identified as having been received and spent.
(3) Financial information came from Genesis Agendum's submission of accounts to the Charity Commission. However, for the year ending March 2010, only revenue and expenditure, in aggregate, were available when checked in Dec 2010. No breakdown was available. Genesis Agendum's revenues for the year jumped from a typical £4,523 a year to £31,549 . It was registered as a charity in 1996.
(4) As the American anti-creationist Lenny Flank points out, the creationist activists are like vampires. As soon as some daylight is focused on their activities, they run for the cover of darkness. Time and time again.
(5) Normally we would name our correspondent here but she has specifically requested to remain anonymous for fear of Internet stalking.
(6) See Ron Numbers; The Creationists for an introduction to creationism in Britain between 1970 and 1992. The latest edition updates this but the updates on the UK are not as thorough as in the original work.
.
