By adpikett

Mike Wilson is 100% correct about concerns over the curriculum, ethos and governance of this proposed school. Whilst I respect people's right to believe that earth is 4000 years old and dinosaurs died in Noah's flood, as members of the ECC do, I do not believe that they would be appropriate in an educational environment. I am not claiming Mr Morgan would attempt to brainwash the pupils in anyway, and I'm sure he has the best of intentions. It is just that education is a very serious matter and best left to professionals like Mr Wilson, not misguided amateurs.

By J_Marshall

You have to ask if a site on an industrial park is suited for a new school. Issues of traffic, lack of safe pedestrian and cyling routes, air pollution, contaminated land, loss of employment land are just some of the issues that worry me. But planning rules for such free schools are set to be greatly relaxed under new rules in order to push them through.

By VMembride

I am a non Christian but would have no objections to a new secondary school built there. With the issue of traffic, have you driven around Balderton at school leaving time? It's not going to be a huge school and what is wrong with a little competition? Is there any objection to Holy Trinity school as I gather this is a very popular school, and Christ Church infant are these not religious schools? Maybe if we had more choice in Newark then maybe some of our youngsters wouldn't have to travel outside the area to get an education. Don't reject ideas before you have considered them.

By adpikett

You are right, competition is most welcome. The point is that at Holy Trinity you would not find anyone from their church or school objecting to the science curriculum. That is not the case with followers at the ECC. They don't support the curriculum, and I'm sure you would find that in their proposal. Letting them run a school is akin to letting someone run a hospital who against blood transfusions.

By ABrompton

As a parent of a secondary aged child I personally would welcome the choice of schools. I have nothing against any other school in the area except that to some degree both are not performing as they should. Aside from this as a christian parent the choice of a school with a strong christian ethic is important to me. In terms of a science curriculum I am unsure of what the curriculum will cover however I do know that ECC are open to discussion about the various theories surrounding the begining of our planet, the key word here is choice. If a parent doesn't want there child to be exposed to Christian teachings on a daily basis, there will still be 2 other schools to choose from.

By adpikett

I am sorry, you are missing the point. They will NOT be teaching 'discussion about various theories surrounding the beginning of our planet' in their science curriculum. If they receive taxpayer funding they must teach in accordance with the National Curriculum for England that requires students at Key Stage 4 (14-16) be taught:

1. that the fossil record is evidence for evolution
2. how variation and selection may lead to evolution or to extinction.

They keyword is not choice, its 'legal requirement.'

By adpikett

Apologies for the couple of typos in my posts, this is supposed to be an educational news article!

By ABrompton

adpickett. I have complete faith(no pun intended) that the school will employ talented and dedicated teachers that will teach to the required outlines set out and far beyond.I am not going to second guess now what the exact syllabus etc is going to be. Our current schools are not meeting requirments in many areas, you just have to look at the respective Ofsted reports to see this. Whatever your personal issue with the fact that the church teaches what the bible says has no relevance, if as you have suggested that teachers by law must teach the two points that you reffered to. I am sure that Ofsted will see to that.

By Lyn

As a teacher of many years standing, I would like to congratulate the minister and board of ECC, Newark for their vision and community spirit in this proposed venture. Sadly,many schools have become entangled in political debate and wrangling over finance,funding and other issues which can distract from the real purpose- that of educating children to the highest standard and providing then with skills for life. Schools are much more than a Science curriculum or any other curriculum for that matter. Having over thirty years experience as a teacher, I have seen countless changes to what are "legal requirements" of a curriculum ,but have seen very few changes to what each child requires - a caring and supportive school community. I wish Mr. Morgan every success and look forward to seeing the impact such a school will make on the community.

ateacher

By DrGrantMilana

Having current ties to one of the existing local secondary schools, and having been educated at the other (and recently visited it 10 years after leaving) I can make an informed observation. Both Grove and Magnus do the best they can with what they have. Both schools have some excellent staff, but both are constrained by a need for extra revenue to update both the "hardware" as in the physical buildings, and the "software" of the materials within. I was asked to assist in expanding and refreshing the library stock for one of the two schools a few months ago. When it came to the cut there was only enough money available to the department for less than a dozen books. This is not an indictment of the school, but of the very tight financial leash they are held on by this and previous governments. The age of austerity that we are all now experiencing has been something the education sector has had to deal with for much longer. These existing schools would freely admit that their performance is in need of improvement, but to take any more funds away from them, or divert a much needed financial boost elsewhere would, in all likelihood, not see the improvement required.
As for whether a "Christian" school (I phrase this way to distinguish it from Magnus, who are, it is worth mentioning, a Church of England school, to give them their full title)is in the best interest of Newark's youngsters (or any youngsters for that matter)we should probably look to the case of Reg Vardy. Vardy, also an Emmanuel Christian (nice rebrand by the way, still ECC so as not to upset those who already bought the embroidered bath towel set) has funded several secondary education complexes. These schools pass OFSTED inspection by meeting the standard of teaching evolution, but make it fit the beliefs of their benefactor by time and again reinforcing in the pupils that it is ONLY the opinion of some scientists, and that by science's very nature (of adapting to new information and evidence) subject to change. Simultaneously they are teaching creationism as unequivocal fact. This is wrong, not just in the obvious scientific sense, but in a moral one too. Furthermore, a mandatory sex education class that consists of merely hardline abstinence, and which, when pressed, decries homosexuality, onanism, and other acts as sinful has no place in a modern school. Adolescents feel outcast at the best of times, so to fear being ostracised by peers or teachers for completely natural expressions is only a step away from the stereotypical nun with a ruler, and sure to lead to years of therapy.
I "came out" as an atheist in my teenage years, having been raised in a home that pressed no beliefs upon me. I learned about each faith in R.E., and then made a decision, an informed decision, about my own beliefs. This is where religion should remain in a school. Teach each faith in equal measure within the R.E. syllabus, and give each child enough respect to pick the one that is right for them, even if it is no established faith system at all.
A school whose central ethos is Christianity, and is a subsidiary of this church cannot possibly claim that it will be welcoming to all faiths. If your core belief is that to live a fruitful life you must be baptised and reborn to submit to Jesus' will, you will, by definition, be exclusive towards those whose allegiance is to a different doctrine. Many of those who will advocate this proposal would be vehemently against the construction of a school, within the same parameters, that is based around the central beliefs of Islam. They would suggest that it would foster segregation, and not be in the best interest of society. This basic hypocrisy is a further sticking point for me. I believe any money would be better spent to make the existing schools places where all subjects are taught to an equally high standard, and where no subject, religious faith (and no religious faith) included, is taught to the detriment of others.

By wilbo456

Brilliant comment @drgrantmilana, this is the way we should view all faith schools, it's simply unrealistic to think that they give equal weight to all schools of thought or even to the National Curriculum. Education should be secular, schools teach fact, churches teach faith. So many times the atheist majority of this country remain complicit in these issues in their attempt not to kick the 'holy cow' but can you imagine the objections if someone wanted to erect a minareted mosque in the middle of town and yet faith schools teach the same kind of religious segregation to the most precious and vulnerable people in our society and people assume it must be a good thing.

By JNicholas

I think it’s amusing that there is such ferocity against a 'Christian' group starting a school. School and education as a whole in this country was started by the Church. In fact it was across most of Europe. There is still a majority Christian population in Newark (in terms of other religions) and so surely having one school offering a Christian based ethos is entirely representational of the town.

The world has about a 2.5% atheist population... ergo a massive minority... most of the world faiths have a creation story. Hence dictating that a school can only be ‘proper’ if it teaches a scientific theory that is that held by a small minority world over is arguably more than just small minded?

The ECC church in Newark has been providing summer clubs and youth clubs for the town for years and having seen the inside of their new complex is clearly lead by a fwd thinking bunch of people whom will do a good job of something like this.

If Newark keeps expanding the way it has over the past few years we would be an insane local community to do anything but encourage a venture which will help spread the load. Having spoken with many other parents there are serious numbers of us whom have the first choice schools being in Sleaford of Grantham… this is ridiculous state of affairs and Newark’s young people deserve something better in their own town.

One more thing which is of profound importance to some of the less informed commentators here… The budgeting for all the capital expenditure comes from a redirection of funds from a ‘Technology Project’ see info here http://www.education.gov.uk/freeschools/frequently-asked-questions#f1 Revenue will then be on a per pupil basis. This competition can only make for all the schools to offer as good an educational service as possible.

Please do go for it Mr Morgan and don’t let bigots put you off our children deserve the very best chance in life!

By MrsM

Well said jnicholas. I find it hard to understand how people are so quick to judge. Anyone who has been to ECC or had any connection would know immediately they do things excellently. Their current venture of a nursery has been more than successful. The toddler group has numbers reaching 70 children on a regular basis. Everything has an excellent standard and I am excited at the prospect of my children being in their school.

By adpikett

It is amusing that the supporters of this idea like to use facts and reason in a way which, at best, can be described as disingenuous. Free state education was not started by 'the Church', but by Edward VI. If you are trying to prove a point, why not pick something that supports your argument? Secondly, what a ridiculous use of statistics in quoting what percentage of the world is atheist. I wasn't aware the world was a single country, perhaps the UN is in charge of school building projects in Newark? Thirdly, saying 'most of the world faiths have a creation story' is meaningless. Presuming you are a Christian, you wouldn't believe in other faiths' versions anyway, and be the first to oppose their teachings if they tried to weasel their way into an educational syllabus. I can explain why there is variation in creation stories between the faiths; they are all made up.

By AlisonStubbs

I find it interesting that mearly the potential building of a school associated to a church should provoke such a complicated arguement. I am not greatly educated in world statistics, but believe I have a degree of common sense. Surely there will be either demand for this school or there won't. If there is it will go ahead and if not it won't. It would be foolish of anyone to presume they know what the curriculum will consist of based on opinion or experience of other such schools run by other organisations. As a mother of 3, we considered all the options for secondary education, visited each school, talked with Headteachers, and made an informed decission. Many children fill buses daily to go out of county for their education. I am not suggesting that this will be the answer for all of them, but we all have the right to freedom of choice and the demand for this can not be ignored. I would like to ecourage Mr Morgan in this brave decission and recommend all parents to make an informed decission based on facts once they are released.

By HumanTriangle

That is a great point Alison, people seem to be missing the point; if ECC do start a school, Christian or not, it would do so legitimately and by popular demand. The money is not being diverted directly from the other schools within Newark, they were never going to get that money in the first place. Maybe peoples’ problem is with the government’s decisions on where it allocates its money in regards to our education system, but it certainly shouldn’t be on the fact that it is Christian! I am sure it will be very open about what it will be teaching your children, so if you don’t like it then send your kids elsewhere. The government has stated (as far as I am aware) that the free schools do not necessarily have to adhere to the National Curriculum, but if the education quality isn’t up to scratch, which I assume ofsted will be monitoring in their own way, that will have financial penalties, or eventual closure. I find people getting upset at the school itself ridiculous, because a “religious” school just really isn’t the issue, unless they were imparting their world views without parents being aware of it. And being so bold as to say all creation stories are made up is the most outrageous argument I have ever heard or read! Maybe you can enlighten me on how the world really did come about and present it as undeniable fact with undisputable proof. In the end of the day it is all opinion, and no one knows for sure, but that argument is for another day. I wish ECC the best of luck for seizing this opportunity to try to improve the local community.

By BefJ

Reading the various comments above i agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion in this situation. However i have noticed that some comments have been stated as fact not opinion. As a Secondary school student i travel twenty minutes to school and back everday. Me and my parents chose my school because we wanted the best for my education. The report states that the church wishes to give excellent education, meaning that just because the school would be christian doesnt necessarily mean it wishes to force students to follow the christian faith. Infact Mr Morgan states in the report that racial and ethnic harmony will be a key strength of the school. Some people have criticized the christian faith and used it as a reason against the school which i do not find necessary.

By adpikett

"being so bold as to say all creation stories are made up is the most outrageous argument I have ever heard"
Really? Well, only one set of events can be true! Lets take, for example, the Bible's version of God creating the Earth. If you believe thats true then you automatically have to discredit the other ideas. You can't incorporate a Hindu's version into it. Its not an 'and' argument, its a 'or' argument. Which brings me on nicely to "Maybe you can enlighten me on how the world really did come about and present it as undeniable fact with undisputable proof". The answer to that is, of course, no, not at this time. I'm sure that will please you greatly, but I hate to tell you that not many scientists are spending their research time trying to prove the Earth is 4000 years old either. Maybe someone can give me any proof that a deity of any kind exists, or any paranormal activity will do. Anything at all, I'm not fussy. Why not go out and try to capture a ghost or an angel or find someone that's possessed by a demon or something like that? There must be lots about.

By JohnHarris

Dear adpikett, I am surprised that you have been so negative from the outset regarding this new school despite Mr Gareth Morgan’s assurance to provide an “excellent secondary school education” (including an excellent science education). It seems to me that your objection is lead by your religious and humanistic evolutionary convictions rather than your concern for the community or even education. May I remind you that this website is for those who wish to comment on whether setting up an excellent school in Newark is necessary/required and NOT how it affects your religious worldview (evolution)!

It appears that your comments were not just unhelpful but indeed insulting (see your post dated 23/07/2010 10:29am referring to Mr Gareth Morgan as “misguided amateurs”). As parents that were forced to send our children outside Newark for education, I welcome the idea of having a local school that focuses on excellence (in every area of the National Curriculum)!

------------------------------------
Earth is 4000 years old....
------------------------------------
Dear adpikett, regarding your comments that Christians believe that the “Earth is 4000 years old and dinosaurs died in Noah’s flood” (see your post on 23/07/2010 10:29am). Christians/Creationists DO NOT say that the Earth is 4000 years old nor do they say that all dinosaurs died in Noah’s flood (this is an argument that I would like to discuss in my debate offer below). However, my short response to this comment will be similar to YOUR response to JNicholas (see your post 26/07/2010): “If you are trying to prove a point, why not pick something that supports your argument?”. In this case I will add: Why not pick on something that Christians/Creationists actually DO say? By the way, even if Christians were to claim this, then please note what evolutionists teach: We all came from a ROCK! Here is what the textbook says: “4.6billion years ago the Earth cooled down [ROCK] and formed a rocky crust [ROCK]...Earth’s surface was hot [ROCK!] and there were large pools of bubbling lava [melted ROCK]...oceans formed as it rained on the rocks [ROCK] for millions of years...swirling in the waters of the oceans is a bubbling broth of complex chemicals soup to a living organism [from ROCK]” (Holt Earth Science 1994 p. 280 & 281). Sorry, I only have the American textbook version. I’m sure evolution took place the same way in USA as it did in the UK though – lol.

Please check your hypothesis before criticising other theories because it seems to me that you “strain at a gnat but swallow a camel” (Matthew 23:24) – lol.

By the way, I LOVE science! But evolution has NOTHING to do with science, it’s just a worldview. Having said that, please note that I don’t mind the teaching of evolution! I only mind when humanists promote the evolution theory as science. It’s nothing more than just a humanistic worldview (religion). Check out the religion of the Humanist Manifesto (http://www.americanhumanist.org/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_I) it spells out evolution!


-----------------------------------------------
‘Christian’ group starting a school
-----------------------------------------------
Dear adpikett, JNicholas said that “School and education as a whole in this country was started by the Church” (posted on 25/07/2010). In response you described JNicholas in your post 26/07/2010 as “disingenuous”. Again strong words adpikett! It sounds like you have a lot of religious anger and hatred stored. Perhaps evolution has not been very generous in providing virtues such as patients, love and kindness :). What JNicholas was trying to tell you was that the Christians started the school in this country. The original Greek word for Church was Ekklesia which meant “the called out ones” or “the body of Christian believers”. It was therefore the Christian believers who started education in most of Europe (check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education#Europe and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education). What’s even more interesting is that Edward VI (who YOU claim to have stared education as opposed to Christians) was a devout Christian – lol (http://www.historyonthenet.com/Tudors/edward_protestantism.htm). Therefore, once again, IT WAS THE CHRISTIANS WHO STARTED THE EDUCATION IN THIS COUNTRY AND ACROSS MOST OF EUROPE - Lol. What’s even more interesting is that it was mostly run by Bible believing Christians. Dear adpikett , I sincerely and politely ask you to refrain from insults in future contributions especially when you are not correct :)

-------------------------------------------------------------
The world has about 2.5% atheist population
-------------------------------------------------------------
JNicholas claimed that “The world has about 2.5% atheist population” on 25/07/2010. Dear adpikett, you appear to have objected strongly in your post 26/07/2010. Although I’m not sure what point you were making, I would like to explain this statement to you. “Atheist” means “Someone who does not believe in the existence of a god” (Oxford American Dictionary). Therefore, an atheist is a person who does not believe that God exists. Tell me something dear adpikett; how could ANYBODY know the non-existence of ANYTHING? In order for an atheist to be right, he/she/you will have to know EVERYTHING, not just in this dimension, but in ANY dimension within all time, space and matter. Therefore, by definition NO ONE can be an atheist, just agnostic. I wonder whether you call yourself an atheist. If you do, I recommend you convert to agnostic, it’s more accurate but just as inexcusable :). This is fun :) I’ll keep going...

--------------------------------
Curriculum for England
--------------------------------
Dear adpikett, you accused the ECC (in your post 23/07/2010) that “They will NOT be teaching ‘discussion about various theories surrounding the beginning of our planet’ in their science curriculum”. I believe that you are mistaken. In fact I recommend that ECC teach all the various theories surrounding the beginning of our planet particular that of the evolution theory. It is important that the students know what scientific “evidence” exists that supports this theory :). They should be explained that it’s a theory and NOT a fact pointing out any empirical science that does or doesn’t support it. Students should be educated with the different available options and let them make their own choice with intelligence (not indoctrination). Don’t you agree?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"They keyword is not choice, its ‘legal requirement’"
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear adpikett, you said in your post dated 23/07/2010 that the ECC “must teach evolution accordance with the National Curriculum for England that requires students at Key Stage 4 (14-16) to be taught...They keyword is not choice, its 'legal requirement.'”. It appears that your humanistic intolerance is shining through again :). Please re-read the main article on this website which says “Free schools would not have to follow the national curriculum but would need to provide a broad and balanced education”. In case it was missed, it said “would not have to follow”. I hope the “legal requirement” is clear in this statement :). It appears to me that it is YOU who wants to force a religious worldview on students :( Nevertheless, as explained above, I totally endorse the teaching of evolution (that you fear will be missed out) so that students are educated and not brainwashed by religious evolutionists who claim that this hypothesis (disguised as science) is a fact and confuse students.

-----------------------------------------------
“...creation stories are made up...”
-----------------------------------------------
Dear adpikett, on 29/07/2010 HumanTriangle’s asked “Maybe you can enlighten me on how the world really did come about and present it as undeniable fact and undisputable proof”. Your response on 30/07/2010 was “Maybe someone can give me any proof that a deity of any kind exists...”. It appears that you are missing the point here. Christians who believe the Biblical account of creation do not claim that it’s science (although science does not disprove it and in many case it supports it – check out www.halos.com). They are happy to accept and teach it as a faith and belief system. On the other hand, evolutionists will have us believe that this hypothesis of evolution is based on science and scientific evidence. That’s where I STRONGLY disagree because evolution is nothing but a humanistic worldview (religion). Therefore, the burden of SCIENTIFIC proof lies in your court. So, HumanTriangle does not have to prove God....but YOU, on the other hand, HAVE to prove your theory....or get rid of it (if science is what really counts). The fact that you responded to HumanTriangle’s request of proof as “no, not at this time” suggests that “at this time” we should only consider this theory as a faith (or indeed more accurately: religion), and certainly not science!

------------------------------------------
Offer for private/public debate
------------------------------------------
If you have the urge to respond to my comments (which I will welcome and look forward to), I am happy to continue on a more appropriate Internet website (privately or publicly depending on whether you are genuinely interested in knowing the true answers re Creation vs Evolution). Seeing this website is setup for the sole purpose of validating or discussing the benefits of opening a new school with high education standards, the subject of Creation vs. Evolution discussion would be inappropriate here. This way, it will not clutter this site with unnecessary posts.

----------------
Conclusion
----------------
I hope my post was received well as my intention was only to correct some inaccurate statements (deliberately or accidentally) made that were not very helpful for the cause of starting a new school.

Rest assured Mr Gareth Morgan is a very intelligent and educated person who has Newark’s interest at heart led by his strong convictions to do what is good and right. Having this school will only give more options for parents who simply wish to provide a better education for their children. I cannot imagine why anyone would object to it.

God bless you all, particularly adpikett

By adpikett

Thanks John for a great reply. Sure, I'm happy to answer any and all of your points! First, can you just post back how old you roughly believe the Earth is, for the benefit of any readers of this?

By Wthomas

Hello To all

After spending time reading all the reviews on this new school. I strongly agree with Mr John Harris, being postive that ecc can build a school that will keep Newark children in Newark surley must be a good thing for our childrens furture and others to follow?

By JohnHarris

Hi adpikett, thank you for getting back to me.

Before I answer your question, I feel that I must point out once more that this website is not suitable for debating the Creation/Evolution worldviews. I am happy to discuss/debate this subject on an appropriate website of your choice. The focus of this website must remain on whether providing Newark with an “excellent secondary school education” is a benefit.

Regarding what I “roughly believe”: I hold without apology to the YEC “Young Earth Creationism” worldview and that this world is too complex, it had to be created by an all wise, all powerful Creator who is outside of, and beyond, and above, and not affected by His creation! I hope that’s reasonably clear :)

If you want, you can get a basic description of YEC from Wikipedia but please note that this website is generally administered and updated by biased evolutionist. You would be better off reading http://www.creationists.org/ and http://www.nwcreation.net/ for a more educated understanding of YEC.

I look forward to receiving an appropriate website for debating this subject where you can provide watertight/indisputable evidence using empirical science to support your religious worldview using any scientific field of your choice, preferably using molecular biology, geology and/or palaeontology. Of course we can include cosmology but not even cosmologist can agree on a cosmological model that does not break known laws of physics. Anyway, it’s your decision :)

In the meantime, I trust you will offer your support to Mr Gareth Morgan who has the desire and passion to launch a new secondary school in Newark that focuses on excellence.

God Bless

In the meantime, I trust you will offer your support to Mr Gareth Morgan who has the desire and passion to launch a new secondary school in Newark that focuses on excellence.

God Bless

By adpikett

Thanks John, I thought you wouldn't be able just to answer a simple question! So to make it 'reasonably clear", here is what you believe: "Young Earth creationism (YEC) is a form of creationism that asserts the Heavens, Earth, and all life were created by direct acts of the Abrahamic God during a relatively short period, sometime between c. 5,700 and 10,000 years ago."
No, I will not be 'debating' with you as you dodge answering even basic questions.

By JohnHarris

Thank you adpikett. I’m not sure that I follow your response. You apparently (accidentally or otherwise) missed my point. Not only did I answer your question in detail (I thought), but even provided resources to help you understand the exact meaning of my answer with references. I apologise if you found it unhelpful. I’m happy to be even more specific next time!!!

In addition, I appear to have failed miserably to point out what I thought was obvious in my previous posts. Allow me to be crystal clear:

It is YOUR belief and religious system that is in question here (not my Creationist worldview) and being challenged in view of the fact that you refer to it as SCIENCE! Please note that SCIENCE (as of facts or principles); means knowledge gained by systematic study of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. I don’t think any dictionary would contradict with this description (I checked several of them). However, your evolutionistic worldview has NOTHING to do with SCIENCE and therefore is nothing more or less than a RELIGIOUS worldview that you obviously wish to INDOCTORNATE and impose upon every school, student and pupil DESPITE being unscientifically supported. I don’t object to the subject of evolution nor evolutionists; however the evolutionary worldview is just a HUMANISTIC religion that belongs in a religious classroom along with ALL other religious beliefs (including mine).

I have offered you the opportunity to provide watertight/indisputable empirical SCIENTIFIC evidence in order to dispute this statement in a public forum. It’s your choice!

I have given talks and run courses on this subject. If you wish I am happy to send you information.

Failing that, I feel that it would be appropriate to, politely and kindly, ask you to refrain from offering ANY further criticism based on this biased worldview to discredit this new school.

By A

Now you see how Tory Newark is...depressing.

By Vinnie

I agree with John Harris totally and I believe that this school can not be built soon enough. I for one can't wait to send my children to a school where they will be taught the truth about creation and God. People that are so intent on disproving God clearly are trying to avoid having to answer for the choices they make. However it does not matter how much you try to ignore God you WILL stand before him one day and nothing you say or do will ever change that. The choice you make now will determine how your meeting with God will be :-)

By PB

An interesting debate...

John

Based on your definition of Science then adpikett's point of view is in fact a FACT. I've could take you to any of the Great Universities of the World, or to the British Library and show you Millions of documents scientifically documenting evidence that evolution is True and scientifically provable.

Science is basically about proving a theory to be true. If you are unable to provide evidence that it is true, then by definition it must be false. Now I can provide evidence that evolution is True.

You however can not provide any evidence that Creationism, or in fact God for that matter does exist. Hence creationism is False, and there is no God (Remember this is based on the definition of Science you gave)

With regards to the School. I am friends with members of the EEC and I have to say I do not think they should be allowed to open a school. Especially if they hire their teachers from their own community. The children are likely to get a skewed view of the world where religious points of view are taught as scientific fact, when (and I remind you by your own definition) they are not.

By Wthomas

hello

intresting comment from PB, yet are you not ment to support your friends respect their decsions and offer love and guide them where you can, regaurdless of there future plans/devlopment and postive structure for the furture..

By JohnHarris

Dear PB,

Thank you for your post which is clearly addressed to me, so here is my response:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I could take you to any of the Great Universities of the World, or to the British Library and show you Millions of documents scientifically documenting evidence that evolution is True and scientifically provable”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You don’t have to give me “Millions of documenting evidence that evolution is True”; JUST ONE WILL DO!!! You are obviously an evolutionist who is under the illusion that your belief system is supported by science - lol. Perhaps you need to spend some time studying this subject. People who understand and study this subject say “Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable.” - Sir Arthur Keith – an evolutionist!!! ;-)

It is not surprising at all that you would be able to get some “Great Universities of the World or the British Library” to support your religion. After all, most of them are lead by humanistic teachers, leaders and professors. By definition these are religious people who wish to indoctrinate their belief system and disguise it under the heading of science. Check my previous reference for a detailed explanation of what humanists believe in (http://www.americanhumanist.org/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_I). The first three tenets will surprise you! This is not just sad, but deceitful!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Now I can provide evidence that evolution is True”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NO YOU CANNOT! But if you feel you can provide ANY watertight/indisputable evidence, please provide a public forum of your choice to present your evidence. Otherwise, resist confusing education, religion and indoctrination on this website ;)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“You however can not provide any evidence that Creationism, or in fact God for that matter does exist”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are right! It’s a religious worldview (similar to evolution)! Lol. That’s why there is no scientific evidence (similar to evolution). Having said that there is no scientific evidence against Creationism (unlike evolution) and in most cases new scientific discoveries support Creationism (unlike evolution). You need to start reading books like “Darwin’s Black box”, “Icons of Evolution”, “Of Pandas and People”, “Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth”, “Thousands Not Billions”, “The Evolution Deceit” etc. and let education take its course - no pun intended :)

Just in case you are wondering; I already have several different versions of Charles Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species” and all of Richard Dawkins popular books such as “The GOD Delusion” and “The Greatest show on Earth” etc. and a whole other collection of books.

Let me spell it out to you PB; it’s about education, education, education. Oh, and there is one more thing, EDUCATION! – lol

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am friends with members of the EEC and I have to say I do not think they should be allowed to open a school. Especially if they hire their teachers from their own community.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So PB, you are not biased at all then? You appear to have already condemned members of the ECC without even knowing who the teachers are and without discussing their teaching or qualification levels. I see how education is the centre of your concern for our community – lol.

You say that “The children are likely to get a skewed view of the world where religious points of view are taught as scientific fact”. So let me get this straight; the only religious worldview that is allowed (in your opinion) is evolution :) and yet you have the audacity to accuse this new school to be presenting “a skewed view of the world”. You appear to have missed every point I have been trying to make in my previous posts. With that in mind, I am not sure I can help you to understand the irony of your comment!

A proper education is to present all worldviews with any scientific evidence (for and against) and let the student decide. That’s what this school is all about! That’s what education is all about! That’s what excellence is all about! That’s what pupils do not get these days because that’s how religious people like you brainwash kids like ours! :(

Therefore, the merits or disadvantage of this school is not based on your definition of science nor your understanding of evolution, but based on a good healthy education system without trying to brainwash children!!!

God Bless

By Patches

Hi PB,

Before I ask my question, I would like to acknowledge as has been stated above that this website is not for an Evolution Vs Creation debate and therefore apologise for my next question before I ask it.

Sorry to steer things on a slightly different course.

I am really interested to see you answer the challenge from John that you cannot present just one evidence for evolution. I am genuinely interested to see that question answers, and almost even more interested to see how John will deal with that evidence (assuming it is correct and is actual proof of evolution).

Regards

Patches.

By NotWanted

People who believe in invisible friends and magic Jews shouldn't be allowed any input into the education of our children, they certainly shouldn't be allowed to teach them.

By Tenorman

@NotWanted - I take it that you will be petitioning for any Christian, Muslim, Jewish teachers to be banned from other schools then? I think there may be quite a few around.

By Belle

To the above individuals.

You are debating upon a fascinating subject I give you that, however on many an occassion, on all sides it has been stated that this, religious belief (yes atheism is a religion too!) is not an appropriate subject to be discussing on this forum.

Please support your own statements by seeking not to continue in this manner, if provocation is made have the good grace, and lack of hypocrasy to ignore it. I say this not to cause dissent, I am an early years educator and as such I would prefer to read soley about the economic and educational value of this school to newark, and to see and debate exactly what they will be teaching, rather than watch newark residents disgrace their own humanity through attacking one another personally.

Your religious opinions are entirely your own, keep them that way, no two people, even if they read the same books and go to the same place of worship will ever think exactly the same way, such is the nature of humanity and inherant individuality, so stop trying to make the world that way. All you will achieve by proffering your own beliefs in community forums is to demonstarte to that same community that you have little conviction indeed if you feel the need to defend them to others, however you believe we were created.

All love and due respect...

but shut the hell up!!!

By julian_caine

shouldnt the money on this proposed schoolnot be spent on a new grove school building with heating that works, if people want religious education go to a church and leave secondary schools for academic subjects

By ABrompton

Julian, the money set aside for free schools is from a different budget, that has come from an abandonned IT initiative. This will not have any impact on the Grove in regards of finance.

By Roll17

I wonder how many of these sceptics actually visited the presentation day and how many actually are affected by this by having children in primary school. We were very impressed and it gets our thumbs up. We need a choice of schools and this is a new/innovative/exciting idea that I hope gets the backing of the Town and the green light from the Government.

By ImmortalTech

By ImmortalTech

ABrompton, please see that the different pot of money excuse doesnt wash...if you were one of the thousand parents of a Grove student that were promised (and so nearly had) a new purpose built, inspiring school and then had it took away when the school is no longer inspirational you'd feel gutted right? and not only gutted surely the first bit of money that came available should go to those disappointed kids right? my heart cries for them believe me!

Belle, i respect your peaceful intentions and as you put it..."Your religious opinions are entirely your own, keep them that way"
so that is why no school leadership should profess a religious belief or non religious belief. The kids look up to them and WILL be influenced. keep it private and teach pros and cons of all and let the kids choose.

lastly, John Harris. I admire your passion and the challenge of your outspoken opinion please send me a way to contact you i'd love a heated discussion.

By ABrompton

ImmortalTech. Please do not make assumptions about me. My child attends the Grove School (currently yr 10) and as such we were very dissapointed about the cancellation of the BSF.

However as a parent I feel that a school is so much more than a building alone and that the Grove needs to shake things up in many areas not just the building.

The proposed free school is an excellent proposition as you would be aware if you attended the public presentations.

You also need to remember that in the report figures suggest by the year 2015 a further 600 places in newark secondry education will be needed. (this does not include returning Lincs drift or the growth point). These figures were based on accomodation that already has planning permission in our locality.

I am not anti Grove I am pro great education and believe that the Grove, Magnus and the new school can exsist side by side and provide a choice of great educational establishments for our young people.

God Bless

Al

By ImmortalTech

Al: who's made assumptions about you? i stated that i felt the pain of those children (and parents) of the grove who cruelly had their new school taken away from them. And now i know you are one of them i'll ask you directly...dont you feel that the first bit of money that came available for this towns young people should go to those who were promised the new school first?? thats only fair right?

ive seen the presentation of the proposed academy and read all the literature and have been extremely impressed i must admit by the vision and passion of the proposal. i dont doubt for one minute their good intentions so dont confuse my views.

i just ask, we all know this government isnt going to throw money around on 2 schools in 1 town in these tough economic times so who should have the money first?
a school that doesnt exist yet or a school at the heart of a community that had been PROMISED for years a new school as theirs is falling to bits?

oh and yes the grove needs more than a new build i agree and as you must know they are working extremely hard to acheive this at present...how much would an inspirational, purpose bulit, multi functional building aid this!!

By Roger-S-Andrews

If the Grove school were personified for a moment, as a person struggling to come to terms with economic challenges, trying their best to continue to contribute to their community while existing in poverty, at a stage where some of their basic needs were not being met, adequate shelter (the school building - think Maslow)and had been the victim of countless broken promises, their latest one having a direct impact on hundreds of people in their care.. - what would we do? What this proposal and the associated comments is trying to do is walk away from the school at a time when the community should rally around it, support it in any way it can as an established elder of our community, like a person. Why do we not feel the compassion to ensure the school is supported, to dust itself down and pick itself up with resources, money, community activism and help and a fresh start....To use the remark made by AB that it needs to "shake things up" you are probably right. But it is very easy to shout from the sidelines....how have you tried to help the school, will the same energy you put into this debate be better spent helping your local school where your children attend? When a person needs to get back on track and "shake things up", is it not better to support them to do so, be a charitable person and not look away at the next new and shiny thing..The ECC proposal looks exciting, of course it does..but so could be the prospect of a community coming together to support a struggling school, fighting for it to have a great building as it has been promised. The same school which RIGHT NOW is educating our children, RIGHT NOW is having money taken from it, and RIGHT NOW seeing people getting more excited about something new, then supporting something that helped many of us get where we are now.
"Let gratitude for the past inspire us with trust for the future"
Francois Fenelon

RSA

By dzommers

Free School's Project what a laugh just imagine 50 or so years down the line WHERE will be the MONEY for RESTORATION!!!!!.
Nothing in life is FREE. So put MONEY into EXISTING SCHOOL'S as promised!!! Because we all know the FREE SCHOOL'S won't be big ENOUGH to hold the whole of Newark and Sherwood District.

By doctor_bob

And they say religion isn't the cause of all strife in the world. Just a simple suggestion over opening a school seems to have stirred up enough of a hornets nest here. Next thing you know one of you will accuse one of the others of being "like the Nazis" - as all discussions of this type usually end up (Godwin's Law I believe it is called, but even that name is rather ironic in the circumstances)

By PJenkins

Thanks to the complete and utter fool who wrote 'However it does not matter how much you try to ignore God you WILL stand before him one day and nothing you say or do will ever change that.' This idiotic statement does more harm to your cause than any over possibly could. There is no such thing as god - FACT. And if there were a god who created all things, would it be the same god that Muslims,Buddists etc pray to. Get a grip and stop trying to force your dangerous fairy stories down peoples throats. You did make me laugh though.

By Darwin

Can Anybody tell me where the millions of pounds the Emmanuel Creationist Cult spent on their new building actually came from? Most churches struggle to raise funds for roof repairs so where did such a small church actually get all this money?

By ABrompton

Darwin. This question has been answered already but here it is again.
Social enterprise business and the generousity of it's congregation. And where on earth did you get the idea that this is a small church. The Church is a healthy, growing and vibrant one. You are most welcome to attend.
Sunday morning @ 11am

Al.

By ImmortalTech

Creationist groups banished from free schools!!

Please read the following link which could draw a line under this whole debate, from the Everyday Champions Church point of view anyway x

http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6082592&navcode=94

By Baldertonian

The Grove Summer Fayre
Saturday July 2nd 11am to 2pm at the Lilley & Stone site. Please help raise money to help children and supprt the students who will be there doing their bit, thank you!

By MrNook

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Creationism

By jagger

would not another school would dilute the funding available for schools in Newark?. are schools not funded by how many pupils they have?.More schools less funding for the existing schools.

• News
• Latest News
• Video
• News In Pictures
• Your Letters
• Archive
• Digital Edition
• Submit A Story

• Sport
• Football
• Rugby
• Cricket
• Athletics
• Angling
• Boxing
• Golf
• Darts
• Hockey
• Swimming
• Other Sport

• Leisure
• Arts
• Film
• Music
• Stage
• Games
• Events
• Horoscopes
• Tourism
• Holidays

• Your Community
• Forum
• Junior Advertiser
• Family Notices
• Blogs
• Dating

• Our Services
• Photo sales
• Images from the past
• Talking Newspaper
• Subscription
• Leaflets
• Media Pack
• Contact Us
• Terms and Conditions

• Property
• Hot Properties
• Buying
• Renting
• Find An Agent
• Contact Agents

• Recruitment
• Motors
• Findit