Here at The Guardian, Richie Thompson advises us:
Before we go any further, to be completely clear, what is objectionable is the teaching of creationism or intelligent design as scientifically valid. The very simple reason for this is that they are not: the huge weight of evidence and consensus that follows it overwhelmingly supports evolution as being the best explanation we have, and strongly rejects alternative explanations. Ellip[sis2
The main focus in recent years has been to stop Free Schools teaching pseudoscience and to get evolution in the primary curriculum. Other issues have more recently come to light, such as funding for creationist nurseries.
Consider such comments in the light of the item we just linked to about weird, exquisite spiders that look like other life forms or the detritus thereof. Spiders who must have got through thousands of millennia of only looking a few percentage points like the target life form or detritus—if current evolution dogma is to be believed—without being detected. And the only place in the U.K. that rational objections can be discussed is black market “creationist nurseries”?
Aw, bring ‘em on! Some PhD. scientists need a refresher course they won;t get from their admirers in the pop science media.