Prayers for the new Pope in Catholic schools
Friday 15th March 2013, 5:00PM GMT.
Pupils from St Mary & St Michael Primary School were among those to pray for the new Pope yesterday. (Picture by Tom Tardif, 1310126)
PRAYERS have been said at Roman Catholic schools across the island to mark the choosing of a new Pope.
Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, was elected 266th Pope in the fifth ballot on the second day of voting at the conclave. He will be known as Pope Francis.
St Mary & St Michael School held a special collective worship for the new Pope. Led by deputy head teacher Iain Kilpatrick, the assembly focused on the character of the new pontiff. ‘One of the first things he did was to ask the crowd to pray for Pope Benedict [his predecessor].
‘He is usually seen on the bus in Argentina and is a very friendly man,’ said Mr Kilpatrick.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Tuesday 18 June
- Condor wants security to buy £70m. ships
- Your States - St Peter Port South
- GP 200 LOOKback - St Peter Port Harbour
- CGi Technology Challenge
- Sport - Priaulx's problems continue
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Why won’t anyone think of these poor brainwashed children?
Report abuse
I agree Phil. Forcing children to follow a religion at such a young age is wrong. Allow them to decide whether they want to be religious or not, when they’re old enough do so. If my parents had forced me to do this I would’ve resented them for it.
The big problem I have with it is that there are hundreds of religions in this world. Why force them to learn about just one. Even normal schools are bad for this. I remember constantly being force fed Christianity. I decided at a very young age that religion wasn’t for me. I distinctly remember being in Year five and learning very briefly about Judaism and being very excited at the prospect. Unfortunately as I said it was very brief and we were forced back into learning about the same old drivel.
In a modern day society children should be taught about all religion. This can enable them to be more accepting of others in our increasingly multi-cultural society.
Report abuse
No one is forcing any child to follow a religion here !! Half of the children in the school probably just go with the flow and probably dont even know why or what they are praying! And, other religions – although not all of them as you say there are too many to cover, are covered in not only the catholic schools, but I would imagine other schools curriculums too! The amount of RE taught at the catholic schools is probably just as equal to that taught in the other schools too. Its an extension of history to some degree really. I am sure that all these kids will be allowed to make their own mind up once they are old enough and mature enough to understand and make their own decisions. I am sure none of them are being ‘forced’ to partake in a normal assembly/prayer group.
Report abuse
Not brainwashed exactly Phil. They are brought up in the Catholic Faith and will have the choice when older to make their own decision about their faith. I was one such child…dragged up in the faith, not willing to go to church, forced to do so by my parents but now I can choose and I am grateful that I have something on which to begin to make an informed choice. I don’t think a catholic education is any different to a non faith based upbringing…it’s just another choice.
Report abuse
All the children attending Catholic schools are there because their parents have made a choice to send their children there.
Contrast this with the other schools in the island where parents have no choice because the government tells you which school your child will go to regardless of whether or not the school is right for your child.
That is, unless you can pay to go private.
Report abuse
Phil & Oh Dear – all kids are brainwashed, it just depends what with. Thousands are sold the lie of evolution as fact, but it still goes on. We subtley brainwash with political correctness continually.
I don’t believe that any man on earth is perfect or can forgive peoples sins, but I think there are much more damaging things taught every day to the majority of school kids.
I don’t think the school in question would teach alternative sex and disregard for family etc.
Many children are sent to these schools because they are known to be good schools, with good morals.
Report abuse
….interesting line Steeplechase…”the lie of evolution as a fact but it still goes on.”
So who brainwashed you into believing in Creationism…and yes it still goes on…evolution that is…
Report abuse
The clue is in the title “The theory of evolution” it was an interesting alternative concept to creation, however the lack of evidence and inability to study any evolution between different species, leaves it in need of much hype, deceit and repetition to school children to keep it “relevant”
As many of the children praying will respect those leading them, a number will grow up and use prayer as something to bring comfort etc.
Those taught repeatedly that they are products of chance and nothing more than modified animals, will grow up believing this and as a result will put into practice the “survival of the fittest” teaching and will end up selfish, uncaring, for themselves, their descendants, their planet.
Report abuse
that should read “survival of the fit enough”:) or more accurate “natural selection”
Most don`t use the term “survival of the fittest” as its misleading and often taken out of context. (see Darwin and H Spencer).
There are those who believe in evolution as well as creation and see no conflict.
Report abuse
bcb
When you said that the that phrase “survival of the fittest” is misleading, were you alluding to how fascists inaccurately viewed it inasmuch that they saw it as a justification for genocide ?
Report abuse
Yes Ed along with Eugenics.
Also in nature as there are many aspects that play a role in the survival of a species and any individual animal even luck especially on an individual basis.
Report abuse
Just for your info Steeplechase.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/scientific+theory
A scientific definition of theory is very different to the English definition.
I’m not uncaring, disrespectful or any other thing you think understanding evolution might bring me to be.
You are extremely delusional if you think some of the greatest minds to ever walk this Earth are wrong. Science isn’t a belief as such, it’s refuted with evidence. Something that no religion in the world has.
I suggest you read about it, you clearly don’t have a clue.
In reply, even in other schools other religions are NOT taught about any where near as much as they should be.
Teaching it as history would be innacurate. Despite all of the wrong doings of religion in history, religion in itself is not history. It’s fairy tales.
Report abuse
Oh Dear, Oh Dear!
You appear to have signed up to the belief system of evolution, which has prompted a minor outburst, but not a big bang.
According to your link,your theory should be falsifiable,and that is your problem, it is not falsifiable and so it is nothing more than a belief system or religion.
I would respectfully advise you to take a sip from the medicine that you offered me and find the facts. Don’t just accept toot because it comes from, as you put it “the greatest minds on earth”
Your comparison of religion to fairy tales is also very dubious. Religion has been responsible for millions of deaths, it is an immensly powerful tool. A person that can compare 9/11 to humpty dumpty would seem to put a very low value on human life, maybe the value of a monkey.
I can see the attraction of believing your religion as it frees you of any responsibility etc. but I just haven’t got the faith.
Report abuse
Perhaps you could endarken (sic) us Steeplechase and share some of your anti-scientific beliefs?
Do you believe the earth is 6,000 years old?
Do you believe man walked with the dinosaurs?
Do you believe literally in the fairy stories in the Bible like Noah’s Ark and Jonah and pillars of salt and all the other stuff and nonsense?
I rather suspect that you do?
Report abuse
Don’t worry Steeplechase, I’m not getting angry. My writing style can sometimes come across in that way but I am perfectly calm.
The whole point in that link (which you either didn’t understand or didn’t read) was to show that a scientific theory is backed up with evidence. Yes it can be altered as more is discovered.
I am not dismissing the fact that religion is a very powerful and destructive tool.
How does believing in logic and evidence free me of any responsibility? I’m not responsible for 9/11. I’m not even sure why you felt compelled to mention it.
I value human life very highly. Just because I believe (there is evidence to support my belief) that we evolved over time doesn’t mean that I value life any less.
Religion will never allow you to take the moral high ground. It is the cause of so many millions of deaths. 9/11 is another human atrocity caused by religion. The Catholic church is responsible for millions of deaths just with anti-contraception alone. So to say that I disvalue human life is extremely disproportionate.
The Bible can’t even agree on Jesus’ last words.
Jesus’ last words:
MAT 27:46,50: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?” that is to say, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” …Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.”
LUK 23:46: “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, “Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:” and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”
JOH 19:30: “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished:” and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”
Hundreds of scientits study evolution and come to the same or similar conclusions. How did three men get this so wrong?
Lets face it, arguing about this is pointless. You seem to think that because you are religious you stand higher than everybody else. The majority of what you have posted is nonsence and you have made no real attempt to prove your point. I could do this all day, taking FACTS and quotes from scientists past and present. I could give you diagrams and irrefutable proof that the Earth has been around longer than you think. I could show you the DNA makeup similarities between different species. I could show you species that are found on two different continents thousands of miles apart that evolved to be virtually the same. Despite all of the evidence I could collate in just a few minutes you would still sit there and argue with me. You would do this despite not having any indicators that point to your chosen deity.
Ignorance is a wonderful thing when you are afraid of what is real.
Report abuse
Hi Martino
The age of the earth is never stated in the Bible as it was never meant to be a scientific manual. “Young earth creationists” tend to make assumptions that cannot be substantiated from the Bible, so it’s nothing more than speculation. It is perfectly feasible to believe the creation account and also believe the Earth is billions of years old. As for me, I really couldn’t care less how old the earth is!
To be honest mate we could spend hours talking about this and get nowhere fast, however I suspect we’ve both got better things to do with our time. Suffice it to say I don’t expect anyone who doesn’t believe in God to accept stories like creation, Noah’s Ark and Jonah…not to mention the virgin birth and resurrection. In contrast, as someone who does believe in God I don’t find the idea that an omnipotent being is capable of such feats particularly difficult to accept.
I also understand that a measure of faith is required – which is why I appreciate why a lot of folk find the whole idea loopy. I can live with that ;-)
Report abuse
Hi PLP. I have no problem with your beliefs because you have made them very clear, as have I. With regard to all the major world religions I am atheist and with regard to the more general question ‘is there some sort of god of some unimaginable, unknown nature’ I am an agnostic. I’d now like Steeplechase to nail his/her colours to the mast so we can see what we’re dealing with.
Report abuse
Oh Dear
Where did the universe come from or how did life arise? try to answer that and your also talking fairy tales :) apparently there are over 500 theories on what was before the big bang and not a shred of evidence to suggest any of them are right. Not doing much better than the multitude of religions really are we?.
Report abuse
Oh dear
I agree very much with your last post but the real problem is “how did life begin”? unless someone can answer that we will always be relying on our beliefs. This is one area where i agree with Ed.
Evolution can`t tell us what happened before and to be honest its bloody hard to believe either of the only two alternatives.
Report abuse
Oh Dear
I wouldn’t regard Steeplechase as ‘delusional’, just sceptical. The vast majority of the European population believed for approximately 1500 years that Roman physician Claudius Galen had comprehensively covered and had a strong understanding of all aspects of medicine- including the Christian Church. They had no idea that a lot of his concepts were either slightly wrong or completely inaccurate.
Therefore, Steeplechase is only doing what most of the population failed to do for centuries- challenging established concepts.
Just because one believes that they are experiencing the heyday of science and technology they think that they have the ability to refute what can be seen as irrational ideas.
Report abuse
Martino, I am definitely not anti science, true science, that can be tried and tested is crucial to understanding and development. What I initially pointed out was that school children are brainwashed with many things other than prayer (which was the accusation of some readers) and I highlighted evolution as one of those areas. It is taught as a fact and is freely available in school libraries, written as fact, when in fact, many true scientists will admit that, although an interesting point of view, has many as yet missing pieces of the puzzle. Of course we can view evolution scientifically within species, but there is nothing to suggest that canines are evolving into felines.Even in plant life, there are no signs of this happening.
A believer in evolution needs a very strong faith as true science has to be ignored on so many fronts.
Martino, you asked what I believe with regards to pillars of salt etc. I am quite happy to tell you, however, my beliefs are nothing to do with children being brainwashed in schools. To bring my personal beliefs into the equation would only blur the matter in hand. We need to stick to the facts and not digress.
In a nutshell, I believe that it is a fact that schools brainwash children, it is just that some people objected to brainwashing them with spiritual values.
Report abuse
Oh Dear, I take your point about not being angry, but looking at you post, you seem to begin calm and then evolve as you type.
On a humorous note, it is not me who calls evolutionists “scientits” I think you were jabbing at the keyboard with such venom by the time you reached your third paragraph from the end and it all went scientits up so to speak.
I mentioned 9/11 to show you the seriousness of what you term “fairytales”, you then appear to have taken on board what I told you about how powerful and destructive religion can be and repeat it back to me, so I am presuming now, that you appreciate what power religion can have, so it is mutually agreed that it is not Jack and Jill stuff as you initially imagined.
You then inform me that you believe in evidence and logic, but you are an adherent of faith in evolution???
“Religion will never allow you to take the moral high ground” I don’t believe that I suggested any such thing, in fact I’m not sure that I have said anything religious.
I will deal with your Bible quotes later.
By this point in your letter, you begin to lose the plot a little more and claim to be able to prove that the earth is older than I say it is. I haven’t even mentioned how old the earth is. As your faith and trust in your beliefs, begin to totter, you resort to insults, before finally admitting that you prefer to remain ignorant as you are frightened by reality.
There is no reason to be afraid of reality, should you search out the true scientifically proven facts about origins, dates, humanity etc, there is nothing other than fear to stop you understanding and appreciating how amazing a planet we live on and how special you are as an individual.
You have been brainwashed into believing you are a random product of chance, a monkey man. You are much more than that and this is the reason why this faith should be removed from schools well before saying a prayer.
Report abuse
Ha, I thought so Steeplechase. You’re a creationist wacko but you haven’t got the courage of your convictions to spell it out. It is evident, though, from the tell tale signs in your latest post. And far from blurring the issue it spells out exactly why you equate science (good science like evolution theory that can be tested) with belief. You do not need belief to see that species evolve through a process of natural selection. It can be demonstrated. Science is not belief. It is knowledge. Evolving knowledge. Do you accept that our planet, the Earth, is a tiny speck orbiting a star, our sun, towards the edge of our galaxy, the milky way, which is just one of millions of observable galaxies, or do you ‘believe’ that the current scientific consensus of where we lie in the cosmos is just a ‘theory’ that should be given no less weight than Copernicus’ thoroughly discredited (discredited by science) heliocentric model of the Universe? Come on, tell us, and at the same time tell us what competing ‘theory’ or theories you would like school children to be taught in opposition to evolution theory. Be honest now. Share your unscientific ‘beliefs’ with us.
Report abuse
Martino, I began my response to you with these words “Martino, I am definitely not anti science, true science, that can be tried and tested is crucial to understanding and development.”
Now you are having your faith rocked. You have resorted to guesswork and name calling.
I have told you very clearly that I believe in true science, not your religious beliefs and wavering faith in evolution as the origin of life.
You are trying to involve me in the debate again – the debate is not about me or my beliefs, it’s about truth, science and laws of nature (as far as we understand them at this moment in time) Try to get past me, try if you can to get past yourself. Just as I pointed out to Oh Dear, you are not some monkey man, you are not a product of chance, you are much more than that. You have been indoctrinated by your teachers, library books and more recent preachers such as Dawkins, but if you have courage and search for the truth, it is there to be found.
It is interesting that you pick on Copernicus and that you as well as some others like to play a game Science v Religion.
You ask for information, well let me give you a list of religious people from history, you might have heard of them.
Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler,Galileo, Descartes, Pascal, Newton, Boyle, Faraday, Mendel, Kelvin, Planck and Einstein.
Now I know you and Oh Dear are much smarter than Einstein, but I will leave you to chew on one of his famous sayings -”Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
Search out truth Martino, pluck up the courage to jump from hamster wheel that keeps the blind running endlessly, never finding answers. Stand strong on truth.
Report abuse
Steeplechase
Evolution does not claim to know or answer the origin of life.
Report abuse
Steeplechase, this isn’t a debate.
I was trying to debate with you but all you seem capable of replying with is a destruction of my post based on a spelling error and twisting what I’ve said back to me.
Steeplechase your mention of 9/11 didn’t portray to me the power of religion. I was well aware of it. What I meant by fairy tales was when, at the start of the Bible Eve was born from Adam’s rib. The talking snake that’s punishment was eating dirt (we all know what snakes eat, unless scientists are wrong about that as well.
The point is, evolution is a theory that has evidence to back it up. If you look at the definition I posted you’ll see. scientific theories are theories backed up with factual evidence. Things can change and alter in a scientific theory. Unlike religion which stays static. Much of the Bible is now so dated that if people were to follow it word for word, they’d end up in prison.
It’s impossible to know what was around before the big bang. This is up there with “the meaning of life”.
To say that we’re not doing much better than the multitude of religions would be wrong. There is a lot of evidence to support the big bang, just as there is a lot of evidence to support evolution.
Just because Einstein was intelligent and religious doesn’t mean I’m desperate to follow in his foot steps. Have you been brain washed by the media into thinking being like your favourite celebrity is cool?
(think tongue in cheek joke there not anger as you seem to keep misreading).
I tell you what Steeplechase rather than just making snide remarks about each of my posts why don’t you try and prove that evolution doesn’t exist.
What exactly would anyone gain from this “lie”?
Report abuse
Oh Dear
There is nothing in the Bible that contradicts the micro-evolutionary process that Darwin observed – it’s going on all the time around us. Where differences occur between most “creationist” (actually I prefer Christian) wackos like me and evolutionary biology is the scientific theory of macro evolution.
As I said before though, my belief in God underpins my entire belief structure so whenever I observe something, I look at it through that lens. That’s why, although I come from the opposite side of the fence, like Martino I’ve learned from experience that more often than not these debates end up going nowhere. I think that’s because the real issue isn’t creation, evolution, talking snakes etc. – it’s the existence of God. Unless agreement is reached on this fundamental point, debates about the rest are occasionally stimulating, but mostly fruitless.
Report abuse
PLP you’re right.
I said this in a previous post. I guess I should learn when to walk away.
I have a lot of respect for the way you conduct yourself. I think a lot of people on this forum could do with being as controlled as you are.
Report abuse
Evolution is ( like global warming and UFOs ) a fact …. It is what causes it that is open to debate …..
Report abuse
Very good, but I fear the global warming will have gone over many heads.
Report abuse
Steeplechase
Global warming goes over our heads because of the conflicting arguments for or against
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294560/The-great-green-1-The-hard-proof-finally-shows-global-warming-forecasts-costing-billions-WRONG-along.html
Report abuse
That’s my point exactly,IWV, you, Toby and I know this, but there are thousands who don’t, that’s why I thought Toby’s very clever reply might be taken the wrong way by the thousands of gullible people, that believe everything they read in a paper, without researching it. Your link will open a lot of eyes and possibly even result in ridicule as individuals have been brainwashed that cows emitting surplus gas from the intestines are killing off the planet.
Report abuse
If you look further into that you’ll see what the Met Office said in reply.
I’m not saying global warming is a man made thing however. The Earth goes through warm and cool periods all the time.
This isn’t the link I was hoping for but funny all the same:
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/addressing-the-daily-mail-and-james-delingpoles-crazy-climate-change-obsession-article/
This shows the average temperature rising over years.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/decadal-forecasting
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/
Proof that the Daily Mail is not a good “news”paper.
Report abuse
The third link is a reply to a similar Daily Mail article to the one you posted.
They just seem to have something against to Metoffice.
Report abuse
the real worry for me is that if global warming isn’t man made there is practically nothing we can do about it …
Report abuse
Toby
We can adapt and prepare, that’s where the investment is needed.
Climate change has always happened, we know this, so it is no surprise that it will continue to happen, whether or not mankind contributes to it.
Report abuse
And mitigate, Spartacus…
Report abuse
1970s – experts talked about approaching ice-age
1980s – experts talked about global warming
1990s – experts talked about global warming
2000s – experts talked about climate change.
If you look at the influence of the sun
and the incredible variations of climate recorded in the geological archive -
the idea that man can fix climate is hubristic.
We should be responsible about the environment; we should avoid pollution; but we also need some humility.
Report abuse
Whoa there Steeplechase, before you get carried away I am not going to get involved in a debate with a creationist, especially one who will not lay his cards on the table. We are going to have to leave it at that I am afraid. I have other fish to fry!
Report abuse
That’s probably the sensible option.
I might go and talk to my kettle….
Report abuse
My kettle warned me if I used it to make hot chocolate I’d be punished. Trouble is I like hot chocolate so I’m thinking about changing my religion….
Report abuse
Oh you follow that kind of kettle.
My kettle allows me to only make hot chocolate. It views tea and coffee as the pathway (it’s not a highway in my kettle religion, it’s simply a pathway) to hell.
It will also not allow me to use its boiled water of holiness for the purpose of recreational spaghetti.
It has just two commandments.
1. Fill with water.
2. Flick the holy switch of boilingness.
Report abuse
These threads always end like this. Steeplechase clearly won’t listen to reason. However, since he is a fan of Einstein quotes, here are some others:
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.”
“The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.”
“For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions”
“It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere…. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man’s ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.”
“Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.”
Want any more??
Report abuse
That’ll do for me!
And here’s one from Carl Sagan:
“In science it often happens that scientists say, ‘You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken,’ and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.”
Report abuse
Martino, you are absolutely right, science is expanding all the time and a true and truthful scientist will discover new things all the time. It would be a fool, that would disregard true and accurate information.
Politicians – mmm, I know where you are coming from.
With religion, I think you do see those that are purely religious and not following the Bible, evolving, hence women vicars, teaching that miracles are false, no resurrection, no Hell anymore. They kind of rebrand themselves to obtain a better footfall.
The old grumpy ones like me learn all the time, but on the fundamental issues remain the same as those that were burned hundreds of years ago. The Bible is a Christians manual for life and so other than rituals written for Jews, prior to Jesus Christ, nothing changes.
It does take faith to believe the Bible, can you imagine when the Bible taught that air had weight, the scientists of that day and certainly the common people “knew” that was wrong and yet a few hundred years ago, science caught up and we now know not only that air has weight, we even know how much per sq metre.
The same would have happened with the Bible saying the earth hung in space and was a globe like shape. That was thousands of years ago, when everyone “knew” that it was flat and supported underneath.
It is easier for us now as we are not ridiculed on these subjects because science has caught up with Scripture.
What gets even more amazing is that this book even tells what has not yet happened.
Have a good evening.
Report abuse
Not a problem Martino, the scientists of his day, did the same to Galileo. Rather than experience the truth, they refused to even use his telescope as they knew it would prove their blindness to the true facts.
Report abuse
Now you really have shown just how divorced from reality you are Steeplechase, equating the decision by little ol’ non believer me not to debate you with the isolation and persecution of Galileo (at the behest of the Catholic Church by the way).
It takes all sorts I suppose.
Report abuse
Education’s vision statement is due out tomorrow. Lets hope Catholic schools will be abolished along with the 11+.
Spartacus
Report abuse
That would be fantastic.
More equality and stronger learning for our future.
Report abuse
It’s always difficult to tell with just the bare print but I take it that you have used those words as a euphemism for dumbing down
Report abuse
How would abolishing the eleven plus be dumbing down?
I know a barrister that went to Les Beaucamps School and an architect.
Both respectable and well paying jobs. I know people who passed to the Grammar and College only to end up in prison.
Your intelligence at the age of eleven has no real influence on how you will get on later in life.
Report abuse
There is no reason to abolish either of those.
Report abuse
Steeplechase, they could have favourable figures.
I’m assuming that the amount of children who attend these schools is lower than the average attendance for a school. In which the case the children would be granted more one to one time with the teacher thus helping them to learn in a much more effective way.
Report abuse
Sorry this comment should’ve gone under neath your Steeplechase.
Blasted internet explorer and its inability to show this page correctly.
Report abuse
The average class sizes in both the primary catholic schools is the same as all the other primary schools in the island and always has been. I know children who have been in classes of 30 at those schools in the last 7 years – they are pretty much average with sizes in comparison. I do actually wonder where all those children would go if they were to get rid of the catholic schools – they would literally flood the other primaries! Also I do think its the teacher that makes a class- ie you can have a large class with an excellent teacher and they do well and conversely a small class with a no so good teacher who wont do as well…. all effort should be made on recruitment of good teachers across the whole of the education spectrum – I diverse onto another very topical subject though!
Report abuse
I would imagine catholic schools compare favourably with secular schools.
Are there figures to show otherwise Spartacus?
Report abuse
In my opinion there are no figures which would make a Catholic education seem favourable in any way.
Report abuse
If exam results, general behaviour, assaults on staff, staff morale and exclusions are all more positive (and I’m not sure that they are) than in States secondary schools, why would you like to see them abolished.
Report abuse
Children should have a free and open minded pathway of information pertaining to religious ideas and values to enable them to form their own conclusions when they are mature enough to do so.
The other problems you mention do not need religious doctrine in order to be solved.
Report abuse
Precisely Spartacus. What on earth is the point of adding a ‘faith’ element to ANY school – other than to addle the minds of young children with the sort of superstitious gobbledygook spouted by the likes of Steeplechase?
All schools should be secular places of learning, with no prayer element whatsoever and religious ‘instruction’ confined merely to comparative religion studies .
That way we can leave the brainwashing to bible bashers like the one above who insist on living circa 2,000 years in the past.
Report abuse
Hopefully the discrimination shown by the indulgent music service will stop ,saving the taxpayer over £600,000 pa.
Report abuse
Oh Dear, I didn’t mean to upset you with my comments and my sense of humour kicked in when I saw the typo, I knew it was just a mistake and I’m sure you could find plenty in mine if you looked.
As I have stated, I am not Catholic and I didn’t attend a Catholic school, but I do believe that teaching certain things such as evolution in school is more damaging than prayer.
When I initially stated this, a few people were a little put out and decided to have a go. I do enjoy debate and so it became a challenge to remain calm and volley back over the net, with added spin, whatever was thrown my way.
I did not mean to cause offence.
I believe that the poster called bcb came up with a very good point when he suggested something along these lines. Everything in this world needs a beginning, we all know that you can’t make something out of nothing and so any explanation of origin/existence is going to need the miracle or supernatural if they go back far enough. I go outside of the world that we know, to the spiritual side and so I have God.
You remain within what we can see and touch and go for a series of miracles, which I presume begin with soup, but I’m not sure where that came from. (I genuinely don’t know what you think, i am not making fun)
Although I believe in God, I like to find answers to all manner of things and when confronted with evolution , I needed to find out if it was real or even possible.
There are so many missing bits as well as bits that just don’t add up, I can’t muster the faith to follow such a teaching.
The amount of forgeries probably outnumber the times the world is going to end according to JW’s.
The fact that such forgeries not only got passed brilliant academics, but were hailed as answers.
Age of the earth and dating systems are a huge problem.
The size of the sun and its rate of consumption is another.
Where did it come from? is not answered.
Macro evolution is still not possible even today. ie Bovines will not mate with felines to produce new info in the DNA
Even plant life is bound within these restrictions and so Tomato, Aubergine and Potato will mix and match, but never a lettuce or a Geranium.
I am not trying to make you believe what I believe, hence my refusal to be drawn by Martino, as this has nothing to do with me or what I believe.
It is about truth and nothing more.
As I pointed out to Martino, the critics of Galileo would not even use his new telescope as they did not want to see the evidence of what he had taught.Of course, it did not stop him being correct, but in an effort to remain in vogue with the established church at that time, they chose to remain blind.
Have a good evening.
Report abuse
Don’t worry Steeplechase you haven’t upset me in any way.
There are missing links in evolution just as there are in religion. Neither are perfect but I choose the science root due to the fact that there is a lot more evidence to support it. Evolution is a topic that is constantly being expanded. New findings are found all the time that proves common ancestory between various animals. Recent research even shows that homosapiens mated with neanderthals.
Scientists are also at the very brink of cloning extinct animals. In Australia they recently managed to clone an extinct frog. The experiment didn’t quite work, but that’s what science is about. Trial and error until you get to the facts.
The Bible predicted that the Earth was round, it also said that the stars and the moon were lights to help people find their way in the dark. Quite possibly the most complex light bulbs ever.
Trying to force each other to “change sides” so to speak would be a pointless exercise. I just enjoy a debate on this subject.
Thanks and have a good day.
Report abuse
Oh Dear – Your point on cloning is interesting. I understand that they have soft tissue from a dinosaur in the USA, just imagine!
Move over Dolly the sheep!
Martino – I tried to reason with you and you have been a naughty boy and so I will correct you again and send you back to the naughty step.
I never suggested that you were the catholic church or that I was Galileo and I don’t believe for two minutes that you have learning difficulties and so that leads me to believe that you merely act obtusely.
It is your self induced blindness, that is holding you back, in the same way as those that refused to look through Galileo’s telescope .
Interestingly, in those times, scientists/astronomers etc knew that there were seven thousand stars. The Bible, informed them that they were beyond number. Of course, most open minded people would now believe the Bible on that one, I guess you still hold on to 7,000 stars and the earth carried on the back of an elephant.
Now sit on that naughty step and think what a silly boy you have been. You can leave the step on Friday and if you are a good boy, then you can have a sticker!
Report abuse
So you admit that dinosaurs did exist?
In your view what happened to them?
Report abuse
What happened to the dinosaurs?
I remember that as one of the questions in my 11+ exam in the mid fifties
I was a bit flustered that morning as my schoolbus had been cancelled without warning due to driver sickness and route changes.As 4 X 4′s had not yet been invented I had to rely on my trusty pushang to get me there just in time.I remember that I was seated next to a speccy looking kid named Ted or Fred or Ed who had been revising since about 5.30am
Anyway my answer was that because dinosaurs in Guernsey were tethered outside for long periods in all weathers they became progressively weak and therefore easy prey for the workshy Catholics of the period who topped up their child pre-school handouts by making beef burgers and other sh*t-in-a-box type meals out of them
With local Government encouragement they carried out this business quite successfully for a few years from a former packing shed ,exporting increasing amounts of the product to other countries under a special arrangement
This profitable activity encouraged larger non-local groups to set up in the island until inevitably it all came to an abrupt end when IDC closed down the packing shed due to a change of use related problem and the fact that the dinosaur sh*t-in-a-box producers in the other countries complained that they were being shafted by cheap imports
The Guernsey Catholics were ordered to clean up their factory site and so it was that three or four years later, after much consultation, the dinosaur remains were left out for kerbside collection by local Government employees, much to the annoyance of the long established private company collectors, and shipped off to be incinerated in another part of the world at considerable expense
The actual cost of that exercise was never revealed because in order to cover up serious errors in established procedures, secret meetings were held where, acting upon legal advice, the Chief negotiator managed to insert a confidentiality clause in order keep it all on a need to know basis.To date this clause,sealed with a secret handshake, has not been broken despite enormous suspicion and distrust and even though it was subsequently claimed to be a really good deal for all concerned
I passed the 11+.I don’t know my marks because as the precedent had been set that sort of detail had to remain secret
Report abuse
IWV, I wish questions like that were asked in modern academic tests…
Report abuse
IWV – I thought the dinosaurs ended up in Tesco ready meals?
Report abuse
…never have so many words been written about so little…Steeplechase argues his case well…he goes in all guns firing and then realises that folk want to duck out and talk to kettles…so he lowers the battlements a bit and then everyone is talking again.
Martino shouts out he is an atheist…then softens it a bit and says on some levels he is agnostic…must say that is a strange mixture to put in an intellectual cauldron….it could well boil over and turn folk into pillars of salt.
Those of you who may know my own views on religion may wonder why I may seem to be supporting Steeplechase…well the simple answer is, he puts his case (one I reject totally)in a very articulate manner…for Martino & Oh dear to shout “I’ve had enough of this nonsense” and then walk away from it with black kettles & black pots a-jangling around their necks, is not, by any degree of imagination, an argument for evolution..
Even Richard Dawkins stays in his chair, when confronted by some abysmal cleric ….
But it was an interesting debate, even if PLP stayed out of it…as I was inclined to do..probably should have !!!
Report abuse
Hi Vic, there is no point trying to engage in rational debate with someone who regards a funny old book full of hotch potch gobbledygook as true science and true science as gobbledygook.
For the record I am certain that all of the gods invented by the human religion inventors over the centuries do not exist, but beyond that I am not 100 per cent sure. The labels we attach to ourselves (Christian, atheist, agnostic) depend on how we define them and what we mean by god or gods.
I believe – note believe but don’t know for sure – that the noted author Philip Pullman (His Dark Materials etc) has described himself both as an agnostic and an atheist. I’m not in bad company if that’s the case.
Let me leave with a quote from my old mate Salman Rushdie for you and Steeplechase to ponder: Question: What is the opposite of faith? Not disbelief. Too final, certain, closed. Itself is a kind of belief.
Doubt.
Report abuse
Vic, the reason I stepped down was because it was a pointless debate. We all have strong views and strong opinions, nothing will change. I could put evidence forward forever but Steeplechase won’t concede that evolution is real. In the same way that you and I wouldn’t suddenly switch to religion.
I didn’t get angry whilst I was posting. My posts sometimes come across that way. It’s something I need to work on. I should find another way of saying what I need to say in a more tactful manner.
The Kettle thing was just a light hearted comment. I wouldn’t read too much into that.
You claim that Steeplechase argued his case well, he didn’t answer a lot of my questions. But I’m done with this debate now.
Onwards and upwards.
Report abuse
Vic Gamble – They don’t make atheists like they used to!
Martino should not get turned into a pillar of salt because he has left the cauldron a while ago.. kitchen,heat etc.
Unfortunately, he was a very naughty boy, when I tried to reason with him and so he is now on the naughty step, well away from the cauldron. He has to stay there until Friday.
What are your personal views of religious schools? You obviously have no time at all for God, Bible, Jesus and probably church in general, but would you ever consider sending your child/ren (if you have any) to a religious school, if the education, ethos etc was beyond that reached by a state school.
Oh, by the way, I am not a cleric and I am not completely abysmal!!
Report abuse
@ Steeplechase. That old problem of whether, or not, an atheist should expose his children to religious teaching is very neatly side-stepped, at least in Guernsey. Both my children went to pre-school, where one was taught Christianity to such a degree (Easter drawing of stickman on a crucifix was one happy event)that I had to ask the nursery teacher to desist. Both went to Vauvert and from there one to Grammar and the other to Eliz. College….at all steps along the way these schools taught Christianity….not always with great success…my son, at Vauvert, was given a selection of cartoons and asked to notate under each which Commandment it pictured…man with mask and swag bag “Thou Shalt Not Steal” Man and woman in bed with a little girl presenting a tray with boiled eggs,toast and tea….obviously Honour Thy Mother & Father…but my son was swayed to write “Thy Shalt Not Commit Adultery”.
I only relate this to indicate that there is no escape from religion in schools…and why should there be, it is as much part of life as football, pop music and plane spotting…it is when the school lays absolute importance on the religious aspect that my heckles rise….indeed I would answer you Steeplecase by saying ‘I would never consider sending my children to a religious school if that was the main material of its bricks & mortars. Both my children are now young adults….they have no interest in religion, not because of anything I have said, but simply because they never considered it an important part of their life…and they never rated plane spotting either!
Report abuse
Hi Vic – regardless of religion – isnt what it teaches just generally right from wrong – ie the commandments – these can be commandments of life not necessarily with religious undertones? This is surely what we all want of society – teach right from wrong but maybe remove the ‘praying’ element from it. On this basis teaching christianity in schools is therefore ok in my humble opinion. The one thing I know is that in the most desperate of moments in life(I have had a child with cancer so I know) as a pretty much non religious person at the most desperate of times I found myself praying to God and that gave me great comfort and probably does to many non-believers at their darkest times.
Report abuse
I resent the idea that the only way to teach people right from wrong is to turn to religion. I have morals, I know right from wrong. My parents taught me this, not a bible or a deity of any kind.
I do however agree that a lot of people turn to religion during bleak and desperate times.
I’m sorry to hear about your child. I hope he/she is better now.
Report abuse
Vic – I understand your irritation at the “bricks and mortar” approach to religion in a secular school. To an extent I share that view, particularly when the people doing the religious ramming often aren’t Christians themselves!
I’m curious though – what your views are on faith schools such as St Mary & St Michaels, where religion is the bricks and mortar, but where parents need to make a choice to send their children there?
By the way, it might interest you to know that when we decided to send our child to pre-school for a couple of days a week, we chose a secular school over a religious one. The reason was that, although “devout”, we take quite an informal approach to our faith. Repetitive rituals like forcing kids to sit down and say prayers at the end of each day just aren’t our style. Besides, in my experience ramming religion down peoples throats is a sure fire way to put people off genuine faith.
Report abuse
Paul, I thought I had answered your question with my “bricks & mortar” comment and your acknowledgement to that….?
The school you mention upholds and is upheld by Catholic faith. Devout Catholics will obviously feel duty bound to seek out a Catholic education for their children. To do otherwise would, I assume, be a dereliction of their raison d’etre as Catholic parents. Catholics breed Catholics, in the same was as pigeons breed pigeons and dormice breed dormice…and I have nothing against any of them, though I have to admit I like dormice better than pigeons.
My own education was provided by a Calvinist school, where religious adherence was almost the be and end all expected from the pupils. Early morning prayer meetings, followed by assembly (more prayers and hymns). I bowed out of the early morning stuff and the headmaster wrote to my father,saying ‘I am concerned about Victor and his persistent non-attendance to early prayer groups…it is almost as if he has a chip on his shoulder about religion.’ No I didn’t, I simply found the whole thing tedious, boring and about as intellectually stimulating as a rusty soap dish.
So perhaps religious education does ‘maketh’ the man and what I have become today, a totally convinced atheist…and dare I say it, utterly happy in that state.
Report abuse
Vic – In my youth I rebelled against religion in a similar fashion to you so if I had been exposed to a similar experience at school I dare say I would have responded in exactly the same way! Even now as a man of faith, I find a lot of the religious trappings as “stimulating as a rusty soap dish”
As I said, there’s nothing like forced religion to put people off genuine faith – and whilst respecting your choice to be a happy atheist, I’m sure you won’t begrudge me a slight sense of sadness that your experience of Christianity was so dry and lifeless – and about as far from authentic Christianity (as I read it in the New Testament) as you can get.
Report abuse
Moderator…I sent a reply to PLP ten mins ago, but my computer lost connection as I submitted it…can you tell if it was rceived or not?
Thanks.
Report abuse
Hi, Vic,
Looks like the reply didn’t make it to the queue. Can you resubmit it please?
Report abuse
…come on Paul…a wee touch of being condescending in there… I am a big boy and i recognise bad publicity from good publicity…and dry, wet, or even damp, religion is the scratch-card for those who believe in lady luck…whether she be the Madonna of Catholics, or the better half of Jesus who calls you into his happy regime…I do not buy nonsense..well to be honest I did..I bought a very bad Wet, Wet, Wet Cd once….but please do not try and diminish my very real understanding of religion by saying I had a bad introduction to its philosophy about life…see, sometimes you can make me angry…but it is all spilt milk stuff really.
Report abuse
Vic – I wasn’t being condescending at all. I was expressing frustration that too often Christians are the worst advert for Christianity.
You yourself acknowledged that a bad introduction to Christianity might have contributed to your views on religion. I stress might as I’m not suggesting for one moment that if your experience of Christianity had been better you and I would be in a prayer group together. My experience of Buddhists is quite positive but I’d never become one!
Oh, and some of your comments make me angry too, but as you say it’s all spilt milk. I’m sure we’re both thick skinned enough to handle it!
Report abuse
Oh Dear – I will get back to you, but it probably won’t be for a day or so.
Island wide voiting – are you competing with Vic Gamble for wit/sarcasm?
Report abuse
@Steeplechase…..IWV is a professional at wit & sarcasm…I just sting like a butterfly and move like a bee!
Report abuse
OK Paul I can fully accept that it was not your intention to be condescending. It is just that so many Christians have approached me with that beholden smile (you know the smile I mean!) telling me if I had had a better/sweeter introduction to religion I would have taken a different perspective….that, of course, implies that I am a lost soul unable to make correct intellectual decisions for myself.
You say you rebelled against religion…I say I rejected it…when your rebellion was exhausted you returned to the faith, I simply never moved away from my decided position. Indeed some of your posts still indicate a red streak of rebellion..you tend not to fully embrace the Bible, the Word of God, but rather promote a liberal approach. If you are going to mix with the Philistines, the prophets, the Pharisees, Pontius Pilate, Jonah, pillars of salt and Peter, Paul & Mary (but not Puff The Magic Dragon) then surely you have to embrace all these things…you obviously cannot straddle the donkey of Jesus and the Golden calf at the same time…..but we both already know our views on these things,and one assumes we both embrace what human kindness there is in the milk, spilled or not.
Report abuse
Thanks Vic – yes I know that smile well! Actually I do embrace the Bible as authoritative, after studying it though I’ve come to the conclusion that many Christians have completely misinterpreted its message – a bit like the Pharisees of Jesus’ day. A recent Guernsey example of that is the fiasco surrounding Sunday Trading. That’s a very long story though and one I won’t bore you with today…..
Report abuse
Oh Dear – You were asking about dinosaurs and seemed surprised that I knew about them. Of course I know about dinosaurs, they are part of history and true science has given us information about the various kinds etc. You can see the remains which are not fabrications like your Piltdown Man. Because they are real, there has been no need for evolutionists to use skip loads of plaster or wire differing species together, so we have a very accurate picture.
As to what happened to them, I can’t really say, I have never seen one on Lancresse common, but maybe that’s because they know that they might get tethered.
Whether they still exist, it is impossible to say.
What is the evidence? Well the word dinosaur was only invented 200 years ago and so before that they were called names such as Draco and in the UK amongst other regions, they were called dragons, lizards etc.
Are they billions of years old, no, hence the soft tissue remains.
Did they live alongside humans? Definitely yes as prints and paintings give evidence.
Why they went extinct or declined to such low levels that we can’t find them, I don’t know, but the reasons given by certain people about cataracts, constipation and meteors, don’t make any sense to me.
Report abuse
‘Did they live alongside humans? Definitely yes as prints and paintings give evidence.’
Absolutely barking.
But getting away from Steeplechase’s realm of total fantasy, this is the very latest SCIENTIFIC THEORY on what made dinosaurs extinct millions of years before homo sapiens came on the scene.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21709229
Report abuse
Could you provide links to the evidence because in all the years i have enjoyed the study of evolution and origins of lief/universe i have never come across a reputable source of what you claim.
Report abuse
Sorry i should have said convincing evidence and where have you read that any scientist (or anybody else) have claimed dinosaurs are “billions” of years old?.
Report abuse
bcb – I don’t believe any of it myself, I am merely telling you that evolutionists trot out this stuff and it is actually believed by the majority.
Here is a link to billions of years -
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/dinosaur-bone-age1.htm
I don’t believe this for two minutes, I only post at your request.
You honestly don’t need me to look for links as it is so easy to find, the internet is saturated with every evolutionary trick in the book.
You will find many scientists that know the truth too, but they will be a little harder to find because their findings rather ruin the theory of evolution, which complicates things for its adherents.
Report abuse
bcb – I don’t really understand it and so I have just cut and pasted the first link that I found. You understand that I don’t believe this, I merely add it in answer to your question.
Croft an ophthalmologist studied the role of heat and ultraviolet radiation in causing cataract faster. He proposed that the global warming would have led to an increase in the cataract formation in dinosaurs. He also said that an increased rate may have caused the blindness in dinosaurs before they reached their reproductive stage.
This theory is supported by the fact that placental mammals lack in their eyes a protective oil drop which implies that most of the mammals on the Earth have passed through a nocturnal phase in their course of evolution. Thus, when all the dinosaurs were going blind in the day, the mammals survived because they were nocturnal in their habit and hence took over dinosaurs. This also accounts for why reptiles were saved from becoming blind as they being ectothermic would come out only in the night and thus saved from the effect of global warming and damage to their eyes.
Report abuse
This is a Telegraph link detailing the exploding Dinosaurs theory. A bit like Piltdown man, they now realise that they didn’t blow up as taught in 1976.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/dinosaurs/9172233/Exploding-dinosaur-myth-burst-by-scientists.html
Report abuse
This contains reference to the prints that I had heard about, you will obviously be aware of the many accurate pictures found, pointing to the fact that mankind had witnessed them.
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/giants.htm
Report abuse
You may want to check out the credentials of at least Three of the leading proponents of that link you provided.
See
Carl Baugh
Clifford Burdick
Don Patton
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html
Report abuse
I take on board the comments made in the link, however, would you not expect comments like these, if individuals broke rank and cut across what many people want to peddle.
We still have all of the accurate paintings left unexplained. Of course we have sightings worldwide even during the last 200 years.
The scientific bodies are so excited, when they make these discoveries, but then when they realise the implications, things go very quiet as in the case of the Coelacanth found alive and well last century.
Note to Martino the myopic scientist – I am quoting your people, not Bible, in fact I don’t think I have quoted Bible at all, I am using science, common sense and evidence. You could do much worse than get aquanted with those three.
Report abuse
Martino – You really refuse to look through Galileo’s metaphorical scope. You post an insult, followed by a proposal that bits of iridium loaded rocks, wiped out only dinosaurs.
You must stick to facts when you try and debate a topic. You have the most incredible faith in this evolution religion, which might be okay for you, as you are prepared to put reason and fact to one side, but as a nonbeliever I need evidence.
Do you not even think for a moment, that all animals would have been affected.
Does it not cross your mind that soft tissue would not even last as long as your link proposes.
Report abuse
bcb – I will have to have a look what I can find as most of what I have heard has come from books. I am sure that it will be available on the net.
I will have a brief look tonight, if not it will be Monday evening before I have time.
Report abuse
Sorry bcb, it seems they all died of hayfever as you will see from pasted item below.
It was a real idea. It was postulated by E Baldwin in 1964 in his book An Introduction to Comparative Biochemistry.
He was given support in 1983, though when R H Dott Jr published “Itching eyes and dinosaur demise” Geology 11:126, which linked the rise in pollen production from Angiosperms to terminal hay fever among the dinosauria.
Report abuse
I think the dinosaurs perished because there was no room for them in the ark
Report abuse
….surely from a Christian viewpoint dinosaurs died because God decreed it be so…no accidents in God’s world you know…all pre-destined.
Report abuse
Vic – Have you converted to a Calvinist, because it sounds very much like it. I think permissive will and sovereign will are a bit too much to divert into on here.
If everything is predestined, is it Martinos fault that he gets over excited.
Is it my fault that I can’t spell or get my punctuation right?
Report abuse
Steeplechase…it is no-body’s fault but God’s…so we can all smirk like innocent little lambs in the sure knowledge we are not ‘mea culpa’
Report abuse
Whoops, he’s off on one again. Steeplechase the creationist who insists man walked with the dinosaurs and who uses a motley collection of old religious tracts written circa 2,000 years ago as a ‘manual for life’ in the modern world.
Never mind the dinosaurs mate, you are away with the fairies and there is no point ‘debating’ with you other than to have a bit of fun exposing your most potty statements (evolution = faith??!!!) for what they are.
Report abuse
Martino – I don’t believe any of the above, I am pasting in, those that you follow.
Of course you have faith, as the factual scientific evidence doesn’t tie up. You just have to ignore and truck on in blind faith.
When science discovered dinosaurs living in the 1900′s did it not knock your faith even a bit. I think even with your level of factual myopia,you realised that men and women were in existance.
IWV – I wouldn’t imagine that to be a problem as they didn’t need to take fully grown adults.There are also many reports the world over to suggest that they were around after that time.
Report abuse
Dinosaurs living in the 1900s. It just gets pottier and pottier. And yes, I do know about the coelacanth but that is not what you meant. At least try to get your punctuation right next time.
Report abuse
Martino, my grasp of English leaves a bit to be desired, I agree, but I have never claimed to be anything special. I hope that you are thankful for your retentive mind that can recall spelling etc.
You might have a grasp of grammar and punctuation, but you are not so good a psychic. Why would I type Coelacanth if I meant Brontosaurus. There are many others that I could have used, but as the Coelacanth has been videoed it was a nice easy one for you to grasp.
I will try and find a nice video of a different one for you to watch.
I think we are beginning to make a little progress now, as you understand that a so called extinct prehistoric fish, is alive and well in 2013 on planet earth, along with mankind.
Report abuse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mneDhOtVEQw
Martino, prepare to eat a fairly substantial slice of the proverbial.
You were much safer talking to your kettle, you are getting battered and publicly humiliated with your scorn being turned back on you.
For every vindictive and inaccurate remark you make in my direction, you just receive double the number of facts back in return.
I think you are going to have to either admit you have been brainwashed and fooled or move on to make fun of people that are a bit easier to impress, because thus far, your credibility as a boy that understands nature and history is lower than a lizards loins.
If you wanted to know the truth, I wouldn’t make fun of your inadequacies, but with your pompous and hostile manner, I feel that you need to be taught a public lesson.
Please let me know if you need any more evidence as the more I have looked this weekend, the more I find that I never knew before.
Report abuse
I think I must be getting to you now Steeplechase. My understanding of nature and history admittedly is on a par with your understanding of when and when not to place an apostrophe but at least I don’t believe, as an article of faith, that my ancestors were trotting around with velociraptors, triceratops and the like.
You’ll be telling us next that T-Rex was alive and well as late as the second half of the 1900s. 20th century boy, bang a gong, get it on, ride a white swan… Do you know what? I think you may be right!
Report abuse
Martino…they did, they did, dinosaurs were around even later…my son saw the film and it was made in the last two decade or so…you know Hollywood wouldn’t make it up…you are such a cynic.
And Sidney Pottier Pottier wasn’t in that film I’ll have you know! He was in The Dark of The Night, like the rest of us.
Report abuse