So Professor Michael Reiss wants Creationism to be taught in Science lessons in the UK (BBC article), and he uses the rather abstract reasoning that, "should be seen as a cultural "world view". Well I have another cultural view for him. Mine: he is a plonker, a doik, a moron, an idiot, a stupid arsehole, a git, a goit, a twonk and an unsufferable ass.
Science is not the place for religion and rather than allowing people to explore beliefs it will in fact just muddy what a science lesson is about.
How about this Professor bollock-brain: I think the number three is irrelevant to Maths and in fact is a type of tomato, so biology should now discuss why 3s grow on trees resemble a vegetable but are in fact a fruit, and the sequence of integers is 1 2 4 5… No, clearly not, and this is preposterous, like your argument.
Why do people keep confusing evolution, a natural process that we can OBSERVE in action with the various beliefs for the Creation of mankind? Whether or not man was created by God or the FSM, whether or not God exists is f*cking irrelevant in terms of Science. We can observe evolution in process, we can see the changes and record them. There is no doubt about it.
(This allagory is stolen from my wife)
It is like the apple under the tree. If I see an apple under a tree I might presume that gravity made it fall from the tree, whereas you may presume that somebody put it there, neither of us can be absolutely sure who is correct as neither of us directly observed what happened, but we can both still agree that gravity exists, just because the apple was placed doesn't mean that gravity ceases to exist (for soft twonks like Professor Reiss man is the apple btw).
Now I have no idea whether Professor Plonker (a biologist) believes in mans' evolution or creation (I guess the latter by the fact that he is a CofE Minister), but he must know that evolution is observable, therefore taught as a science, I don't give a flying f*ck whether man evolved by this process or not, and I don't think we need to teach evolution in context to man as there are far easier examples of evolution to use, but I do expect science to be taught in a science class, not belief.
Otherwise at the same time can we also teach about the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
(Apologies for the harsh rhetoric, but arguments like this serve no purpose at all and in fact cause more harm by muddying the waters and confusing a process with a belief.)