BBC: ignores Britain's maritime heritage.

Libby Purves is a proper sailor. She's owned a Contessa 26 (nods of approval from all who know their boats), crewed on sail training square riggers and writes for the UK cruising mag Yachting Monthly. She's wiped the salt spray off her face, has lived life at 20 degrees and knows of what she writes. She's also a regular BBC broadcaster hosting Midweek on Radio 4 and writes for The Times, the newspaper for which the Beagle's Captain Robert FitzRoy became weather forecaster later in his career. In her most recent column she comments on its shabby treatment of our maritime heritage. Evidence for the prosecution was its refusal to broadcast the bicentenary of the Battle of Trafalgar in 2005. It clashed with the G8 summit and the Glastonbury festival. In Libby's words:

You get a sense of men in suits desperately clawing for youthful edginess, for membership of any hip minority rather than horrid old “Middle England”. During that week of Live 8 craziness, another huge BBC presence was down at Glastonbury straining to be cool. Meanwhile, there was the Trafalgar Fleet Review – tall ships and fireworks, a unique assembly of international vessels, a powerful message about the continuing importance of the maritime sector to everything we do. It was spectacular: it drew 750,000 people to the banks of the Solent (six times as many as Glastonbury, three times as many as Live 8). Yet the BBC would not carry it on terrestrial television, even though cameras were there for News 24. People without satellite or Freeview (who are legion, and often fond of ships) were dismayed, betrayed at a national hour by the national broadcaster.

The snub was plainly a matter of policy, not resources: it would have been possible to simulcast News 24 on BBC1 for the crucial hour, replacing (for God’s sake!) an Antiques Roadshow and a tennis recording. But no: the message was: “Ugh, ships, so retro! And ugh, imperialistic! Who cares? Everyone, like, prefers Madonna and Geldof and Primal Scream.”

This from the national broadcaster of a nation whose identity and history is shaped by our ability to build ships, sail them well and sometimes recklessly, win naval battles, do things that history views askance (slavery, colonisation) and do things necessary to civilisation (exploration, surveying, trade, helping some bloke discover evolution). As I mentioned in a previous post, the maritime heritage of another country is getting BBC airtime. Or you could always have your ship burn down.

Now, we at the Beagle Project think we've got a rather neat idea with lots of TV appeal: a great many TV production companies almost incontinent with the possibilities of working with us agree. The BBC doesn't. A shame, because as anyone who has seen the (insert superlative of choice) wildlife series presented by David Attenborough, when they do it they're worldbeaters. And our talking a replica Beagle round the world would give them the biggest vistas to film, the most significant theory in biology to communicate and the biggest questions facing humanity to confront.

Reasons we need a Beagle (n)

because the Church of England's head of education Rev. Jan Ainsworth has suggested that intelligent design should be taught in schools:

Ms Ainsworth told the Times Educational Supplement: "While it is not something I would subscribe to, it is a recognition that there are different ways of looking at the evidence. You would get howls of protest from the scientific community, which would say there is absolutely no place for it in the curriculum. But you could do it in history of science," she added, pointing out that religious education lessons in CofE schools include discussions of different beliefs.

Rev Ainsworth is responsible for 4,600 schools. The CofE's spokesman was reported to be playing down the significance of the comments:

A spokesman for the Church of England said Ms Ainsworth was "simply representing the fact that some schools currently discuss intelligent design within the context of lessons exploring how our understanding of science has developed historically". He continued: "Ms Ainsworth was not suggesting that intelligent design should be taught as a scientifically-based theory, but merely stating that some schools do include the topic on their history of science curriculum, and that she does not propose to prevent them from doing so. "She believes that schools should take a lead from the national curriculum, and use discretion in enhancing this with discussions about the theory of intelligent design where appropriate," he added.

Sigh.
Write down 100 times: Intelligent design is not a theory, it is an opinion with no supporting evidence and is based on an argument from ignorance and incredulity.

Hat-tip Pharyngula for ruining an otherwise lovely Saturday morning with this. And to MissPrism who made the Darwin puppet and supported us through a blog and buysale. MissP is a good oeuf and currently spending time being put right by the NHS following a torn calf muscle. Click on over and help her recuperation with some nice comments. The Darwin puppet found a new home in Canada thanks to a generous donation from an Humblewoodcutter. I only hope Chas did his share of the lifting in the recent house move.