SNIP
Similarly, that gravity exists is a fact -- the "theory" part is how it works, aka the theory of gravitation. Theories explain how facts occur, or are strung together, and are supported by evidence. In science, a theory is "stronger" than a fact.
Thats slippery slope as my physics professor and many other prominent scientists will tell you Gravity is a LAW. Aditionally the stronger than a fact is also inaccurate. The theory of relativity by einstein was accepted as the best answer not the correct one. This was of course until M-theory was suggested and then further supported by Higgs boson.
All evidence thus far indicates that the
factual, observable process of evolution accounts for the variety of life we see today, derived from common descent. No evidence has come forward, in the 150+ years since Darwin published his theory, that it is inherently incorrect, despite the onslaught of disagreement early on, and despite the lingering resentment of the idea by creationists (who still have yet to provide any irrefutable evidence in support of their view). Like I said, there is no controversy -- only a group of people who refuse to accept what mountains of evidence indicate.
Factual? Observable? Evolution cant be observed or proven thus it is STILL treated as the "best" theory on how life came to be. When scientists wont even say its the ONLY theory that should tell you they are wishy washy. Evolution doesnt stand up to scrutiny such as explaining a bacterial flagellum or why rocks havent gotten up and started walking, If you beleive in evolution from the evidence you have been presented then I can respect that. But to say its factual and creationism(Intelligent design) is only believe by idiots is just pure none sense. While the govt is against creationism from a religious persepective I know here in WA they are now also offering Intelligent design as an alternative theory.
Without understand the process of evolution, most of biology doesn't make sense -- thus "teaching the controversy" in schools will lead to confusion in science classrooms.
Do we really want people discouraged from going into science because one group wants to dismiss the field as "promoting an evil, unsupported theory" like evolution? Is that how to encourage innovation? If you insist that your child be taught creationism, then send your child to Sunday School -- there are more churches and other houses of religion in this country than there are public schools, so it shouldn't be difficult to find one. But leave science in the science classroom -- we need more scientists.
Yes that is the duty of any good education establisment to offer all possiblities and theories and let the students decide what they believe. Teaching only one view point is call propaganda or brainwashing. You dont have to go into sermens about creationism from the religious stand point but I think it should be at least discussed in classrooms as a competing theory. Also Intelligent design does have some gaps just as full on creationism and darwins theory but things make a lot more sense. Now whether you think Intelligent design is suggesting we are made by aliens or some deity is where it gets murky. Be VERY careful before suggesting that our schools should only teach one way of thinking in any field. That is a very dangerous slippery slope to go down and leads to an ignorant and suppressed society.
