re: #189 BryanS

An honest b) would say that. I say it helps the debate because it explains what science is so that we can clearly defend excluding religion. There is no such thing as a scientific theory that cannot be modified based on new evidence—it happens all the time and from time-to-time it happens to “long settled science”.

You’re absolutely right, BryanS! The quote comes from a book I’m reading by Richard Morris called “The Evolutionists, The Struggle for Darwin’s Soul” (2001), page 62. But as we all know, some Evolutionists are afraid to question parts of evolution and won’t tolerate those who do.

Here’s another quote from the same book:

Today scientists are arguing about evolution as fiercely as ever. Naturally, they are not debating the question of whether of not evolution happened … Although there is broad agreement among evolutionary scientists on many points, there are important scientific issues that remain unsettled. I have written this book to explain what the arguments are about.

Scientists expect to be skeptical and involved in controversy. So should the students learning science. Students would be better served if the various questions and controversies about the theory of evolution are taught, rather than a dogmatic teaching and rote acceptance, which is very dull indeed.

Creationism does not belong in science classes. But I would suggest that Von Helmont’s, Redi’s, and Pasteur’s experiments regarding the spontaneous generation controversy, Lamarckian evolution, and other historical controversies should most certainly be taught. Certainly the controversies concerning global warming, genetic engineering, cloning, and stem cell research cannot be ignored either.

-sk