re: #402 cpuller

I’m not a particularly religious person since I was raised in a single parent home and we weren’t taken to church much. So, you know that about me. I do consider myself Christian. I’ve been Christened and I’ve been Baptized.

I’m not sold on 6000 years (isn’t it getting closer to 7000? :P) And I’m also not sold on evolution to the extent many are. Count me in the group thinking there’s something else. I don’t want Creationism taught in school but I also don’t want evolution taught as if it is settled science. I do get the whole “Well, science keeps questioning itself” consideration. But, it seems they don’t question themselves as much on evolution as they might ought to.

There, kill me now and get it over with.

The central tenets of evolutionary theory - random genetic mutastion and nonrandom environmental mutation - are as settled as empirical science gets. For 150 years, experimental researchers have been investigating and interrogating these tenets, and ALL of the empirical evidence they have derived has supported evolution, while NONE of the empirical evidence has contradicted it.

As to your suggestion that we should teach bioscience without teaching evolutionary theory? That makes about as much sense as teaching geology without teaching plate tectonics, or teaching about the solar system without teaching heliocentrism, or teaching physics without teaching relativity theory or quantum mechanics. As Theodore Dobzhanslky correctly and consisely stated: “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution.”

pbs.org