20 years of the Creation/ID science curriculum

I think the ID camp wants students to develop critical thinking skills and so wants both ID and evo theories to be taught and examined critically. Frankly, I cannot fathom why anyone wanting students to be educated would balk at, for example, teaching criticisms of evo theory.

I disagree. In fact, there are more, albeit few, ID papers discussing the tenets and ideas related to ID than there have been validating the basic tenets and assumptions of The Theory of Evolution. Admittedly, part of that is Darwinism was largely accepted outside the peer-review process as we understand it today.Nevertheless, there is quite a bit of publication related to ID, both in biology and other fields, as ID stretches past just biology.

Evos have resorted to the courts to silence criticism of their theory. Btw, Dover really settled nothing because the judge, obviously biased, just copied and pasted his ruling complete with typos from evo advocates. It was a sham and is viewed that way by everyone that isn't an evo.

Well, I may getting stretched too thin to answer all you have posted, but I do see credible ID theories and believe ID in general matches the view of reality shown in quantum physics and ideas like the participatory universe of Wheeler's.But regardless, take a look at some textbooks. Criticisms of evo models are generally not presented, and it's not a straw man argument. Even basic things such as the fact some evolution occurs does not validate that observed processes of evolution equate macroevolution, and this is pretty important because leaving this criticism out leaves students somewhat brainwashed. Darwin's finches, peppered moths, natural selection don't amount to a hill of beans really as evidence for the Theory of Evolution, and students need to be encouraged to think about that.A good example people can grasp is to view dog breeds. You can breed dog versions. heck, you can argue you can breed dog species as all canine "species" can interbreed, but that raises another issue of where the term "species" is used in a misleading manner sometimes.But what happens with pure-bred dogs? They are in-bred and over time, it's not a good thing, is it? Evolution occurs but it decreases the breed's ability to evolve further by limiting genetic variation in the breed.So really every time evos point out natural selection, Darwin's finches, peppered moths, it needs to be pointed out that there is a very strong argument that all of these things are strong evidence against Darwin's theory of evolution, and not for it.But that argument and a ton of others, which are not straw man arguments, will not be taught to students because it is not allowed, by force of law and politics.Btw, not trying to divert the topic but just show an example of criticism that is not included. Students are taught to accept Darwinism as fact without considering the arguments against the assumptions of evolutionary models.Edit to add: I had not read percy's post just prior. Sorry for wandering. I think if IDers had their way, what we would have is much more critical thinking and much more research of the basic assumptions of many things such as whether the universe is essentially material and physical or not, and whether natural selection is an evolutionary or conservative process, etc, etc,....I think students would be smarter and science would significantly progress.Edited by randman, : No reason given.

Hmmm.....wandering off-topic is something I've been warned about so discussions of Dover should be on a different thread, I suppose.I think considering the narrow confines of the OP, my answer that I think critical thinking skills would improve and science move forward is the sum of the matter....not sure how I can add anything else here.

this was the comment by admin Take it up with admin if you think Dover is applicable. I have stated my reasons why I think ID would help students, namely by better developing their critical thinking skills.

The non-evos appear to be the more open-minded and less inclined towards indoctrination as they (we) are arguing for more openness in the class-room and both or perhaps more than "both" sides be taught in schools.Evos are arguing students should be kept from hearing creationist and ID arguments.You'd think if they felt their views were so much more supported factually that they would welcome the chance to have them presented side by side with their critics, but that's not the case.

I have to ask you and don't take it as offensive, please, but do you genuinely believe that? You think if ID and creationism are taught alongside Darwinism that "there will be no more secular scientists emerging"?

You sure about that?Can you show where the 1st amendment states that because it clearly does not? The idea is the state cannot interfere with matters of the Church, not the other way around.Also, Jefferson did not write the Bill of Rights. Madison did.