"Ok kids, we're discussing evolution. I am obligated to tell you that it is controversial. Not within the scientific community, mind you, but with a number of religious people. But, as per the law, I have to inform you that you will see controversy over evolution"
That's kind of what we do in the UK:
quote:
Some people find it hard to accept that such complexity could have evolved through natural selection. Some religious people believe that all living things on Earth were made by God, or that life was begun by God but then evolved through natural selection. We will probably never be absolutely certain about how life began, as no one was there to observe it. But scientists must base their theories on evidence.
From
here
Kind of like that.
quote:
...shall not be construed to promote any religious or non-religious doctrine...
I don't see the need to put this in there, if the intentions really are secular. I think they've quit trying to convince the courts that ID is science and are gearing up to promote something like 'irreducible complexity' or 'specified complexity' as if they were scientific objections to evolution.
If they did, I hope the objectors will point out that biochemical irreducible complexity is a prediction of evolution, not an objection. (The prediction was made in the twenties I think, and again in the fifties)
™ Version 4.2
