Scientists are expected to present evidence for what they teach to children as (always tentative) "truths".
Actually, for the large part it's not the scientists who produce the materials used to teach children, at least children in the primary and secondary school systems (ie, K to 12th grade). Most of those textbooks are written by professional textbook writers, not by scientists. As a result, not only is the content determined by the publisher -- who is strongly influenced by pressure groups, such as creationists, and by considerations of what will sell in the larger states where the school boards are themselves pressured by special interest groups such as creationists. Add on to that the writers' own misconceptions about science and evolution.
For example, in the mid-1980's William J. Bennetta (later of "The Textbook League") was involved with the California State Board of Education's purchase of a new high school biology textbook. He enlisted the help of a group of scientists to review the candidate textbooks. They found all of those books to be filled with misconceptions, factual errors, and just plain wrong statements. Even though none of those books were acceptable, they did choose the least unacceptable of them and presented a list of corrections that needed to be made before it could be minimally acceptable. The publisher made a few of the corrections and then the Board accepted it without informing Bennetta and the scientists, essentially acting behind their backs. As a result, students were being taught wrong "information".
What Lucy was complaining about was that the press reports their version of a scientist's new findings before any peer review has taken place. Actually, what I've seen is that the press doesn't normally learn of these discoveries until the scientist has published it, meaning that the peer review process has indeed taken place.
However, the real concern should be the misinformation contained in the textbooks that the students are learning from and that the teacher (who is not always trained in science; eg, biology teacher John Peloza was schooled in PhysEd and my son's biology teacher in middle school was the home ec teacher) is depending on. Textbooks that are written without input from the scientists.
{When you search for God, y}ou can't go to the people who believe already. They've made up their minds and want to convince you of their own personal heresy.("The Jehovah Contract", AKA "Der Jehova-Vertrag", by Viktor Koman, 1984)
Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the world. (from filk song "Word of God" by Dr. Catherine Faber,
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML)
Of course, if Dr. Mortimer's surmise should be correct and we are dealing with forces outside the ordinary laws of Nature, there is an end of our investigation. But we are bound to exhaust all other hypotheses before falling back upon this one.(Sherlock Holmes in
The Hound of the Baskervilles)
Gentry's case depends upon his halos remaining a mystery. Once a naturalistic explanation is discovered, his claim of a supernatural origin is washed up. So he will not give aid or support to suggestions that might resolve the mystery. Science works toward an increase in knowledge; creationism depends upon a lack of it. Science promotes the open-ended search; creationism supports giving up and looking no further. It is clear which method Gentry advocates.("Gentry's Tiny Mystery -- Unsupported by Geology" by J. Richard Wakefield,
Creation/Evolution Issue XXII, Winter 1987-1988, pp 31-32)
™ Version 4.2
(1)
