<div id="RTEContent">Phil Nisbet <pcnisbet1@hotmail.com> wrote:<br> <br> > scrapped. Once an idea is shown to be incorrect the only place it should be<br> > taught is in history of science classes. If a scrapped and incorrect theory<br> > is still being taught as science, it is no longer science it’s Dogma.<br> <br> Agreed.<br> <br> > All I hear in the debate from both sides of the ID vs. evolution is an<br> > argument between two groups of religious zealots. One side of this debate<br> > wants to teach an unprovable theory and the other side wants to teach an<br> > incorrect one. Why should we debate either in science?<br> <br> Why do you think evolution through natural selection can't be proven?<br> We should debate evolution through natural selection in science because it is the best explanation we have for the origins of modern lifeforms.<br> <br> > You have made the case that Intelligent Design should not be taught in<br> !
>
science. Darwin’s Origin of the Species is just as much a speculation and<br> > one that has and can be proven false, hence should not be taught either.<br> <br> What do you mean by 'Darwin's Origin of the Species'? Are you talking about the ideas in his book 'On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection" or about our current understanding of evolution through natural selection? Either way, how have the ideas been proven false?<br> <br> > If schools are going to teach ‘evolution’, they should be teaching the<br> > science, not Dogmas of either side of that debate.<br> <br> Agreed, but there's no need to use 'scare quotes'. <br> </div><p>
<hr size=1> <a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTFqODRtdXQ4BF9TAzMyOTc1MDIEX3MDOTY2ODgxNjkEcG9zAzEEc2VjA21haWwtZm9vdGVyBHNsawNmYw--/SIG=110oav78o/**http%3a//farechase.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.</a>