"Teach the Controversy!" Facepalm*

[Tonus]

Do you think that if there is scientific information, which weakens the case for evolution, that it should not be taught along with the evidence for it?

But that's not how science is done. If there is "information" that challenges all or part of the theory of evolution, then it should be tested scientifically. Presumably, this information comes in the form of an observation around which a hypothesis can be formed with outcomes that can either verify or falsify it, then experiments and tests can be performed and the results outlined in articles that are submitted for peer review. Through this process, the theory might be amended, changed, or even completely replaced.

We should not just grab at pieces of "scientific information" and then "teach them along with the evidence" for evolution. If there are areas where evolution can be falsified or changed, then make observations and do the research and submit the findings for peer review. This is, IMO, the crux of the 'teach the controversy' argument-- that there is some piece of information that threatens to undermine the theory of evolution and scientists and teachers are refusing to give 'the other side' a proper place at the discussion. That's not how science is done. There are methods and mechanisms in place for changing or replacing scientific theories-- use them.