(January 2, 2012 at 4:25 pm)Perhaps Wrote: What's wrong with this? When I attended my middle school, and even high school (both of which were public) we conducted experiments then came to conclusions, we then compared those conclusions to accepted theories and saw differences and similarities. I'm all for teaching multiple perspectives and theories, if the most evidence falls behind evolution then there is nothing to worry about. I'd rather have my children grow in understanding by negating other theories with evidence as opposed to being taught a single definitive 'fact'.
There is a distinct difference between a law and a theory, one never changes, and the other does all the time. Nothing wrong with teaching children that knowledge is limited and that nothing is definitively true. In fact, if you take a step back, allowing creationism to be disregarded and negated by the youth as there is no evidence to support it would bring about a great deal of intellectual growth and maturity.
This is all well and good, and would work if the creationists actually were interested in the scientific method. Most of them only appear interested in peddling their beliefs as truth.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
