(November 18, 2008 at 8:22 pm)Daystar Wrote: But you just said that evidence can always change to some completely different conclusion. Why teach them anything regarding how we got here?There are a couple of problems with this:
Did Christendom teach creation before evolution?
1) If implemented, we wouldn't teach anything in schools for fear that it would at some point turn out to be "wrong". That isn't how we learn. The only way to address the issue is to present the evidence, teach the current theory, and then once people have learnt that they can challenge it in any way they wish.
2) The evidence does not change, merely the interpretation of the evidence. The fact of Evolution is clear through the evidence (it happens, we've seen it happen, etc). Any alternate theory (explanation) to the current theory of Evolution would have to explain the evidence we currently have (i.e. it would have to explain how the Evolution we see affects life). So if evidence were discovered that supported a creation, the whole creation theory would have to include explanations of the evidence already at hand.
So we have a simple choice: Don't teach anyone about the theory of Evolution, or teach people about it, show them the evidence, etc.
The first option would destroy a large slice of the study of medicine and disease (because it explains drug-resistant viruses, etc), as well as all the other various uses our understanding of Evolution has. The second option is a tried and tested method, and whilst we may be entirely wrong about the theory of Evolution, our experience has shown how science is very good at correcting things. Only a few hundred years ago we thought the Earth was flat, now we don't. Same thing with the orbit of the Earth around the Sun, same thing with every scientific blunder. The correct explanation of the evidence always comes through in the end. There is no reason to think that the same can't be said for today's scientific community.