By not covering Norse creationism in schools, it appears that they can't prove it's wrong.
By not covering creationism in schools, it appears that they can't prove it's wrong. Nobody is expecting creation to be taught as science, but it is going to come up in class anyway. Even if the teachers don't address it, the students probably will. Everyone knows about the controversy and science's best defense would be to have some good answers.
Well, first of all, I'm glad someone on the creationism side has dropped the ridiculous fig leaf of a term known as "ID" and decided to be up front about what she wants taught in the schools. That's refreshing, and at least it weeds out the Xenu fans and those who claim a role for Galactus in world events.
Second of all, however, one must ask, what theoretical framework do creationists espouse that would result in falsifiability criteria? If your "theory's" sole answer to every inquiry is that "well, it's that way because God did it and it's a miracle and we can't know the mind of God" then of course no one can prove the theory wrong.