Nobody is talking about teaching mythology in science classes. What people ARE talking about is Intelligent Design, which is clearly a testable scientific hypothesis and, in many instances, all anybody has wanted to do was insert one page or a sticker in highschool biology books noting that there was a controversy involving evolution, and that about half the American populace remains unconvinced of it which is true.
EVEN THAT much of a request is seen as an overwhelming threat by the evos and they go running off to the ACLU (Anti-American Commie Libertine Union) and their little crooked judges with lawsuits at the least hint of somebody acting as if there were any question on the subject.
How is ID testable.
In evolutionary science, there is no controversy--or at least not that kind. They fight like cats and dogs over the smallest details, but ID does not get in the door.
Why?
The controversy that we are begged to teach--"Teach the Controversy!" (oh, pretty please, just a camel's nose sticker) is a product of a PR machine designed to force Christian dogma back into science classes. And, I suspect, in such a way as to not be critically evaluated, which is what science does best. Critical evaluation is the last thing you really want.
"What people ARE talking about is Intelligent Design, which is clearly a testable scientific hypothesis."
Not it isn't, Ted.
And I hope you are ready to put stickers in physics books noting that Gravity is a theory and quite conreversial (and it is within science circles).
Please elaborate.
Consider: a geneticist finds the same genetic markers in the genome of pigs and cows. Using the ToE, he postulates that they will also be found in the gonomes of giraffes, hippos, deer and whales, among others. Testing proves him right.
Why isn't the ID-ist forced to say "I dunno where else the genetic markers will be found, it's whereever the designer put them", ie forced to admit thet he has no theory to test?
Show me a clearly testable scientific hypothesis for Intelligent Design. Just one. Any one.
Show that is the hypothesis is testable by outlining the tests.
If you can do this, you will have my 100% support.
So, are you going to tell us how ID is testable?
Or should I cue the crickets?