Yes. It is not an alternative religious view, but science. It should be presented.
But it should NOT be presented the way historians make THEIR presentations. Giving the supporting data, to be reviewed, along with the conclusions would be science. This is not science.
This is "history" in another field of study. And given what IS widely known about the history of science, such presentations are the pedagogical equivalent of using "hot girls" to sell beer.
Defending such presentations differs from defending such advertising only in that the latter is shameless while the former is supercilious.