[Virginia-American]

the many reputable creation scientists have plenty of scientific rigor...they shouldn't be excluded from public schools. Maybe in a totalitarian state, but not in America.

They should be allowed to teach their stuff as though it were science when, and only when, it is actually accepted as science, and not before. This will take some doing. Here's an example I posted on another thread:

When an evolutionist is told that a genetic marker (ERV, pseudogene, etc) is found in the same place in the genome of pigs and cows, but is not found in horses, he can tell you that it will definitely be found in the genomes of deer, sheep, giraffes, hippos and whales, it will definitely not be found in the genomes of rhinos, elephants, people, platypuses, and porcupines, and that there isn't enough data to make a prediction about camels and llamas. (So far, all such predictions have been correct; ie ToE is falsifiable). Maybe DI or AiG could sponsor research to find examples where the ToE's predictions are false

If an anti-evolution activist, whether an ID-ist or a Biblical/Koranic creationist, is presented with the genetic marker that's present in pigs and cows but not in horses, just what exactly will his predictions be? How are they arrived at?

Neither ID nor creationism will be taken seriously until they can answer questions like the above. And in hte meantime, why should something that's demonstrably weaker be taught at all? Affirmative action?

[Lexinom]

They should be allowed to teach their stuff as though it were science when, and only when, it is actually accepted as science, and not before. This will take some doing. Here's an example I posted on another thread

There's a difficulty there: Yes, what they teach IS science, but it is rejected by the establishment for the same reason Galileo's teachings were rejected by the establishment of his time. We're not collectively, as a society, interested in free thought...

I've spent a good deal of time challenging the epistomological underpinnings of scientific positivism. Swinging across to the other end of the spectrum to brass tacks, it would be good if parents could choose to educate their children in either a humanistic school (public school system) or parochial school - and not be forced to fund the one or the other against their will. Pro-choice, any one?

[fabian]

the truth is that there are many scientific elements taught by creationists and it simply is accepted as a valid theory. Not by you; but that doesn't change the facts. You should be just a little more open minded. After all, the science pointing to creationism is alot more fascinating than the poor science of evolutionism. The facts are there for all to see and the kids who are denied them in school will find them on their own when they want to. But they shouldn't be denied them in a tax payers school.