You responded to my post 12, which asked why only evolution is singled out as a subject matter. You wish, I suppose, to create the appearance of dealing with my question. It's an artless artifice.
The answer is, essentially, "Who cares if evolution is 'singled out' for this disclaimer if the disclaimer is TRUE?"
You don't know or care a thing about science. Please keep your religion in church where it belongs. The disclaimer is an obfuscation, attempting to imply that because evolution, only evolution, is "a theory," that it should be regarded as a hypothesis or conjecture rather than a fact.
But we have the fact that life has evolved over the history of the planet. We might as well be able to teach what we understand about that without interference from the witch-doctor crowd.
Yes, asked and answered. How many repetitions do you need?
"Evolution is a theory" is a true statement. I see nothing wrong with putting true statements in books. And I don't consider the whine "why not put this disclaimer in front of other theories too??" to be a serious rebuttal, even if you do.
Frankly, I see nothing wrong with putting such a disclaimer in front of other theories too. So that's that, we're both happy.
How many times do you want me to repeat all this?
You wish, I suppose, to create the appearance of dealing with my question. It's an artless artifice.
As opposed to an artful artifice, I suppose....
You don't know or care a thing about science.
I don't? Gee, you sure know a lot about my biography from a few posts.
(These silly ad hominem attacks sure make the evolutionist side look more "scientific". Lucky for evolutionists, I don't judge them all by your behavior. But it doesn't help.)
Please keep your religion in church where it belongs.
What "religion"? When did I even bring up religion here? Are you under the impression that you know what my "religion" is? Are you certain that I even have a "religion"?
More silly ad hominem. It's rather sad because you don't have a leg to stand on either. You don't know jack about my biography and yet you're resting a huge portion of your fallacious argument on it for some reason.
The disclaimer is an obfuscation, attempting to imply that because evolution, only evolution, is "a theory,"
I never said that "only evolution" is a theory. I also think that all other theories are theories too. Please try to keep straight who you're talking to. You keep arguing with someone else (or perhaps with phantoms in your own head), not with me, because I never said any such thing.
that it should be regarded as a hypothesis or conjecture rather than a fact.
A "theory", in basic terms, is a hypothesis or conjecture: a hypothesis or conjecture about how stuff works or happens, for which there is some amount of evidence.
So actually I agree 100% with the statement that evolution (the whole "theory of evolution" shebang, not just evolution meaning "change in populations") is a "hypothesis or conjecture rather than a fact", for which there is evidence, and I think a responsible science teacher would frame it in these terms (followed by a presentation of the evidence) to her students. All of which is perfectly consistent with putting the truthful disclaimer at the front of the book, as is proposed. Best,
Keep your atheism out of the schools where it does not belong. Atheism is as much a religious viewpoint as Christianity. Just because there is no church of the pond scum, it does not mean that it is not a religion. The vituperation, anger, and meanness shown by evolutionists at religious people show quite well that your beliefs have nothing to do with science and are completely based on faith.