>>Evolution is quite simple to understand, but it is made a convoluted subject, very hand wavy with pseudo-complexity grafted on to give it an aura of gravitas it doesn’t merit, and is often subjective which makes it hard to teach even at the highest level of a research institution and even more so at secondary level non-research universities.<<
I admit it — you lost me.
TToE is indeed quite simple to understand. The basics are there for anyone to understand.
There is a teaching problem, but I suspect the subject matter (TToE, the USC or so many other subjects) is not the problem.
Teachers just don’t know how to TEACH and the students, who have spent their lives getting medals for having “tried” just don’t know how to LEARN.
This isn’t TToE at all and I think you and I are arguing about something we agree upon based on specifics rather than the principles we see the same way.
Of all the gifts God gave us, His Children, the ability to teach was the greatest (seriously — Christ enumerated them). My mom had it — I kind of have it but my foolish passion inhibits my ability to use it some times (this being one of those times).
Your assertions I am not sure are borne out.
If your assertions are correct there would be a corresponding difficulty across the disciplines.
But there does not seem to be the same problem with chemistry, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, physiology, physics etc...
Why is evolution the exception?
My observations are
Evolution is simple to understand, but it is sparse.
It barely merits a section in a biology class to explain.
It is puffed out with a lot of hand waving and what can be called scientific histrionics to make a full class, much less a major.
I don't remember that enumeration: do you have a reference?