[A0ri]

Then you do not object the removal of cosmology from public courses of education. Seeing as you seem to want to disassociate the field from evolution when they are taught hand in hand. (Note: A similar argument was used by the Kansas Board of Education) It was accepted that cosmology was a major part in "evolution".

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Then you do not object the removal of cosmology from public courses of education. Seeing as you seem to want to disassociate the field from evolution when they are taught hand in hand."

They are not taught hand in hand. They have nothing to do with each other, at all. If the Big Bang theory were disproved tomorrow, the ToE would not be altered. In fact, the competing model (steady state) that the BB overturned was actually BETTER for evolution, in that it postulated a universe with no beginning. The BB puts a constraint on time for evolution, though that constraint is still extremely long. In either case though the earth would still be 4.6 billion years old.

[Dimensio]

Then you do not object the removal of cosmology from public courses of education

I have never advocated such a position.

Seeing as you seem to want to disassociate the field from evolution when they are taught hand in hand.

I have not observed that evolution has been taught "hand in hand" with cosmology. I am aware of no aspect of the theory of evolution that depends upon a theory regarding the cosmos being true nor am I aware of an aspect of cosmology that is dependent upon the theory of evolution.

It was accepted that cosmology was a major part in "evolution".

By whom and when? Please provide references.