I'm not surprised.
If I would have a single, basic argument to put forth in the controversy it is that the General Sciences need to allow the inquiring mind an opportunity to challenge all information with which it is presented. Science is not preaching.
Attendant to that argument, WRT practical implications, I think it is acceptable to admit the possibility of intelligent design into the classroom without entering into specific religious teachings.
Lastly, as a point of personal observation, I have yet to see science and the Bible disprove each other. They fit together like hand in glove. Both make propositions to be accepted by faith, and both give evidence enough to be accepted as true.
Well of course that is always allowed - but the information must be challenged with evidence, not opinions.
I think it is acceptable to admit the possibility of intelligent design into the classroom without entering into specific religious teachings.
Students are welcome to believe what they wish. I'm not sure we want science teachers speculating on things outside the realm of science, even if they do fit our preconceived notions.
If we're talking about government, do you want the liberal teacher teaching his or her personal beliefs, or would you rather the teacher try to teach the facts in as unbiased a way as possible?
Both make propositions to be accepted by faith, and both give evidence enough to be accepted as true.
You continue to demonstrate your total lack of understanding of what science is and includes.
And most scientists disagree with you.
And I suspect that most people would disagree with your political machinations to achieve that end if they suspected that even more fantatics would press on to have their brand of BS taught in schools right alongside ID/IOT.
Science can't "disprove" ID. ID doesn't make any claims that can be investigated by science. You have demonstrated that by participating in a 600 post thread without listiong a single claim of ID that could be supported or disproved by an experiment.
Meanwhile, the physical sciences are entirely hung out. Any evidence in geology or physics or astronomy that contradicts the age of the universe or the age of the earth bring the thing crashing down. There are innumerable places in biology where an unexpected bit of evidence could cause trouble for evolution.
There is a dearly departed freeper who has assured us this will happen, and has specified where in the human/chimp the smoking gun will be found. This is at least a claim that will eventually be tested.
But this is a claim of evolution which will be put to the test in the foreseeable future. ID makes no comparable claims. ID is not science. I will grant that some people who believe in ID may be perfectly qualified to do science, and probably are doing competent science. But they can't say they are studying ID, because ID makes no verifiable claims.