[Jim Noble]

I don't do crevo threads.

But note the status the NYT gives "evolution" - a fortress, something concrete and formidable, unmoveable even, capable of being "attacked".

It's an hypothesis. There is data that tends to support it, and data that tends to call it into question.

It's perfect for teaching the scientific method-there's nothing better that middle schoolers and HS students can grasp for the purpose.

But for the NYT, and far, far too many scientists, it has achieved Holy Grail status, so that teaching the data that tends to undermine the hypothesis is a revolutionary act.

It's pathetic.

Back to politics, have fun, y'all.

[shubi]

You are dead wrong. Evolution is a theory, essentially a fact of science.

Evolution is an observed fact and the Theory of Evolution explains that fact.

For once, the NYT is correct.