You say there is a controversy. The article gives a history of the findings going back to the 1800s. Give me an example of any controversy that would affect the theory of evolution.
One of the biggest problems with the theory of macro-evolution is that there is little or no fossil evidence of one "type" changing into another. The hundreds of millions of transitional fossils that should exist DON'T. The scant few fossils that Darwinists do point to as "evidence" include the archaeopteryx.
What does that say about the theory of evolution when its own proponents can't even agree on a critically important "find" like archaeopteryx? The 'holy grail', the 'missing link' between dinosaurs and birds - call it what you like but many evolutionist don't even believe it. Yet it remains in our textbooks because macro-evolutionary science is attempting to maintain the appearance of cohesion to support its shaky assertions.
What does it say about our public schools' view of science when the controversy is completely ignored?