[stremba]

You do know that nothing is ever proven in science, don't you? You also know that creationism is not a theory, right? Creationism cannot be tested, so it falls outside the realm of science. What's wrong with teaching science, ie. evolution, in science class and teaching creationism in some other class?

[smokeman]

What's wrong with teaching science, ie. evolution, in science class and teaching creationism in some other class?

Nothing, I never said that it had to be taught in biology class. Although, I would also say that ape to man evolution should also not be taught in biology class. The evidence is too weak IMO. And yes, I have seen all the evidence.

[YHAOS]

To: smokeman - You do know that nothing is ever proven in science, don't you? You also know that creationism is not a theory, right? Creationism cannot be tested, so it falls outside the realm of science. What's wrong with teaching science, ie. evolution, in science class and teaching creationism in some other class?

That's the problem with any 'theory' of origins, isn't it? It's not testable, so it's not a theory (scientifically speaking), so it's not science? Perhaps, if we could find a way to get back around to the front end of this process, theories could be proposed and tested. Or, it may be that a 'theory' of origins will remain forever a hypothisis-in-waiting, destined never to be consummated.