[A. Pole]

Yeah, sounds about as stupid as "post modernism" where everyone has an equally valid viewpoint. Claptrap. An ignorant viewpoint is worth exactly what you wouldn't pay for it. An experts opinion is usually worth the quantity that he does get paid for it.

There is a fundamental question - does the society have right to have wrong scientific views and teach them in schools?

If not then we will have scientocracy where the scientists rule. This will be a form of bureaucratic aristocracy resembling the Soviet model.

Is the Science the Supreme Law of the land?

[Mylo]

Science isn't morality and it isn't law.

Nobody's forcing you to accept evolutionary theory. If you don't want the latest antibiotics because you don't think selective pressure will result bacterial resistance to the old antibiotics, nobody is forcing you to buy them.

Nobody is forcing you to accept the principle of Electromagnetism. If you think it all happens by magic that is fine, so long as you pay your electricity bill on time.

And Scientific theories aren't so much about being "right" or "wrong" but about being useful and useless.

If Bohr's model of the atom is complete bunk and absolutely "wrong" it doesn't change the fact that it is a highly useful theory that allows one to better observe and predict the universe and explain phenomena.

And ID "theory" may be absolutely 100% right but it is still absolutely 100% useless for the purpose of observing and predicting the universe, although it does have a crude simplicity in its explanations of phenomena.

I personally do believe that the laws of the universe themselves were designed, but that God needn't be mucking with his creation all the time; however I recognize that my feelings about the symmetry of the universe are ABSOLUTLY NOT scientific observations.