[Physicist]

This accounts for the widespread desire that children be able to factor in some alternatives to the notion that “natural selection” has brought us, humanly speaking, where we are. Well, maybe it has. But what if it hasn’t? The science classroom can’t take cognizance of such a possibility? Under the Jones ruling, it can’t.

Equine feces. If schoolteachers really feel the need to fill the heads of children with anti-Darwinian nonsense, they can legally teach Lysenkoism.

[A. Pole]

Equine feces. If schoolteachers really feel the need to fill the heads of children with anti-Darwinian nonsense, they can legally teach Lysenkoism.

What is wrong with talking about Lysenko? Are the courts going to ban all theories which do not fit in the present canon of what students might be exposed to?

BTW, I read Lysenko out of curiosity and his writtings were superior to the popular and faulty beliefs in psudo-Darwinian theory. And Lysenko was certainly for the Separation of Church and state!

[MarcusTulliusCicero]

Interestingly, Lysenko (or rather, Lamark)may have somewhat more validity than once thought. One of the hot topics in molecular and cancer genetics is non-Mendelian inheritance, in particular, epigenetic inheritance that allows for acquired patterns of expression to be passed from generation to generation.

[MEGoody]

If schoolteachers really feel the need to fill the heads of children with anti-Darwinian nonsense. . .

Nothing like a little hysteria to show one's true colors. LOL