[Right Wing Professor]

So you're claiming that we should tell students all the possible evidence there might be against evolution, but we haven't checked yet? So let's see, there are cubic kilometers of rock we haven't dug into yet, and in that rock we might find fossils that refute evolution, although we've never found one before. And there undoubtedly organisms we haven't found yet, and one of them, hiding in a deep deep cave, might have a genome that violates common descent, although no organism we've found to date does.

Hey, we could apply this to physics class too. There might be some material somewhere that doesn't feel the force of gravity. If we could find that material, we could build all sorts of star ships. We should spend at least as much time on that possibility as teaching student about the objects that do obey 'universal' gravitation, which is, after all, only a theory.

And how do we know there are no unicorns, hmmm? Have scientists looked everywhere? Yep, zoology class needs unicorns.

Thank you so much, together we've just validated my original post...

Your simple happiness is charming.

[Thatcherite]

Charming placemarker

[js1138]

More charming than the frothing at the mouth exhibited by some.

[darbymcgill]

So you're claiming that we should tell students all the possible evidence there might be against evolution, but we haven't checked yet?

No...

Can you tell me difference between these two statements, if made by scientists...

[circa 1990] there is no scientific evidence that points to the existence of the Wollemi pine...

[circa 2006] there is no scientific evidence that points to the intelligent design of life.

[Virginia-American]

So let's see, there are cubic kilometers of rock we haven't dug into yet, and in that rock we might find fossils that refute evolution...

I mentioned to Fester that there are no fish fossils in the Burgess shale, his reply was

"How much of the Burgess shale has been studied?"