If teaching only creation was such a detriment to science education, please elucidate on how so much progress was made in science in the hundreds of years before Darwin published his book, and before creation was shoved out of the public school system through litigation.
“If teaching only creation was such a detriment to science education, please elucidate on how so much progress was made in science in the hundreds of years before Darwin published his book, and before creation was shoved out of the public school system through litigation.”
—When did I ever say that teaching creation was a detriment to science?
Science did do well before Darwin’s theory was published, but that doesn’t mean that we should go back to teaching that diseases come from an imbalance of the four humors, that the four basic elements are earth, wind, water, and fire, and the phlogiston theory.
I would think that “science class” should be a class for teaching the scientific method and the leading scientific theories (otherwise, why call it “science class”?)