[Mylo]

Covering the Intelligent Design Hypothesis can be done in about three hours maximum. There simply isn't any more to it. The theory of Evolution through natural selection, and the hypothesis of abiogenesis (separate subjects, despite the ignorance of those who hate and fear both, but understand neither.), however, cannot be covered in its entirety even if you kept those kids in science class all day every day of their High School years.

So if by "alongside" you mean that ID is mentioned and discussed once or twice, no problem.

If by "alongside" you mean that equal time should be given; your poorly serving our already undereducated kids in public schools. They will not learn about one of the central tenets of Biology in depth, and they will waste time mucking about with a philosophical question that has little, if any, bearing upon our understanding of how Biological systems operate.

[Diamond]

...abiogenesis (separate subjects, despite the ignorance of those who hate and fear both, but understand neither.)

You understand abiogenesis? That would be a remarkable tacit claim on your part. Are you, like many, loathe to discuss it even though your world view depends upon it?

Cordially,

[From many - one.]

I find it hard to come up with 3 hours worth of ID content.

Here's my take on curriculum

Grade 1. These are dinosaurs. Either something made them, or not.

Grade 2. These are dinosaurs and sabertooth tigers. Either something made them, or not. No, we can't talk more about it because we have to give equal time to both sides and there is nothing to say on one side. No, we can't tell you which side.

----skip to---
Grade 12 (in some foreign language) You survivors of the bio-wars must now be grateful to us. We did not kill you, you may now work for us and we will feed you. Funny, you used to have the lead in the biological sciences.

[curiosity]

Covering the Intelligent Design Hypothesis can be done in about three hours maximum.

Actually, that's probably not true. They'll insist lots of time gets spent reviewing supposed example after example of "irreducible complexity." Hours will be spent covering every detail of Demski's convoluted notion of "specified complexity." Probably several lecutres will be devoted to the "cambrian explosion."

It's all rubbish, but intelligent design "theorists" have no trouble filling loads of time with it. What do you think they do at their conferences?

[js1138]

Covering the Intelligent Design Hypothesis can be done in about three hours maximum.

It can be done in a lot less time than that.

I have spent the last four days posting a simple request on these threads. I would like for an ID proponent to state what the content of biology education would be if ID proponents ran the entire curriculum. So far I have not received a single response.

We know at a minimum that ID is proposed as an alternative to natural selection as the cause of variation. Random mutation is declared inadequate.

This takes ten seconds to read.

But what are the areas that ID holds in common with mainstream biology? Is everything else taught in biology and geology correct?