You're going to have to be patient. I've been asking for three weeks what ID advocated would teach if they ran the science classes.
Saying that Darwinism doesn't have everything explained makes a rather short lesson plan.
What is it they would tesch?
You're going to have to be patient. I've been asking for three weeks what ID advocated would teach if they ran the science classes.
Saying that Darwinism doesn't have everything explained makes a rather short lesson plan.
What is it they would teach?
I'll keep trying and let you know if I ever get a coherent response.
This notion that TOE is not good science but that Creationism and/or ID should be taught alongside TOE in a science class is absurd.
That ID should be taught in place of TOE in science classes is the only logical position if you think ID is good science. But as you ask...what exactly would be taught? I'd like someone to tell how ID would be taught in place of TOE so I can have an opportunity to question ID theory as taught.