I agree. What sort of science teacher relies on anecodotal evidence?
Not to mention that at least one of these fundamentalists under attack has a doctorate in the sciences himself.
Nor do I believe all of the rest of the pap in the article. I've watched journalist after journalist go to only one side of the debate and write that Kansas wants to do something that is absolutely not the case. The approach is reasonable: open the classroom to the possibilities to teaching that some problems exist with the theory of evolution. Any honest scientist would admit as much.
But that does not bring ID into the classroom.
Weakness in certain parts of the theory of evolution does not constitute evidence for the belief in ID.
Even though I am a church-going Christian, I do not believe in creationism or intelligent design. But the thing is, the nuts on the far-left want evolution passed off as a fact when the scientific community still has it as a theory. Both sides and the science for and against evolution should be taught.
I doubt you've read the standards. They didn't open the classroom to possibilities of problems; they invented problems that don't exist.