Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
How far do you take the "evolution isn't completely proved" argument, though? There are many things that we don't understand about quantum mechanics, but what we think we know so far is consistent with lab observations, and we certainly don't hesitate to teach this as a hard science. You reach a certain point in a theoretical construct where it becomes clear that, while you are still working out details, you have happened upon a valid framework. I think that evolution is at that point, at least. I know that I would vehemently protest the teaching of some model of subatomic theory that conflicted with qm but that was offered because it didn't conflict with someone's religious/philosophical views - and that, to me, is the entire basis for the push for the various creationist theories.
|
1 I'm sure that the people who pushed have the motive of teaching creationism, and maybe that alone makes it bad. Not Me, the article doesn't say the curriculem teaches creationism, does it- i know the article talks about creationism.
2 As to when do yuo stop throwing out questions, I would be happy with never. what's wrong with ending the science chapter on quantum mechanics by saying "here's some stuff that doesn't, or isn't explained yet."
That is part of the scientific process.
