I think that this is exactly right, about evolution not being taught. I went to a good high school (back in the 60's), took lots of science classes, and never heard about evolution in the classroom. I think it was the last chapter in the textbook, and most classes in general don't get to the end of their textbooks.

If us evolutionists were smart (rather than just self-rightous) we would INSIST on creationism or IT being included in books and classes, with the only proviso that it be first in the book or lesson plan, and that evolution get equal time.

The number of students who actually learned something about evolution would increase enormously. Especially since the air of controversy would stimulate students to actually do some thinking and arguing...

John-

Questioning the orthodoxy would lead to chaos. Next thing you know the phrase "endowed by their Creator" would be discussed in social studies. Remember the Inquistition?

Actually, we're entering an age likely to be dominated by material science.

Another side of the Free Speech Issue:

Manufacturing a weak integrity argument to justify free speech violations...

It started in a federal Court in Pittsburgh and has moved quickly to Colorado Universtity and Iraq. It's a stretch, but politcal hacks have besieged first amendment free speech protections.

They attempt to combine a provacative essay comparing victims of 911 with Nazi criminals and an emotionally charged General's comments on war, questioning whether such is permissible when the comments may cause damaged to an institution's integrity.

Why?

Because in a Pittsburgh federal court a well connected corporate crony has suggested the novice argument, and the legal question is waddling without any legal precedent in need of an activist court.

Thus the current unexplained campaign against “free speech” appears to be little more than a Madison Avenue scheme to control any discussion of the President’s desire to privatize higher education.

That is, a number of for-profit colleges have faced inquiries, lawsuits and other actions calling into question the way they inflate enrollment to mislead/increase the value of their parent company’s stock.

In the last year, the Career Education Corporation of Hoffman Estates, Ill., has faced lawsuits, from shareholders and students, contending that, among other things, its colleges have inflated enrollment numbers. In addition, F.B.I. agents raided 10 campuses run by ITT Educational Services of Carmel, Ind., looking for similar problems.

But in a Pittsburgh federal court there is a bigger can of worms.

Kaplan, Inc., is wholly own by the Washington Post Company. For-profit postsecondary education has turned the company around and individuals far more powerful than Martha Steward have made millions. However, there is a nominal “Watergate” styled federal court proceeding (scandal) involving campus “free speech,” that could expose the administration’s violation of public trust

In short, I provided the S.E.C., Department of Education, and federal courts information that appears to prove Kaplan inflated the Concord School of Law enrollment, telling investors that the “flagship” of its higher education division has as many as 600 to 1000 or more students.

I also provided evidence to prove apparent violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

However, in an attempt to protect important icons of the Washington and New York financial/political circle, hacks have been hired to stir a free speech controversy.

But even Stan Chess (En Passant http://lawtv.typepad.com/en_passant/2004/a_question_of_l.html) innocently questioned the obvious - a clear violation of the federal securities laws.

“Kaplan’s Concord School of Law says it’s one of the largest law schools in the country, yet for each administration only about 25 of its graduates sit for the bar exam. What happens to the hundreds of other students in each class?”

What are you willing to do?

What's so funny is that in the religious school that I attended, the Biology teacher taught both Creationism and Evolution. "How do you expect to refute it if you don't know what it is?" he asked. He also used the issue as a way to illustrate the role of controversy in Science and the succession of scientific theory. This was way before Khun and his theory of scientific revolutions.

Not a single parent complained at all about this program whatsoever.

He was a hard-assed SOB, but Mr. Siemens was one hell of a teacher.

ptah:

It's funny isn't it? While there may be some religious folk who want to protect their kids' delicate ears from the seductive lures of evolution (Harry seems to know a lot of them), it's really the scientists who are most anxious to censor. I've noticed several posts here to the effect that ID and creationism should be taught in philosophy or comparative religion classes. I always thought the objection was that religion had no place whatsoever in public schools. Now the line of defence seems to be the protection of the purity of science. Not dealing from strength, are they?

Not a lot, Peter. All.

I have yet to meet a Christian who could state accurately what darwinism is. There must be one somewhere. I just haven't crossed his path. Or his ptah, I suppose.

I wonder what Mr. Siemens thought darwinism was.

Harry:

You talk to Christians? In person?

Harry:

Maybe, but then it seems you haven't met a darwinist who can state accurately what darwinism is either.

Given the state of American ignorance of basic literacy, mathematics and science, all this foolishness about evolution v creationism is like complaining about the lack of a fish knife at the place settings on the Titanic.

I'm a newspaper reporter, Matt. I talk to everybody.