[MissAmericanPie]

And testing evolution hasn't moved it from the theory category into fact has it.

Evolution should not feel so threatened by ID as to go so far as to censor it. I thought democracy was suppose to be a market place of open ideas.

So far, evolutionists have only proven one theory, that they are scared spitless at the thought of both being taught.

[Right Wing Professor]

I thought democracy was suppose to be a market place of open ideas.

It is. High school science classes are not.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"And testing evolution hasn't moved it from the theory category into fact has it."

Nothing moves a theory to a fact. They are different things.

" Evolution should not feel so threatened by ID as to go so far as to censor it. "

Scientists don't want to censor ID. They correctly point out though that ID is not science.

"I thought democracy was suppose to be a market place of open ideas."

You don't want to get so open-minded your brains fall out. Science isn't a democracy; it is not run by votes or polls.

" So far, evolutionists have only proven one theory, that they are scared spitless at the thought of both being taught."

Scientists are concerned that non-science (ID/creationism) will be taught along side real science (evolution).

[ToryHeartland]

I thought democracy was suppose to be a market place of open ideas.

And scientists just ain't buying Creationism/ID.

So a number of proponents of ID appear to be demanding special price subsidies and trade barriers to hawk their goods to High School students....

[Condorman]

It would be nice if you would make up your mind.

Post 111: evolution is an unproven theory
Post 124: evolutionists have only proven one theory

Those posts are just over 15 minutes apart. Do YOU know what you believe?

[b_sharp]

"And testing evolution hasn't moved it from the theory category into fact has it.

Theory never graduates to fact-hood. A theory is not supposition, nor is it a guess. Perhaps you should spend some time learning what a theory is and how it is developed?

"Evolution should not feel so threatened by ID as to go so far as to censor it. I thought democracy was suppose to be a market place of open ideas."

It sounds as if you are repeating ill understood but heartily desired sound bites from creationist sources.

Evolution is not threatened by ID on the level of science. That is simply not where the battle is taking place. ID attacked not just evolution but the scientific method, the very basis of science, at the political level. Just take a look at the 'Wedge Document' and the writings of Philip Johnson. If ID was traversing the science landscape in the same manner as any other science there would not be such a vociferous outcry from the scientific community. IDists have jumped over this step, simply because of a lack of research and scientific basis, and are now trying to infiltrate the minds of students through purely political means.

Being open to new ideas is a good thing. Accepting new ideas which are bereft of any corroborating evidence is bad. It is this type of floppy thinking that encourages people to believe in homeopathy, astrology, pyramid power, psychics and worst of all, Monday Night Football.

Should we put to vote the acceptance of heliocentrism?

"So far, evolutionists have only proven one theory, that they are scared spitless at the thought of both being taught.

Hardly. It is the Discovery Institute fellows who are afraid of having ID exposed for what it is, a non-science political movement. Aside from that, how exactly would you teach ID in science class?

Would you include Astrology as a serious science in astronomy class, Homeopathy as a serious science in health class (or chemistry class, or quantum physics class), Intelligent Falling as a serious science in Physics class?