Go back over my posts. I think you'll see I never described myself as a scientist, now did I? So technically in your post back to me, you were lying. You are just trying to make me look stupid to make yourself look smart. Oh, I know, you are a big shot in the space program, which is really cool. But that doesn't mean you have all the answers of the universe. God has also given us common sense, which the theory of evolution really stretches. Of course, you always accuse those who support teaching both sides of being liars. I am, however, able to read. Therefore, I try to read what both sides are saying and make up my own mind. I don't think evolution (as common ancestor, species jumps) has been proved and I don't think it's been completely disproved. What is wrong with teaching the problems with evolution? Or are you saying there aren't any?
You don't have to be a scientist to debate science - but if you're going to argue about science and evolution, and especially what should be taught in SCIENCE CLASSES, don't you think it's important to really know what you're talking about?
When you say something like 'i don't think evolution (common ancestor, species jumps) has been proven' a scientist will look at you like you're crazy, because you've just generalized an entire library's worth of thought and concepts into a single sentence - evolution as a mechanism, natural selection, phylogeny (of every organism on earth or just humans?), speciation, etc, etc, etc, and boiled it down to "I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN PROVEN" which puts the icing on the cake because you seem willing to disregard vast amounts of observations and theory without offering a testable alternative, while completely ignoring the fact that science doesn't even claim to be able to prove anything anyway and is only about finding and failing to disprove the most reasonable explanation that fits the evidence?