https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

But it’s only fair, right? Wrong.

Why “teaching the controversy” in science classes is a bad idea. Hint: it’s not because teaching controversy is wrong. Why, then, would two lifelong educators and passionate advocates of the…

Why “teaching the controversy” in science classes is a bad idea. Hint: it’s not because teaching controversy is wrong.

Why, then, would two lifelong educators and passionate advocates of the “both sides” style of teaching join with essentially all biologists in making an exception of the alleged controversy between creation and evolution? What is wrong with the apparently sweet reasonableness of “it is only fair to teach both sides”? The answer is simple. This is not a scientific controversy at all.

The article goes on to note that there are various genuine controversies within the field of evolutionary science, but that ID is, for a variety of reasons, simply not one of them.

Good stuff worth reading.

13 view(s)  

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *