You know, I don't really understand your point... it appears you're saying we shouldn't teach it because we don't know everything about it?
I think I understand now your viewpoint about Darwin... and that he shouldn't be treated "so special". I think you are missing some MAIN POINTs:
1.) "Evolution" (a term Darwin didn't really use much, supposedly because he really didn't want to piss the church off) is an integral part of Biology... explaining life on the planet, and how and why it is the way it is. A simple explanation of nature to the best of our collective ability.
2.) Darwin's (and Wallace, probably deserves more credit if you're looking for another reason to diss him) observation went WAY AGAINST the common belief of his day (Religious belief) much in the way Galileo did. He could be described as quite courageous to put forth such bold ideas.
3.) The "scientific community", if there is such an animal MUST change their viewpoint (sure it takes time) when new evidence is put forward and then confirmed over time...
4.) this is NOT the case with Religion. The way religion has changed over time is through past dogma falling out of favor (by political movements within the church incrementally putting forward the truth when safe to do so... at the end of ones life, or during periodic upheavels and of course through sheer loss of disgusted members) over centuries of attempts to twist, change, and propagate it through "face saving" changes and morphologies of those dogmas. Sadly, there have rarely been outright admissions that "hey, we got it wrong". In science this is a regular occurrence!
DAK |
