Strollerderby

Nice.  I'm a big fan of Darwin too.  If it weren't taught in school, I'd discuss him with my kids myself.

On a related note, I once met a young man who was a flat-earther.  Stunned me.  He did already have son of his own.

One of my peeves is when people confuse scientific theory with hypothesis.  I am a scientist and it really is not hard to understand.

I got this from understandingevolution.com.  Saying something is just a theory is incorrect.  

Theory vs. hypothesis

A theory is an explanation. The validity of a theory rests upon its ability to explain phenomena. Theories may be supported, rejected, or modified, based on new evidence. Gravitational theory, for example, attempts to explain the nature of gravity. Cell theory explains the workings of cells. Evolutionary theory explains the history of life on Earth.

A hypothesis is a testable idea. Scientists do not set out to “prove” hypotheses, but to test them. Often multiple hypotheses are posed to explain phenomena and the goal of research is to eliminate the incorrect ones. Hypotheses come and go by the thousands, but theories often remain to be tested and modified for decades or centuries. In science, theories are never hunches or guesses and to describe evolution as “just a theory” is inappropriate.

Nothing wrong with the arena of ideas. If creation science wasn't a viable theory, the vast majority of people would not bother with it. Yet there are many intelligent people who have objectively studied the issue on both sides. I want (and ensure) that my children hear both of these religious views. They can decide for themselves.  However, "serious debate" does not need to use "quotation marks" to make the "other side" seem "stupid."

Happy Birthday, Abe and Charlie :)

Sue, you and your children are welcome to do your own research and draw your own conclusions.  

You are not welcome to do that in the public school where I send my kids.  If you keep it out of the schools, I have no problem with your religious beliefs.

Glad to see this mentioned today - I was just reading a press release about a book called something like, "You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can't Make Him Think," and the press release claimed that this book is sweet and gentle while atheist leaders like Richard Dawkins are big meanies. Uh... did they read the title of their book? It's horribly insulting and immediately puts atheists on the defensive, but the atheists are the big meanies? Heck of a way to start my work day.