RAZD has explained the ways "evolution" is defined better than I could. I hope you've taken note. Evolution itself, that life has changed over time, is not in dispute by scientists. The theory of evolution explains those changes by the processes of mutation and natural selection. You're telling me a "brief mention" of it in a science class is OK, when it is a fundamental part of so many scientific disciplines?



The vast majority of scientists accept evolution as fact. You would be hard-pressed indeed to find a biologist or geologist who rejected it outright. The people who do reject it tend to betray fundamental scientific ignorance and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find one who wasn't a religious fundamentalist. So a lot really does depend on who you speak to, but I know which group of people are qualified to be setting the science curriculum.



None of them have any more place in a science classroom than creationism does. On December 20, 2005, in Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover, U.S. District Court Judge John E. Jones III ordered the Dover Area School Board to refrain from maintaining an Intelligent Design Policy in any school within the Dover Area School District. Judge Jones ruled that "ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents". In reference to whether Intelligent Design is science Judge Jones wrote ID "is not science and cannot be adjudged a valid, accepted scientific theory as it has failed to publish in peer-reviewed journals, engage in research and testing, and gain acceptance in the scientific community".



But the sorting of that record, and the dating of the strata, are crucial elements. The fossil record directly contradicts the idea that God simultaneously created all life that ever existed on earth. It is compelling evidence that life evolved.



I fail to see any relevance between Christian history and the issue of evolution.



What facts-?