Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

It's really a question of whether the moods created by Christianity are beneficial to society compared to those of non-Christian moods or atheist ones.

Are the Catholics teaching that science is the light, truth and the way, as long as it does not contradict what the bible says?

you have the only god that exists

How many atheists believe in sex with aliens ?????? Not as many as Christions that have sex with chickens, I'd surmise.

I know a lot of atheists

I'm old and beyond economic repair..whatever that means ... At the moment have a pace maker that's just been replaced ( had old one 10 years )

a pace maker that's just been replaced ( had old one 10 years ) at no time have I ever expected a god to invent one same

Phylogeny and palaeoecology of Polyommatus blue butterflies show Beringia was a climate-regulated gateway to the New World
Roger Vila1,2, Charles D. Bell3, Richard Macniven1,4, Benjamin Goldman-Huertas1,5, Richard H. Ree6, Charles R. Marshall1,7, Zsolt Bálint8, Kurt Johnson9, Dubi Benyamini10 and Naomi E. Pierce1,*
+ Author Affiliations

Abstract
Transcontinental dispersals by organisms usually represent improbable events that constitute a major challenge for biogeographers. By integrating molecular phylogeny, historical biogeography and palaeoecology, we test a bold hypothesis proposed by Vladimir Nabokov regarding the origin of Neotropical Polyommatus blue butterflies, and show that Beringia has served as a biological corridor for the dispersal of these insects from Asia into the New World. We present a novel method to estimate ancestral temperature tolerances using distribution range limits of extant organisms, and find that climatic conditions in Beringia acted as a decisive filter in determining which taxa crossed into the New World during five separate invasions over the past 11 Myr. Our results reveal a marked effect of the Miocene–Pleistocene global cooling, and demonstrate that palaeoclimatic conditions left a strong signal on the ecology of present-day taxa in the New World. The phylogenetic conservatism in thermal tolerances that we have identified may permit the reconstruction of the palaeoecology of ancestral organisms, especially mobile taxa that can easily escape from hostile environments rather than adapt to them.

But your argument is silly spendi since no one has proposed teaching only evolution while not teaching literature, drama, music and all the other arts.

So your argument is we shouldn't teach evolution because religion is part of human evolution? It rather defeats the purpose of denying evolution, doesn't it?

Creationist Group Backs Out in Texas
(Texas Freedom Network, TFN Insider Blog, January 31, 2011)

The Foundation for Thought and Ethics, a prominent creationist group, has reversed a stated intention to submit instructional materials this year for use in Texas science classrooms. That decision, publicized on FTE’s website, is very good news for supporters of sound science education and students in Texas public schools.

On the other hand, it almost certainly is a huge disappointment for evolution deniers on the Texas State Board of Education. In 2009 those state board members succeeded in winning the adoption of controversial new science curriculum standards. They hoped the new standards would open the door to creationist arguments against evolution in classrooms across Texas.

As TFN Insider reported earlier this month, the Texas-based FTE was included on a list of vendors made public by the Texas Education Agency on January 20. Those vendors had indicated last fall that they intended to submit instructional materials covering the new science curriculum standards. The state board is scheduled in April to choose which of those materials will go on an approved list. Texas public schools could then use state dollars — if the Legislature makes such funding available — to purchase those approved materials for use in science classrooms beginning in the 2011-12 school year.

FTE is publisher of the “intelligent design”/creationism book Of Pandas and People. That book was at the center of a key Pennsylvania court case in 2005, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board. In that case a federal judge ruled that “intelligent design” is a religious concept thinly disguised as science. Teaching such a concept, the court ruled, would represent an unconstitutional promotion of religion in public schools. The folks at FTE complained that the court’s decision would make Of Pandas and People and other “intelligent design” propaganda “radioative” and unmarketable in public schools.

Of course, they were right. But after the Texas state board approved the creationist-friendly science standards in 2009, perhaps the folks at FTE thought they had another chance to promote their junk science in public schools. Now, however, they apparently have realized that another major defeat — before the Texas board or in the courts — would simply compound their Dover disaster.

Still, other dangers remain for science education in Texas. Anti-evolution groups and state board members are likely to pressure legitimate publishers and other vendors to water down instruction on evolution in the materials they submit for board approval. The Texas Freedom Network helped build a broad coalition of pro-science education groups and activists that successfully blocked such efforts when the state board approved new biology textbooks for Texas schools in 2003. TFN will again work with scientists, other scholars and educators to help ensure that all materials publishers submit for board approval this March actually teach the well-established facts about evolution, not anti-science propaganda.

I'm saying we shouldn't teach evolution to schoolkids until we have worked out the implications of doing so. We do that for everything else we teach and not only in schools. Why do you want to make an exception for evolution?

Are you shy of discussing the implications?

Do you deny that "mood" can affect metabolism and cell function? And mating opportunities? And, though possibly a bit far fetched , the choice of sperm by the egg. Do you deny that religion creates moods?

What does the expression "love child" mean in literature? Or "foundling"?

Evolution doesn't deny religion any more than religion denies evolution. They are not mutually exclusive.