Hi, Larry. Back dishonestly using yet <i>another</i> pseudonymn? Why do you do it? Are you honestly so foolish as to think that your content-free, scientifically-illiterate, ignorant posts are not immediately recognizable? Amazing.
<quote author="Larry le pissoir">You can say that again. Consider the following —
A Guardian article reported a recent UK public opinion poll that showed that 4 out of 10 think that ID should be taught in science classes. See http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,… .</quote> Unfortunately for you, you failed to even bother to read the article. The poll was about <i>religious</i> alternatives. And you've claimed that ID isn't religious.
Get a clue, Larry. Your continual posting in ignorance and deceit is boring.
<quote>http://www.furl.net/members/bsgroup/Creationism%…) reports on the controversy in Australia, Eastern Europe, Germany, Finland, Turkey, and New Zealand.</quote> Misleading data from a creationist nutcase. More Larry ignorance.
<quote>http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/03/C84… reports that a Russian schoolgirl has filed a lawsuit “demanding that the Russian Education Ministry rewrite biology textbooks to include the view of creationism — the belief that God created the universe and all living beings as described in the Bible. Teaching only the theory of evolution, she says, violates freedom of conscience and religious rights, and therefore runs counter to the constitution.” This article also reports a public opinion poll in Russia that shows strong support for creationism. Ironically, revulsion against the “godlessness” of communism was supposedly the motivation for permanently adding the motto “In God We Trust” to all US money in 1955 (the motto had appeared on various coins off-and-on dating back to 1864) and adding “under god” to the pledge of allegiance to the flag in 1954.</quote> But ID is not religion, Larry. You've said so.
Do try to be consistent in your ignorance. Thank you.
<quote>http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,1188423… reported, *…..as in the United States, creation and evolution are political issues in Italy. In February, Alleanza Nazionale, one of parties in Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s governing coalition, held a week long series of events to dispute the theory of evolution. In the course of a conference entitled Teaching Evolution: a Fairytale for the Schools, parliamentarian Pietro Cerullo linked Darwin’s theory to leftist thought.*</quote> There are a minority of nutcases everywhere. So what?
<quote>ID is a raging controversy in the Catholic church. Cardinal Schonborn, chief editor of the Catholic catechism, supports it, while Father George Coyne, chief Vatican astronomer, opposes it.</quote> "Raging controversy"? LOL.
Fortunately, the Church is far more informed that you are, Larry. They're not ignorant. And they have been debating the proper relationship of science and faith for well over a thousand years; all the way back to St. Augustine, in fact. You'd know that if you knew anything about the Church or the history of Christianity. But apparently you don't.
<quote>Thus, the notion that evolution theory is controversial only in the USA is utterly without foundation.</quote> Nobody ever said that; you're making up <i>strawmen</i> again. Of course, since you claim that you <i>don't</i> make up strawmen, we see that you're being inconsistent, as well as dishonest and ignorant.
Why, Larry? In the age of the internet, your ignorance is inexcusable!
<quote>This false notion is especially promoted by those who falsely claim that the USA’s controversy over evolution theory is going to hurt the country’s international technological competitiveness.</quote> It will. Thank God you have nothing to do with science - you're a menace.
<quote>In any case, raising doubts about evolution theory need not be a problem, because scientists can use evolution theory even while believing that all or part of it is untrue.</quote> But they don't, Larry. Another ridiculous strawman, written by someone without any knowledge or experience with science or any 'hard' discipline.
Scientists accept evolution as the best current explanation to fit the facts. Only an ignorant fundie, such as yourself, would claim that scientists 'believe' or don't 'believe' in it.
And there <i>are</i> no doubts about whether evolution takes place, Larry. Only arguments about the relative weight of mechanisms. Of course, if you knew anything about evolution, you'd have known that.
But you don't.