> By the way, who are "they?" 

"They" are the Discovery Institute (http://www.discovery.org) as well as a network of fundamentalist religious denominations that support an anti-science agenda and the spread of ID, and apparently, sadly, the President of the United States is also one of "them."

> 1. Where's the proof? If science cannot produce the proof, then they're
> asking me to take it on faith. Hmmm...that's exactly what religion asks too.

In religion, faith spans the yawning gap between what science/empiricism tell us about the world, and what theology tells us.  In science, observation leads to hypothesis, experimentation and evidence gathering, testing and replication, and finally, if the process has not falsified itself, to a scientific theory.   "Faith" in science is a calculation of probabilities that something is true, based on rigorous and tested evidence.

> 2. If the authority is an evolution theory that's still standing, then I'd
> have to say that no one has disproved creationism/ID yet either.

In science, it is not the responsibility of someone making a claim to show evidence against an opposing claim, but rather it is to produce compelling evidence in support of their own claim.  Further, althought it sounds contradictory, in order for a hypothesis to move through the scientific process, there must be a scientific avenue by which in theory the hypothesis can be shown to be false.  So, for example, ID's presumption that because life is complex there must have been an intelligent designer (read God) cannot be science because such a presumption is not falsifiable (i.e., cannot be disproven).  

> 3. If either side says, "Because I'm the "illustrious grand poobah" and I
> said so, well then, I'd have to laugh at their arrogance. 

That is essentially what ID proponents are saying, because they attempt to introduce their religious faith into a scientific equation.  Their arrogance is part of their ignorance about science and what science can and cannot address.

> What is wrong with teaching both theories? Why not make a place in our
> schools for students to be exposed to both? 

Nothing wrong with teaching both (although I'd not say "both theories" because that implies both are scientific theories and ID is a religious proposition), as long as ID is taught as religion and evolution is taught as science.

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).