@Dan S de Merengue said “What we observe is that things like microbes, flies and lizards always remain things like microbes, flies and lizards. We don't observe them evolving into anything else. Record it, predict it, and test it as much as you like, but you'll always end up with microbes, flies and lizards.”

Sorry Dan, you obviously don't understand simple taxonomy. Our common ancestor with chimpanzees was a small form of ape. Humans and Chimps are still apes. Whatever our species evolve into in the future will still be apes. We have a common ancestor with all mammals. Apes are mammals. All descendants of apes forever onward will also be mammals. Birds are descended from reptiles. They are reptiles. Their descendants will always be reptiles and birds.

If you don't understand science don't pretend that you do by quoting what some dumb twit said on a creationist website. Especially don't expect that silliness to be repeated to students in school as some form of truth. Its not, its rubbish.

Dan Dare "Theory, in science, means "the best possible understanding we have of how things are..."

So, it is not unquestionable, absolute Truth.

Yet we teach our children "best possible understandings" that may be invalid in 5 years time.
Since you can't teach *absolute* truth about anything, perhaps we shouldn't teach children anything.

Spiritual beliefs are also based on people's "best possible understandings".

And unlike science class, history class and art class (all subject to future revision) you can *opt out* of religious instruction.

"science is based on observing things and testing things"

That can be tested.

You cannot "test" how the Universe began (only whether a theory is possible).

You cannot "test" whether Men and apes evolved *from* a commmon ancestor.

Perhaps "God" created multiple lifeforms with a common genetic "blueprint" (like some painters do a "series" of artworks on the same theme).

"We have observed and documented, in real life, populations of things such as cows and wheat changing from one generation to the next"

And crocodiles and nautiluses *not* changing in millions of years.

If change occurs, it seems to be very restricted in the amount of deviation possible.
But maybe "God" designed it that way.

"there is not enough water on or in the Earth to flood the entire planet to that level"

Were the polar icecaps always frozen?
Was the landmass always at the same height it is now?

Dug "no decent science teacher would ever teach a theory as a fact"

Yeah right.
I'm sure the students understand that when the teacher keeps saying "this happened, then that happened", he really means "this is the most *likely* thing that happened".

"it remains the best explanation for how life developed on earth"

How *species* developed.

Not the origin of life, or even *why* there are lifeforms at all (why is there "life"?, rather than just inanimate material forms).

Jimmy Jones, when God invented smallpox it may have caused no illness, as Man was perfect (so the story goes).

@Shockadelic, big Gish Gallop there mate. I'll break it down over several posts.
You said “Dan Dare "Theory, in science, means "the best possible understanding we have of how things are..."

So, it is not unquestionable, absolute Truth.

Yet we teach our children "best possible understandings" that may be invalid in 5 years time.
Since you can't teach *absolute* truth about anything, perhaps we shouldn't teach children anything.”

Are you being deliberately obtuse? The discussion you quote mined has the context of “doesn't theory mean a guess?”. The answer is “no it isn't, it has been worked on to the point we are very confident in it, which is the best possible level of understanding science can reach”. Science does not, cannot deal in absolute truth and neither can you in any way. Nothing we teach in school is absolute truth. If we followed your suggestion we would teach nothing at all.

You also wrote “Spiritual beliefs are also based on people's "best possible understandings"”. No, they are not the best understandings possible for those people, they are just the adoption of points of view that they like.

@Shockadelic you said “And unlike science class, history class and art class (all subject to future revision) you can *opt out* of religious instruction.”

The “opt out” has already been discussed to death. Its an old sales trick that makes more sales then opt in. The desire for opt out is the desire to catch as many children in the spider web as possible.

@Shockadelic you said “"science is based on observing things and testing things"
That can be tested.
You cannot "test" how the Universe began (only whether a theory is possible).
You cannot "test" whether Men and apes evolved *from* a commmon ancestor.”

You can observe the current conditions of the universe. You can find out how it works and test your understanding. You can learn what evidence it leaves as it undergoes change. Given that then you can work out how the early universe was. You can observe life, how it changes and evolves. You can test your understanding of what you have observed. You can find evidence that shows how all these things are related.

You obviously would not accept forensic evidence at a murder trial by uttering some stupid comment like “You weren't there so you can't know that”.

That's a whole lotta wrigglin' there, Shockadelic.

>>Yet we teach our children "best possible understandings" that may be invalid in 5 years time.<<

Not at all. What we know today is far from "invalid", as it forms the foundation upon which we can evaluate new discoveries.

Our children will find out, as we have, the joy of discovering and learning about new things. We look, we find, we research, we ponder. It's all part of the wonder of humanity.

How tragic it must be to deny yourself this excitement, the sheer thrill of living in this world, still looking for elusive answers to impossible questions.

How even more tragic, if you try to deny it to your children.

>>spiritual beliefs are also based on people's "best possible understandings".<<

I beg leave to doubt that. One of the most common themes proffered by those with "spiritual beliefs" is that all that is, is known. Thanks to the convenient concept that "it woz god wot dunnit".

>>You cannot "test" how the Universe began<<

But if you approach the topic with an open mind, you find out some pretty amazing things. About time. About distance. About the sheer volume of galaxies that surround us, and which continue to change their form.

How sad to deny yourself an understanding, however slight, of how it has all grown over billions of years.

How much sadder, to deny it your children.

There is no real problem, to my way of thinking, in telling kids Bible stories. They are after all just stories. So long as they get a balanced view from home, there's not much harm in them.

The idea of religious Counsellors, on the other hand, is plain creepy. As Rebecca6 explains...

>>I have been a youth leader in the last few years and these poor kids are under unbelievable pressure, teachers are too busy to spend an hour listening a child cry<<

A teacher at my son's school was fired for listening to a child cry. Apparently, the rule is to walk away, to avoid being compromised.

And Chaplains are allowed to?

Scary.