David Flanagan: I won't argue on the point that Darwinism is the consensus science of our age when it comes to origin of life theories.

and

How can it be "true" and "right" if so many in their own discipline disagree?

Um...

never mind.

"At the very least, lets teach the controversy. Darwinian Evolution is a theory, and MUST be taught as such. If you want to REALLY confuse kids, try teaching philosophy or religion in the science classroom. That is what proponents of evolution want. They don't want sound, reasoned debate and a realistic look at the science, they want dogmatism."

What a bunch of crap! I just spent the week preparing 8th graders for my State's standard Science test. You want to know what the first thing we reviewed was? The SCIENTIFIC METHOD! It's really simple, try and keep up if you can!

1. Identify your problem
2. Research
3. Form a hypothesis
4. Develop procedures to test your hypothesis
5. Analyze the data
6. Draw concludions
7. Repeat ad nauseum!

The real "controversy" the ID proponents are asking us to teach is, "do we throw out the SCIENTIFIC METHOD or not?!"

Next we reviewed electromagnetism. I explained to them that lightning was, "the handy work of ZEUS, casting bolts of electricity down upon us hapless mortals!" Guess what, they told ME that this was not a scientific argument because there was no use of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD! Then we got down to some good old fashioned scientific dogmatism-we conducted actual experiments in class. I had students generating electricity and turning electric current into magnets in no time. Zeus never showed up though. Intelligent Designers-they just aren't emperical when you need 'em!

Once you start teaching evolution in church, then get back to me about ID in schools.

I know of few churches that discuss evolution or creation in the context of the current debate and of those that do, it seems they are split 50/50 on it. The Christian community is not as monolithic as some evolutionists think it is. But then again, neither is the scientific community. You Yanks sure do make this so black & white when oftentimes things are a bit more complicated...I wonder if it is a direct result of having a two party system...but that's another topic.

JR,
A consensus generally means a majority, doesn't mean there can't be significant disagreement, and it's obvious that disagreement is on the increase in recent years.

well there's this and I think it's relevant:

Proof of the theory

consensus

NOUN: The quality or condition of being in complete agreement or harmony: unanimity, unanimousness.