Evolution vs. Devolution

Nothing is more entertaining than a discussion between scientists and religionists. I witnessed both sides present their arguments about Florida's new education standards for science. "Biological change over time" is out and "evolution" is in. Yes, this is 2008. The standards have not yet been approved so a town meeting was held in Jacksonville for input.

The two sides can be boiled down to these points:

Against teaching evolution (46% of the speakers)

Other possibilities other than evolution must be considered and taught.
Teachers must be allowed to promote open-mindedness.
There are lots of problems with evolution. Several prominent scientists say so.
Evolution is just a theory.
God (or the bible) told me evolution is wrong.
“In my life time, I’ve never seen an ape turned into a human. I’ve never seen us come from slime”
"I was taught evolution in school and it never did me any good."
“How many of us were taught that Pluto was a planet?”
and other Discovery Institute "Wedge" arguments.

For teaching evolution (54% of the speakers)

The scientific method will out any fallacies in evolution. Those will be taught.
Evolution is the best mechanism we have to describe the natural world.
Bring us other scientific evidence and we will teach that too.
If we teach Intelligent Design (or anything like it) we will be sued (like Dover)

Carl Sagan's "baloney detection kit" is useful for evaluating both side's arguments.

Some of the best

Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument. (religionists: "why are all you scientists so vehement? Us Christians are being so nice.")

Argument from "authority". (religionists: "The bible says...")

Argument from adverse consequences (both: "we are going to get sued if we don't teach ").

Appeal to ignorance (religionists: "I ain't never seen no slim mold turn into a person.").

Special pleading (typically referring to god's will). (religionists: "God will destroy you for this.").

Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses). (religionists: "there are gaps in the fossil record!").

Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (religionists: "Over 60% of Americans don't believe in evolution.")

The list goes on and on. Hats off to the framers and leaders of the new science standards. Now they must endure the onslaught of a vocal majority.

Can someone tell me why evolution is so scary? At least the creationists are evolving in their arguments:

"This is strategy No. 4," said Michael Ruse, director of Florida State University's program on the history and philosophy of science. The first three - banning the teaching of evolution, then promoting creationism, then touting intelligent design - have all hit legal roadblocks. (Tampabay.com)