Ragnazork should be (in the manditory sense) tought in schools

Audience, you may wondering what the word Ragnazork means. Well, The definition of Ragnazork is pristinely not the same as Qubblevome. The two words sound nothing alike, and therefore cannot be confused with each other, a blessing not bestowed on much of the English language. In English we very often miscommunicate with each other and not all the time do we even catch when we do. For example should I describe a female as beautiful for me personally I have learned to use that word and hear it from others to mean a particular level of attractiveness. But for some reader of my description of a woman as beautiful they may not have learned to associate that word with nearly as high an attractiveness. In fact for them to visualize the degree witch I meant to describe to them I would need to add a lot of enhancing terms to ‘beautiful' like ‘very', ‘super', ‘ultra', or something more complicated like ‘as the stars'. Instances like that are not that big a deal when concerning confusion. Strangely what does seem to cause a bigger deal in confusion is one that at least has an add on word to designate its deferent meaning. This term is Macro-evolution and Micro-evolution. Perhaps one day English will develop enough to have new words for so simple a mix-up for words like these, but until then I have created two words that can adapt easily to any terms that need better distinguishing, words that I'm fairly certain will not themselves be two similar to the terms they would briefly replace for conversations sake. I don't worry about this being difficult for anyone because it is as easy as math when you take a number like 3.1452…. and make it equal with pi. For this debate the term Ragnazork replaces Macro-evolution and the term Quibblevome replaces Micro-evolution. Why would I find it important distinguish these two words, well one is accepted as science and fact by even the most wacko Young Earth Creationist, and the other is the controversial one that people actually are in disagreement over. To often debates and discussions go to no point of resolve between two people because facts, evidence and points of interest remained centered around Quibblevome brought up by supporters of Ragnazork to the people who argued against Ragnazork. And all the arguments against Ragnazork were interpreted as assaults against Quibblevome. Why? Likely because people have become lazy and long ago stopped bothering to add the terms Macro and Micro in their debates and felt content to mutually call both terms evolution. So when someone said evolution they could have meant Ragnazork or Quibblevome. No one bothers asking to clarify because both parties assume that the other party thinks the same one is controversial, therefore that must be the point of discussion. But one side believes that its both Ragnazork and Qubblevome that the other finds objectionable; while the other side thinks Ragnazork alone is all that's been argued for some time now. Some believe I. D. should be taught side by side in school with Ragnazork. I contend these people are wrong. Though I would advocate I. D. and Creationism in general they should not be in schools, and neither should Ragnazork. Teachers complain enough as is that they don't have enough time as it is to cover what they need to for the SOL's (standards of learning) and that they feel like because of this that they are not really teaching the subject to their students but rather ‘teaching them to take a test'. If only we could do something for these people with such a stressful job. Why not lighten there load? Take Ragnazork out of the SOL's and the curriculum all together. Ragnazork is not vital enough to waste our high school student's time with. This knowledge is not nessicary for future practices of biology professianaly . http://www.evolutionnews.org... and practically. I would not argue that we should try keeping the knowledge all together away from students, for that we not happen if its taken out of the main curriculem (the SOL tested stuff). Phycology is not tought in history or science class, no chapter is devoted to this science, no mandatory SOL class for it, and yet you would likely find from talking to most students that they have supprising level of understanding of the subject, (perhaps not profissianal level worthy) given that its not covered in a class they took. The same will happen with evolution if taken out of the SOL's. I would not even object to holding an optional class much like phycology is for teaching Ragnazork. the worry I've gathered on doing that is that means ragnazork is portrayed not so much as a real science. well metorology is considered a very real sceince but its not an SOL class. My challange to my opponent is to show how fundamentally important Ragnazork is to sceince that its remaning a SOL cirriculum is neccisary.