The Theory of Evolution should be taught in Public Schools (in the United States)

My case isn't a case as such. It merely is the denial that the theory of evolution SHOULD (emphasis on the word should) be taught in public schools. My opponent's first point raised is that students have a right to learn the most accurate explanation possible. This is a point that I agree with. Then, he continues to say that "the theory of evolution is by far the most agreed upon explanation for how we see so many different species today, and is the only explanation that has substantial amounts of evidence.". this is an incorrect statement on so many levels. Evolution itself is not 'the most agreed upon explanation for how we see so many different species today' it is just one of several explanations, the main rival being creationism and a lesser one being the theory that we are in fact in a matrix, meaning an artificial, virtually constructed reality and actually there are no real species in the first place they are just programmed into the virtual reality. Also you cannot claim that the theory of evolution is accurate. This is because it is a theory. I defined a theory as a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. My opponent agreed to this definition and then decided to ignore the part of it which refers to a theory's status beingconjectural and subject to experimentation and then being said to be IN CONTRAST WITH well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Evolution is not a fact, thus it cannot be claimed to be definitely accurate. The second point raised was that teaching evolution does preserve free will, and does not mean indoctrinating students. The main issue with this is that if students are taught the theory of evolution without being taught all the other theories of species origin then how are they not being indoctrinated? Indoctrinated: to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., especially to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.[1] The final point raised was that teaching an alternative view of the origin of species or not mentioning the subject at all is depriving students. However, if the theory of evolution is not a fact, what is it depriving students of? Teaching should be based on concrete facts, definitely true content should be all that is taught. Evolution is not definitely true, hence it being a theory, so it would not actually be a fallacy to the way of teaching if one was to not teach evolution in a public school, where philosophy is barely a subject and if it is is to the most basic level compared with College/University standard of philosophy. On a separate note, many people believe that evolution is a scientifically proven fact, and that creation is only a theory. This is simply not true. Evolution is not a proven fact, and certainly not a scientifically proven fact. Technically speaking, science can never "prove" anything as a "fact," rather it can only say with some degree of certainty if whatever is being examined is true or not. The scientific approach for examining facts and determining truth is done in five steps: 1) An observation is made 2) A hypothesis is formed 3) Data is gathered 4) The hypothesis is tested in light of the data 5) If the hypothesis passes the test, it becomes a theory. However, new data is constantly being discovered and the hypothesis re-tested. This data either supports the theory or disproves it, but never proves the theory as a fact (for future data could be gathered which disproves it). That is why science can never "prove" anything, only disprove things. If there is no way of testing or falsifying the hypothesis, the theory isn't accepted by the scientific community. George Gaylord Simpson, a notable scientist himself, has said, "it is inherent that statements which cannot be checked by observation are not really about anything, or at the very least they are not science.". Usually the event in question is repeated, and these five steps are used to determine its truthfulness. Events in history cannot be repeated, so they cannot be verified by the scientific method. This alone indicates that the theory of evolution, far from being a fact, is not even a valid scientific theory. If the scientific method was the only way to prove things, you could not prove you went to work yesterday even though many facts suggest you did -- your work got done, your friends would remember, your boss would remember, and there is additional mileage on your car's odometer. For events in history, another method for establishing facts and determining truth must be used. This is what our courts of law use; it is called the Legal-historical method for proving things. This method of establishing truth is based upon the probability of an event happening after examining all the evidence found which does or does not support it. In this case, which has a greater degree of probability: creation or evolution? There is a lot of empirical, and tangible evidence showing that creation is more probable than evolution. Sources: [1] http://dictionary.reference.com... [2] http://www.emjc3.com...