Evolution should not be taught as a fact in American public schools.

"Not quite. The reason it is discarded by many is because it ignores all other scientific proofs and completely disregaurds the imposibility of a creator beyond our solar system. --Creationists say that the earth is 6000 years old, yet many rock formations are found to be millions of years old.-- Why teach something we know is not true?" Because you did not come up with any other explanation to why life exists, you conceded that Intelligent Design can in fact be true, and because ID can oppose evolution, evolution is not a set-in-stone fact, and thus should not be taught as absolute fact. Furthermore, about your rock formation thing, in the book "Dinosaurs, the Bible, Barney, and Beyond," it is pointed out: "The Age of Dinosaurs supposedly spanned the length and breadth of the Mesozoic Era. That era is divided by evolution scientists into three major periods.... Where did those periods and dates originate? In the 1700's, James Hutton and Charles Lyell proposed a system of life development that 'predated' known history. The Geologic Column or Geologic Time Scale was produced by Lyell, who also wrote the 'Antiquity of Man', a book in which he conjectured that man as a species was much older than believed at the time. Lyell's system of geological dating was based on what he observed in a nearby formation that showed layers of rocks in stratas. The DATES (such as 225 million years ago) were placed on the column by Lyell as a guess! He did not have evidence to back up his dating on the column, other than his own theory of 'uniformationarianism' that suggested that the earth has experienced a uniform rate of volcanic activity over time, that the earth's atmosphere has remained constant, and that the chemical proportions of the earth have remained the same from the beginning of time to the present. Many people have come to regard the Geological Column as fact. From its outset and remaining to this day, it is a theory." (89-90) The idea of rock formations being millions of years old is actually based upon a theory that to this day has NOT been proven. Intelligent design still remains an alternative to a 4.5 billion year old universe. "I quote from someone's profile 'Faith is something you believe when you know it is not so.' - Mark Twain." It's better to quote the person himself than a profile. Napoleon is not always right. Well, nor is Mark Twain. "ID is completely illogical and truely has no proof, whatsoever. In any sense. Unless you count the bible, in which case evolution has thousands of 'proof'" You say ID is completely illogical, yet you do not say how, and you no longer can, because this round is the last. Furthermore, something doesn't need proof to be possible. Concrete proof is needed to say that something is impossible; concrete proof is also needed to say that something is set-in-stone true. A possibility, however, needs no real proof, only circumstantial proof. "[P]resent populations of humans and animals are consistent with models that show a 'start' from very small reproducing groups less than 10,000 years ago." Boom. Circumstantial evidence. It doesn't prove ID, but proves that it is possible. Anyways, with your meager response, you have conceded a number of points by not defending them, including: Circumstantial evidence is not enough to call something a fact. Anything that is not fact should not be taught in schools. In conclusion, Darwin's Theory of Evolution only has circumstantial proof, and has been conceded to be unable to be called a fact, and thus has been conceded to be unfit to be taught in schools, which affirms the resolution. Vote PRO. Thank you for this wonderful debate.