Second, those peripheral claims which can be tested have been proven false, and are therefore not science but religious beliefs. But consider this, two opposing scientific theories only deserve equal time if both explain the evidence equally well. By the time all these are considered, you no longer have time to teach science. Their beliefs do deserve coverage in public schools, yes, but they properly belong in a religion, philosophy, or sociology classroom, NOT a science classroom. C. Science and religion deal with separate areas of human experience.
Conflict only arises when people try to apply science to religion or religion to science.
The best example I know to illustrate this difference is a debate I witnessed at a Christian Life Center in Solano County some years ago. Of course, the scientists all said yes. The Creationists were then asked if any amount of evidence could ever convince them to change their minds about special creation, and they all answered no, absolutely not. The scientist believes in proof without certainty, the bigot in certainty without proof. E. Science leaves God out of its theories not out of disrespect or disbelief, but because you can't cram God in a test tube.