Reply to comment

Science is like...being nowhere and everywhere at the same time.

I feel that thinking of science in a way of loopy story or rather a summary of observations that remains until new observations are made that no longer fit the original summary is more useful than the traditional perspective. It allows for one to be more accepting of new and innovative ideas regarding...well, everything. In my experience within Dover's evolution court case I feel that is could have been completely avoided. If the parents and the students were taught that evolution and the ideas of a supernatural beings were not truth but really summaries of observations that have yet to be disproven, people especially parents wouldn't of jumped to the conclusion that the teachers are forcing beliefs onto their children but were really just opening them to new ideas that they can use and accept in whatever way they so choose. To be honest, most of the students didn't mind learning about the different theories but were more bothered by the fact that one simple thing was creating such a ruckus among the small town of Dover. I feel that one huge problem in society is the lack of ability to accept things that seem to be out of the ordinary to us. If we were taught in school how to accept things without necessarily believing in them a lot of controversy would be seen on many topics. I personally feel that at some point in our education the traditional perspective should be dropped and the loopy story telling perspective should be adopted.