Re: Corrected Insert

Bill Payne (
Sun, 23 Nov 1997 17:24:04 -0600

Sat, 22 Nov 1997 22:57:14 -0800 Arthur V. Chadwick wrote:
> At 09:38 PM 11/22/97 -0600, Keith wrote:


> >What I am saying is that
> >evolutionary theory should not be described as a controversial now, because
> >of its nearly universal acceptance among scientists in relevant fields. It
> >should be mentioned that a theory being widely accepted and
> >non-controversial does not imply that it is true. That must be evaluated
> >by a theories ability to stand the test of time and new data.
> I agree. Maybe I think it ought to be, but you are right. There is no
> controversy among evolutionists when confronted with creationists, about
> whether or even how (at least until the creationists are gone!) evolution
> occurred.

And it is this monolithic bluster of which students should be warned.
The purpose of the textbook insert is to tip students off that their
textbook, and likely their instructor, will not present the full story.
I think this is more accurately described as indoctrination rather than