ReligionDispatches.org

Why is it that the same people who insist on including "weaknesses" of one particular scientific theory in the science curriculum don't breathe a word about including any of the thousands of documented weaknesses--contradictions, absurdities, inconsistenceies, incongruencies, impossibilities and fallacies--contained in the Bible, in their new Bible-based curriculum?

The proof of the pudding lies with predictive ability. Advances in biological technology, such as genetically engineered drugs for curing cancer, wouldn't be possible without a deep understanding of evolution. Just ask any genetic engineer. Bible-based prediction results, other than those based on valid observations of human emotions and behavior that any secular person could make, are indistinguishable from random chance. (The Bible's odds are enhanced sometimes, when it predicts both of two possible outcomes.)