Erm … so, does this mean you consider science to be a matter of opinion? Whatever happened to following the evidence, trying to remain objective, and drawing conclusions only from what is supported by evidence?

To put your suggestion into some context, Mike, I’ve been trying to think of a simple analogy. Here goes.

Imagine your car is making a clonking sound when you drive it. You take it to a garage, and the mechanic tells you that your big-end bearing is worn out so you need either a new engine or an engine rebuild. Let’s assume you don’t like the sound of this (after all, it sounds expensive), so you take it to another garage, where you are told the same thing. You then go to another, and another, and another. After 12 garages, where you have been told the same thing 12 times, you then ask your local pastor, who tells you that the car needs an exorcism. You are suggesting that we ask the nation to vote between an exorcism and an engine rebuild.

[[I say, put evolution/creation to a vote … don’t let politicians decide, don’t let school boards that can be stacked decide, don’t let atheists, or creationists decide… let everyone decide what should be taught.]]

I don’t believe you’ve thought this through. Do you want people to decide whether chemistry or alchemy should be taught in high school science classes, or astronomy versus astrology? The latter would probably win. Do you want people voting on whether mainstream medicine or homeopathy should be taught to new medical students?

I really think the experts have to make some of the decisions. We can decide what to do about the facts, but to decide what the facts are, you need the experts. Any country that ignores that is doomed, as BA would put it.

Oh, wait, I DIDN’T.

See what I mean about ideology, folks? It makes people hallucinate words.”

That is one of the more disingenuous postings I have ever seen here.

Try another personal insult, QD; maybe that will make your point more convincing.