Your "evidence states: “DNA has even been extracted from a well-preserved skeleton of the extinct human creature known as Neanderthal, a member of the genus Homo and often considered either as a subspecies of Homo sapiens or as a separate species. Application of the molecular clock, which makes use of known rates of genetic mutation, suggests that Neanderthal's lineage diverged from that of modern Homo sapiens less than half a million years ago, which is entirely compatible with evidence from the fossil record.”

I have this quote from a book by RALPH O. MUNCASTER it is called Creation Vs. Evolution.

“It was once thought that the Neandertal was a man. But recent genetic DNA research indicates the chromosomes do not match those of humans. They do match those of bipedal primates (apes).”

Your evidence also states: “ Creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science.”

Well, I have to say this about that: The scientific method is the basic set of procedures scientists use for obtaining knew knowledge about the universe in which we live. The steps include: observe, form hypothesis, design experiment, collect information, interpret data, form conclusions. Evolution isn’t based on the scientific method, because no one was there to perform the scientific method.

Your evidence states this too: “No body of beliefs that has its origin in doctrinal material rather than scientific observation, interpretation, and experimentation should be admissible as science in any science course. Incorporating the teaching of such doctrines into a science curriculum compromises the objectives of public education.”

I have to say this: Once again, evolution is not based on the scientific method. Shouldn’t it therefore not be “admissible as science?”