Dixieland -

I believe the theory of "design" died a LONG time ago. It is a 17th or 18th century theory that has been proven wrong time and time again.

If you are speaking of creationism, I would have to say that that is a religious based belief that should not be taught in science classes, but in cultural studies along side other religions' creation theories. Why is creationism NOT science? Because science takes pieces and tries to put them together, and hopefull yield an answer. Creationism starts with an answer and finds pieces that fit into that story. It does not adapt with new evidence. Evolution has and will continue to as we learn more.

It is not a science, and does not belong in science curriculums. Sure, put it in a philosophy course or a cultural studies course for high schoolers.

Sara luvs her Tinky -

I don't know how many times I've heard the "I used to drink and do drugs and now I have Christ" tale. I'm well aware that Christians are not all do-gooders, in fact, I'm more inclined to think that they have far more sordid pasts than my own from some of the stories I've been told while being "witnessed" to. The thing is, I've never had a problem leading a moral life, and so I've never needed Christ to enter in and help me sort things out.

Also, as for this information you are providing from a scientist who fell off the evolution bandwagon and onto the creationism one: do you know how many times the opposite has happened? The reason why it is of interest that someone would go from evolution to creationism is because that is not the norm. It happens so often in the opposite direction that it's not even news. Besides, I have a lot of cynicism towards these newly found creationist as they can often get way more name recognition being a creationist (as it is less populated) than as an evolutionist. Good career move.