Teach both evolution and creationism say 54% of Britons

It was about 8 years ago since I studied biology in school, but I remember the coverage of evolution being cursory at best. As far as I recall it consisted of a brief explanation of natural selection, supported by the example of melanistic moths. The words 'homology' and 'analogy' were explained and we all looked at pictures of pentadactyl limbs in bats, humans, dolphins and a couple of other animals. Then we saw some 19th century cartoons of Darwin and talked about his explanation for the evolution of the eye.My memory might be clouded by distance, but that was it as far as I can recall. To make things worse, you have options as to where to focus your study once you reach the age of 14 in the UK. I was doing the 'seperate sciences' curriculum, which meant my biology course was more detailed than that of most students.After writing this, I read around the internet a bit, and it seems that a new science curriculum was implemented in 2006. Anyone here just finished school in the UK or teach science there?

I can. My Christian parents, both different types of Christians, had no problem exposing me to a variety of world views. My Catholic school, where I was taught secular biology by an atheist, also once invited a creationist nutter in to talk to us in 6th form.Is every Christian you've ever met living in a little fundamentalist community out in the desert somewhere?

It's not rehashing every point ever made - it's just a matter of your post not being utter nonsense. Using 'Christian' when you mean 'creationist' or something similar isn't convenient shorthand - it's just wrong. It's annoying and misleading when creationists randomly substitute 'atheist', 'scientist' and 'evolutionist' for one another, and it's equally as annoying and misleading when anybody else uses 'Chrisitan' and 'creationist' interchangably.