In a nutshell, there is a middle ground which science and religion overlap on: philosophy. This is the key to a long-term solution.
There are at least two balanced ways we could do this. We could do it in a high-school science class or we could do it in a high-school philosophy class. Preferably both.
If in a required science class, we could have one or two weeks out of one semester for the students to learn about the different aspects/history of the philosophy of science.
Philosophy of science - Wikipedia
During this period, students could conduct simple thought and/or lab experiments designed to demonstrate exactly when and how different philosophical approaches to science influence the nature of the scientific theory...and how different approaches can lead to different philosophical interpretations. This is, after all, what this whole mess is about.
This is when the concerns of Darwin critics can be addressed...without it being ABOUT "religion vs. science"...but rather it would be about the philosophical approach Darwin took...and without pointless back-and-forth bickering about the details of this fact or that fact.
If this is done in a required philosophy class instead, then all they need to do is the exact same thing but maybe toss in a field trip down to the lab.
Even better would be a separate class devoted to the philosophy of science.
Mankind could use a dose of philosophy in any event.
This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-14-2005 06:11 PM
™ Version 4.2