Does Evolution Require Spreading The Word?

This may come as a surprise to you, but I actually see a lot more effort spent is spreading the word on mathematics than on spreading the word on evolution. Perhaps it is because I am a mathematician that I am aware of this effort.What you see as spreading the word on evolution isn't that at all. What you are seeing are defensive measures. Evolution is under attack by creationists, and most of the attack is quite dishonest. Evolutionists are, of course, defending their science against the attack and against the dishonest characterization of evolution by creationists.If all that were happening was that some students were avoiding the classes that teach evolution, and some parents were home-schooling their children (as a way of avoiding these classes), then you would not be seeing the activity that you consider "spreading the word". However, what we actually see are creationists trying to control the curriculum and attempting to insert religion into the science class.Most scientists, and not just biologists, are offended by high handed and dishonest attempts of creationists to dictate that their thoroughly unscientific views be taught in the science class.

I'm in functional analysis, at least in theory. In practice I do computer science. But actually that's irrelevant.What I was actually referring to are the discussion in AMS Notices and the sessions in math conferences, that deal with the problem of mathematical illiteracy and with finding ways to combat it. Probably not. That's a shame. There seems to be a tendency to abandon common sense, and replace it with rigid rules. I sometimes wonder whether we need a constitutional amendment to require that non-lawyers be given fair representation in the legislative bodies.

I think the responses to your OP mostly agreed with that.As for your (2), (3), (4) - nobody said that. You are misconstruing what people are saying. Shame on you.