I do have to say, though, i am already beginning to doubt any objective conclusion by this paper when i read (pg 10) about “creationist and intelligent design efforts to eliminate evolution from classroom teaching”. Seriously? While there certainly may be a microscopicly few creationists who feel this. I have never met one. The goal and desire of both groups is to open up the discussion so that various views, not just one or two, can be looked at. This is far from eliminating evolution, or any viewpoint, from the classroom. As i continue to read this thesis, is this the kind of “objective” conclusions i can anticipate reading? What simplistic tripe. And the paper won’t change the past, or the truth of it. It was his peers that rejected his work, creationists aside. And it was doctored. It was manipulated. Maybe with the best intentions. The point is, what students saw in their textbooks was and is not a true reflection of that seen in the real world. If you are going to continue to use it, why not at least acknowledge it or give a disclaimer. Or is a lie a good means to reach the truth, or will the truth reveal the lie.