Why does anyone even bother with the SOHO store? Is their marketing just that good? I've never seen the point in having more than one store. The prices are identical on identical products, it just usually means you have to jump through hoops to get to the good products (hidden behind registrations and customer codes and so forth).
Last time I dealt with Dell their support was excellent - calling back when they said they would, actually putting on a knowledgeable expert and not just bouncing around to other clueless morons, sending a tech out next business day on the 3-day plan. I don't even recall having to ask any of their (Indian) call centre staff to repeat what they said (or put on the Indian cow-orker to talk to them in Hindi;)
That being said right now they are really being let down by their hardware. I have an almost 4-year-old laptop that needs replacing. It's replacement? A model with an identical base - just a slightly faster CPU. The connections are still mostly at the rear, there's no Blu-ray option, no firewire, no DVI or HDMI output, just 4 USB ports paired up so its hard to be able to use all 4 simultaneously. No card readers, no fingerprint scanner (which I think is a bit of a wank, but still...) and it wants to be able to use something called a "floppy drive" - I remember seeing one of those in a museum;) Oh and the touchpad is mounted higher than the keys so things go spaz when you accidentally thumb it while typing. I don't think its possible to get a 7400rpm drive either. The base, with lid closed, is about 5cm tall (very bulky!) and it weighs about 3 times as much.
HP, Asus and Toshiba do not have any of these problems. There is no possible way I can recommend a laptop that come the end of its 3-yr refresh period will be 10 years old.
As the current W3C standard for HTML markup is based on XML and the correct thing to do with a non-compliant XML document is discard it; when the browser hits a non-compliant page and simply refuses to even attempt to render it - things will change real quick.
Of course, since Microsoft writes both the software that creates non-compliant pages (FrontPage) and the software that renders them (IE) in reality nothing will change until people have the common sense to dump everything Microsoft.
Python is easy enough for a beginner to pick up, rigid enough they don't wander off into bad practises while learning, yet also powerful enough to be universally useful. It also has a wide acceptance in the Real World (tm) which ensures that students aren't being disheartened by having to learn a language that, while academically sound, is practically useless to them (eg, Haskell).
To those of us down under, VB is a particularly cheap & nasty.... drink labelled as beer. Just like Visual Basic is a particularly cheap & nasty... paint program labelled as a programming language. Avoid both at all costs.
Unfortunately the Queensland government recently passed a law outlawing the (northern) national sport of playing golf with cane toads.
Of course, if the NSW government haven't got the same legal problem, nothing stops those in Coffs whacking the little blighters back across the border;)
It was pretty fun up until the point where it required using urllib (to retrieve more URLs than one has time to do manually), and urllib doesn't support NTLM-authenticated proxy servers. I was hence unable to continue.
I'm fairly familiar with Python, and I enjoyed how the challenges were stretching my limits and making me think differently about the problem too. Good value for intermediate programmers.
I gave you a few of those before mentioning the other editors I also have installed more as a by-point (although they outnumbered the actual IDEs). FWIW this machine also has VS.NET 2003 and VS.NET 2005, neither of which I really use since they both suck. In fact, I gave up using VisualPython (I participated in a trial version) because while it was nice, I couldn't stand Visual Studio.
Please take a look at SPE in particular which I think suits the requirements you have spoken of. I haven't had to do any GUI work in Eclipse but both PyDev and TruStudio are great for adding Python support (not just syntax highlighting, but the full complement of IDE features including code completion, macros, debugging support, class browsing, etc) to Eclipse. Eclipse itself has the PM and SCM support. It probably has GUI builder support as well, though as I said I haven't used it for any of that yet so I haven't checked it out; might be Java-only.
A lot of people have already mentioned the PyDev plugin for Eclipse. You may also like to know about TruStudio (another Eclipse-based IDE) which supports Python and PHP amongst other "scripting languages", and perhaps something like Stani's Python Editor. I've got all three, plus a couple of other generic editors like Vim, Notepad++, NewEdit, JEdit, also PythonWin (which comes with ActivePython, but you can get it separately for vanilla Python.org).
Gee, you see one oversized cat and suddenly it must be a mutant. Step outside the box for a minute here. I mean, come on, how else do you think we keep the Great White Shark under control?
"I'm gonna eat you little fishy!" -- The Cat, Red Dwarf
Well, yes, I do in fact care what tools my car was built with. And I also like the fact when I take it to the mechanic for a service I can talk with him, go into his workshop and inspect his tools, and I get the choice of what parts go into my car.
Combine that with the fact that the man is a... Christian (pretty obvious from his website)
Strange, I didn't realise the definition of a Christian was based solely on the appearance of one's website. But of course, you read it on the internet so it must be true!
John 13:35 (MSG) "This is how everyone will recognize that you are my disciples--when they see the love you have for each other."
If you want me to wear an Armani suit, then have the decency to pay me enough that I can afford one. Or two. Until such time, your whining about my dress sense is as useless & pathetic to me as your whining about some IT issue that happened because you ignored my advice & didn't get me the equipment I needed to prevent it in the first place.
There's no such thing as "local widgets", given that there are so many varied widget libraries available. Sun are doing the right thing by providing a decent default one for their Java platform, but not tying you to it. Many other VM'd languages do the same thing, Python has Tk bundled with it, for example. Doesn't stop me from using GTK, Qt, wxWidgets, Tuross'TotallyTerrificToolkit, or whatever.
I agree Swing is ugly by default, that's why it is possible to theme it. In fact, making something ugly by default is probably a good idea as it encourages you to think about UI issues and not simply code something with the mindset of "I like it this way, therefore everyone else will like it this way". Aesthetics are a personal thing - there's probably people who think the default Swing look(s) (plural because it has 3 - motif, metal and windoze) are beautiful.
Also, Java apps run perfectly fine on any machine made in the past 5 years; repeating the "Java is slow" myth only makes you look foolish. In fact, I find that for example, JEdit feels a lot faster than Visual Studio (its also more useful too, but that's beside the point)
No, the thing that fundamentalist Christians fear most is that schools become a breeding ground for stupidity, and ergo their kids grow up stupid. It is a fact that public school science classes teach evolution as if it were law, and not simply one of many theories. They give no time to other theories, so kids grow up thinking evolution is it. In many cases they use outdated textbooks presenting data that we now know are in the least false, but occasionally blatant forgeries and scientific malpractice designed to give layman's credence to evolution.
What the Kansas state has done is to break this dangerous trend, and they should be applauded.
It's like Al-Qaeda terrorists whining about not getting any respect for their ideals of World Peace. Respect is earned, through actions. Lip-service will more often than not *lose* you respect. Running free software on Microsoft Windows is paying lip service. Everyone likes getting something for free. You've misunderstood the meaning of free.
Writing free software for Microsoft Windows is like substituting the New Zealand cow in the McDonalds burger for a steak you bought from the local butcher and cooked yourself. You're getting a nice bit of steak, but still a crappy sugar-filled bun and dubious fillings with some "special" sauce, and fully contributing towards the profits of those you say you don't believe in. ie, you're a hypocrite. A hypocrite who has the hide to complain that they don't get any respect.
It was more than 2 years ago, more like 5 or so. Microsoft put out vapourware press releases about how they were moving from boxing products for sale in stores and instead moving to a subscription model where they host the app and you rent it off them. The reason at the time was that with the popularity of the Internet, *lots* of people were discovering just how bad Microsoft and their products were, and were thinking about subjects like "this really is a buggy, defective product - either fix it or give me my money back". Both of those choices means Microsoft lose money. So instead of selling someone a product which they own, the product is instead rented to them under very strict terms and conditions; we've seen Microsoft EULAs so we know what those terms are like - you can't use it to speak the truth (ie, say how bad Microsoft or their products are), you can't use it to compete with Microsoft in anything, you must sacrifice your firstborn child to the Redmond gods, yadda yadda.
Since there was such a huge backlash over this idea, they have instead been slowly but surely been edging towards it, sneakily bringing it about anyway. That's what the whole "genuine advantage" thing is about - tracking who is using their stuff so they can bill them via the subscription model once they drop the boxed versions from the shelves and all support. That's why there's this concept of "end-of-life" product with no more support - it's not just about forcing people to buy their same product again, its just getting people used to the idea that instead of a class-action lawsuit for continually defective products, you just upgrade. And if you have to upgrade so often it becomes a pain, maybe its easier to simply subscribe instead rather than buy this stuff you get no support for anyway?
Your homework is to go find out the other things they have done in the past decade to support their move towards the unaccountable subscription model. It's scary.
Somehow I missed the, "There is no God" part of science class. That's probably because it's not there.
Or we went to different classes. My last two years of high school were spent at a public school where it was 'assumed knowledge' that evolution is law, and alternative ideas were treated with scorn and laughed at, along with those who were even prepared to apply science to the ideas (let alone those who actually "believed" them). If you do not understand how bad this is, you have no place commenting on science. By all means, don't subscribe to a particular theory but if your only answer to that theory is to make wild, incorrect claims based solely on someone else's political agenda then you've become part of the anti-science machine where you are prepared to take someone else's opinion over applying science.
I'm not sure where you got the idea I was Christian, I really should avoid your little emotional outburst there but I have to point out that it only demonstrates your own insecurity; that you are assuming something about me based only on the fact that I'm prepared to take a contrary view to yours. I could be playing devil's advocate, you'll never know because its irrelevent. I just find it interesting the conspiracy theory you've come up with as your irrational fears get the better of your logical reasoning mind.
Oh, and for what it's worth the first amendment was written into the Constitution as many of the people coming to the USA were "religious zealots" (as you say) who were escaping persecution and they wanted to make sure that they were not going to be persecuted in their new country, hence why "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
Also, if you wanted to live in a country dominated by religious fanatics, you wouldn't bother going to Iraq, there's much better choices like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria,...
As talkorigins is a pro-evolution biased site I'll happily take anything they have to say with a pound of salt, ie I'll ignore it in the context you're attempting to use it, as a reference site, as it is invalid.
If macroevolution is indeed observable, how come no-one has witnessed an amoeba crawling out of a swamp and growing legs? Why have domestic birds not developed stronger beaks in order to break out of the cages that confine them? Why has my cat not grown wings so it can more easily chase birds?
The very concept is as ludicrous as the somewhat exaggerated examples I've given, and despite protestations by those who believe in evolution (ie, its their faith, religion) it has never, and can never, be observed; and hence fails the ability to be placed through the scientific method, and therefore is not science as we define it today.
Macroevolution does not qualify under the scientific method, however it is being taught in classrooms, exclusively, as the only valid scientific reasoning behind how things came about.
Why is there not an equal uproar against this unscientific educational disaster?
The answer to that question is simple: some people have a political stance against anything remotely related to religion, and wish to shelter their little darlings from anything as damaging to their brainwashing as questioning and testing things such as by the introduction of alternative thought on a subject.
I never mentioned anything about evolution. Go build your straw man elsewhere.
Outright refusal to study any valid scientific theory on the basis that it involves a divine being is teaching atheism. Science class should be about the history, principles and methods of science. Not about teaching "hey, this is what a subset of scientists currently believe is true" (which is the fallacy of appeal to popularity, and is what happens with current so-called science teaching on origin).
I don't care what a subset of scientists believe. That's faith, not science. If we had to rely on that, people would still think the earth is flat and if we moved too far we'd fall off the edge; or in geocentrism; or that we descended from monkeys in Africa; or that our genetic makeup determines what choices we make; or countless other popular theories now debunked.
If you care to do even a modicum of research you'll discover a lot of what we know know through science was discovered by deeply religious people who chose to dedicate their lives to the pursuit of science over the pursuit of religion; ie, who were prepared, many at great personal expense, to go against the tide of popular thought (even of popular thought mandated by the Church, in the case of men like Copernicus and Galileo for example) and pursue science. Perhaps they hold views similar to Kepler, who wrote:
"I undertake to prove that God, in creating the universe and regulating the order of the cosmos, had in view the five regular bodies of geometry known since the days of Pythagoras and Plato, and that he has fixed according to those dimensions, the number of heavens, their proportions and the relations of their movements." (The Mystery of the Cosmos, 1596)
and
"It is an act of piety at the very beginning of this discourse about Nature to see whether it says anything contrary to Holy Writ. Nevertheless, I believe that is premature to raise this question here before I am assailed. In general I promise to say nothing harmful to Holy Writ, and if Copernicus is convicted of anything with me, I shall consider him finished. And this was always my intention from the time when I began to examine the six books of Copernicus's Revolutions."
That they hold such views does not make their methods unscientific; rather, science is the method they use to determine the validity (or otherwise) of their views.
But for public schools, schools funded by the state and federal governments, I think the teachings should remain purely secular. This will allow science to be taught without any religion feeling they are beoing slighted, and it will allow parents to more directly supervise their childs religious instruction.
Except it teaches atheism at the expense of other religions, therefore your argument is false.
Science is about the quest for knowledge. Teaching students that any knowledge that can in any way, shape or form be linked to a religion is false and not worth studying is itself not based in science but solely on a political, and perhaps religious agenda.
The constitution of the USA is clear - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" so the argument that a valid scientific theory has some base in religion and cannot be taught is in violation of the Constitution and the basic rights it grants Americans.
Slashdot Mirror
Last time I dealt with Dell their support was excellent - calling back when they said they would, actually putting on a knowledgeable expert and not just bouncing around to other clueless morons, sending a tech out next business day on the 3-day plan. I don't even recall having to ask any of their (Indian) call centre staff to repeat what they said (or put on the Indian cow-orker to talk to them in Hindi
That being said right now they are really being let down by their hardware. I have an almost 4-year-old laptop that needs replacing. It's replacement? A model with an identical base - just a slightly faster CPU. The connections are still mostly at the rear, there's no Blu-ray option, no firewire, no DVI or HDMI output, just 4 USB ports paired up so its hard to be able to use all 4 simultaneously. No card readers, no fingerprint scanner (which I think is a bit of a wank, but still...) and it wants to be able to use something called a "floppy drive" - I remember seeing one of those in a museum
HP, Asus and Toshiba do not have any of these problems. There is no possible way I can recommend a laptop that come the end of its 3-yr refresh period will be 10 years old.
You're almost correct.
As the current W3C standard for HTML markup is based on XML and the correct thing to do with a non-compliant XML document is discard it; when the browser hits a non-compliant page and simply refuses to even attempt to render it - things will change real quick.
Of course, since Microsoft writes both the software that creates non-compliant pages (FrontPage) and the software that renders them (IE) in reality nothing will change until people have the common sense to dump everything Microsoft.
It's 8 hours to install Windows from scratch, downloading all drivers, applying service packs & (re-)visiting Windows Update.
I predict the rest of the 6-8 weeks is spent typing in the product activation key.
I would.
.... drink labelled as beer. Just like Visual Basic is a particularly cheap & nasty ... paint program labelled as a programming language. Avoid both at all costs.
Python is easy enough for a beginner to pick up, rigid enough they don't wander off into bad practises while learning, yet also powerful enough to be universally useful. It also has a wide acceptance in the Real World (tm) which ensures that students aren't being disheartened by having to learn a language that, while academically sound, is practically useless to them (eg, Haskell).
To those of us down under, VB is a particularly cheap & nasty
oh thats right! mod me down because you disagree.
;)
You're obviously new around here
It's not like the web developer pulled them out of his bum
:)
However, that would adequately explain why Windows is shit
Unfortunately the Queensland government recently passed a law outlawing the (northern) national sport of playing golf with cane toads.
;)
Of course, if the NSW government haven't got the same legal problem, nothing stops those in Coffs whacking the little blighters back across the border
It is an introduction to the world of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for .NET programmers.
I thought they were already fully versed and extremely proficient at it?
It was pretty fun up until the point where it required using urllib (to retrieve more URLs than one has time to do manually), and urllib doesn't support NTLM-authenticated proxy servers. I was hence unable to continue.
I'm fairly familiar with Python, and I enjoyed how the challenges were stretching my limits and making me think differently about the problem too. Good value for intermediate programmers.
(I also found it recently via del.icio.us)
I gave you a few of those before mentioning the other editors I also have installed more as a by-point (although they outnumbered the actual IDEs).
FWIW this machine also has VS.NET 2003 and VS.NET 2005, neither of which I really use since they both suck. In fact, I gave up using VisualPython (I participated in a trial version) because while it was nice, I couldn't stand Visual Studio.
Please take a look at SPE in particular which I think suits the requirements you have spoken of. I haven't had to do any GUI work in Eclipse but both PyDev and TruStudio are great for adding Python support (not just syntax highlighting, but the full complement of IDE features including code completion, macros, debugging support, class browsing, etc) to Eclipse. Eclipse itself has the PM and SCM support. It probably has GUI builder support as well, though as I said I haven't used it for any of that yet so I haven't checked it out; might be Java-only.
A lot of people have already mentioned the PyDev plugin for Eclipse. You may also like to know about TruStudio (another Eclipse-based IDE) which supports Python and PHP amongst other "scripting languages", and perhaps something like Stani's Python Editor. I've got all three, plus a couple of other generic editors like Vim, Notepad++, NewEdit, JEdit, also PythonWin (which comes with ActivePython, but you can get it separately for vanilla Python.org).
Gee, you see one oversized cat and suddenly it must be a mutant. Step outside the box for a minute here. I mean, come on, how else do you think we keep the Great White Shark under control?
"I'm gonna eat you little fishy!" -- The Cat, Red Dwarf
Well, yes, I do in fact care what tools my car was built with. And I also like the fact when I take it to the mechanic for a service I can talk with him, go into his workshop and inspect his tools, and I get the choice of what parts go into my car.
Strange, I didn't realise the definition of a Christian was based solely on the appearance of one's website. But of course, you read it on the internet so it must be true!
John 13:35 (MSG) "This is how everyone will recognize that you are my disciples--when they see the love you have for each other."
You've hit your head on the nail.
If you want me to wear an Armani suit, then have the decency to pay me enough that I can afford one. Or two. Until such time, your whining about my dress sense is as useless & pathetic to me as your whining about some IT issue that happened because you ignored my advice & didn't get me the equipment I needed to prevent it in the first place.
There's no such thing as "local widgets", given that there are so many varied widget libraries available. Sun are doing the right thing by providing a decent default one for their Java platform, but not tying you to it. Many other VM'd languages do the same thing, Python has Tk bundled with it, for example. Doesn't stop me from using GTK, Qt, wxWidgets, Tuross'TotallyTerrificToolkit, or whatever.
I agree Swing is ugly by default, that's why it is possible to theme it. In fact, making something ugly by default is probably a good idea as it encourages you to think about UI issues and not simply code something with the mindset of "I like it this way, therefore everyone else will like it this way". Aesthetics are a personal thing - there's probably people who think the default Swing look(s) (plural because it has 3 - motif, metal and windoze) are beautiful.
Also, Java apps run perfectly fine on any machine made in the past 5 years; repeating the "Java is slow" myth only makes you look foolish. In fact, I find that for example, JEdit feels a lot faster than Visual Studio (its also more useful too, but that's beside the point)
No, the thing that fundamentalist Christians fear most is that schools become a breeding ground for stupidity, and ergo their kids grow up stupid. It is a fact that public school science classes teach evolution as if it were law, and not simply one of many theories. They give no time to other theories, so kids grow up thinking evolution is it. In many cases they use outdated textbooks presenting data that we now know are in the least false, but occasionally blatant forgeries and scientific malpractice designed to give layman's credence to evolution.
What the Kansas state has done is to break this dangerous trend, and they should be applauded.
It's like Al-Qaeda terrorists whining about not getting any respect for their ideals of World Peace. Respect is earned, through actions. Lip-service will more often than not *lose* you respect. Running free software on Microsoft Windows is paying lip service. Everyone likes getting something for free. You've misunderstood the meaning of free.
Writing free software for Microsoft Windows is like substituting the New Zealand cow in the McDonalds burger for a steak you bought from the local butcher and cooked yourself. You're getting a nice bit of steak, but still a crappy sugar-filled bun and dubious fillings with some "special" sauce, and fully contributing towards the profits of those you say you don't believe in. ie, you're a hypocrite. A hypocrite who has the hide to complain that they don't get any respect.
It was more than 2 years ago, more like 5 or so. Microsoft put out vapourware press releases about how they were moving from boxing products for sale in stores and instead moving to a subscription model where they host the app and you rent it off them. The reason at the time was that with the popularity of the Internet, *lots* of people were discovering just how bad Microsoft and their products were, and were thinking about subjects like "this really is a buggy, defective product - either fix it or give me my money back". Both of those choices means Microsoft lose money. So instead of selling someone a product which they own, the product is instead rented to them under very strict terms and conditions; we've seen Microsoft EULAs so we know what those terms are like - you can't use it to speak the truth (ie, say how bad Microsoft or their products are), you can't use it to compete with Microsoft in anything, you must sacrifice your firstborn child to the Redmond gods, yadda yadda.
Since there was such a huge backlash over this idea, they have instead been slowly but surely been edging towards it, sneakily bringing it about anyway. That's what the whole "genuine advantage" thing is about - tracking who is using their stuff so they can bill them via the subscription model once they drop the boxed versions from the shelves and all support. That's why there's this concept of "end-of-life" product with no more support - it's not just about forcing people to buy their same product again, its just getting people used to the idea that instead of a class-action lawsuit for continually defective products, you just upgrade. And if you have to upgrade so often it becomes a pain, maybe its easier to simply subscribe instead rather than buy this stuff you get no support for anyway?
Your homework is to go find out the other things they have done in the past decade to support their move towards the unaccountable subscription model. It's scary.
Or we went to different classes. My last two years of high school were spent at a public school where it was 'assumed knowledge' that evolution is law, and alternative ideas were treated with scorn and laughed at, along with those who were even prepared to apply science to the ideas (let alone those who actually "believed" them). If you do not understand how bad this is, you have no place commenting on science. By all means, don't subscribe to a particular theory but if your only answer to that theory is to make wild, incorrect claims based solely on someone else's political agenda then you've become part of the anti-science machine where you are prepared to take someone else's opinion over applying science.
I'm not sure where you got the idea I was Christian, I really should avoid your little emotional outburst there but I have to point out that it only demonstrates your own insecurity; that you are assuming something about me based only on the fact that I'm prepared to take a contrary view to yours. I could be playing devil's advocate, you'll never know because its irrelevent. I just find it interesting the conspiracy theory you've come up with as your irrational fears get the better of your logical reasoning mind.
Oh, and for what it's worth the first amendment was written into the Constitution as many of the people coming to the USA were "religious zealots" (as you say) who were escaping persecution and they wanted to make sure that they were not going to be persecuted in their new country, hence why "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
Also, if you wanted to live in a country dominated by religious fanatics, you wouldn't bother going to Iraq, there's much better choices like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria, ...
As talkorigins is a pro-evolution biased site I'll happily take anything they have to say with a pound of salt, ie I'll ignore it in the context you're attempting to use it, as a reference site, as it is invalid.
If macroevolution is indeed observable, how come no-one has witnessed an amoeba crawling out of a swamp and growing legs? Why have domestic birds not developed stronger beaks in order to break out of the cages that confine them? Why has my cat not grown wings so it can more easily chase birds?
The very concept is as ludicrous as the somewhat exaggerated examples I've given, and despite protestations by those who believe in evolution (ie, its their faith, religion) it has never, and can never, be observed; and hence fails the ability to be placed through the scientific method, and therefore is not science as we define it today.
Just because you are unwilling to test them does not make them untestable.
Macroevolution does not qualify under the scientific method, however it is being taught in classrooms, exclusively, as the only valid scientific reasoning behind how things came about.
Why is there not an equal uproar against this unscientific educational disaster?
The answer to that question is simple: some people have a political stance against anything remotely related to religion, and wish to shelter their little darlings from anything as damaging to their brainwashing as questioning and testing things such as by the introduction of alternative thought on a subject.
I never mentioned anything about evolution. Go build your straw man elsewhere.
Outright refusal to study any valid scientific theory on the basis that it involves a divine being is teaching atheism. Science class should be about the history, principles and methods of science. Not about teaching "hey, this is what a subset of scientists currently believe is true" (which is the fallacy of appeal to popularity, and is what happens with current so-called science teaching on origin).
I don't care what a subset of scientists believe. That's faith, not science. If we had to rely on that, people would still think the earth is flat and if we moved too far we'd fall off the edge; or in geocentrism; or that we descended from monkeys in Africa; or that our genetic makeup determines what choices we make; or countless other popular theories now debunked.
If you care to do even a modicum of research you'll discover a lot of what we know know through science was discovered by deeply religious people who chose to dedicate their lives to the pursuit of science over the pursuit of religion; ie, who were prepared, many at great personal expense, to go against the tide of popular thought (even of popular thought mandated by the Church, in the case of men like Copernicus and Galileo for example) and pursue science. Perhaps they hold views similar to Kepler, who wrote:
"I undertake to prove that God, in creating the universe and regulating the order of the cosmos, had in view the five regular bodies of geometry known since the days of Pythagoras and Plato, and that he has fixed according to those dimensions, the number of heavens, their proportions and the relations of their movements." (The Mystery of the Cosmos, 1596)
and
"It is an act of piety at the very beginning of this discourse about Nature to see whether it says anything contrary to Holy Writ. Nevertheless, I believe that is premature to raise this question here before I am assailed. In general I promise to say nothing harmful to Holy Writ, and if Copernicus is convicted of anything with me, I shall consider him finished. And this was always my intention from the time when I began to examine the six books of Copernicus's Revolutions."
That they hold such views does not make their methods unscientific; rather, science is the method they use to determine the validity (or otherwise) of their views.
But for public schools, schools funded by the state and federal governments, I think the teachings should remain purely secular. This will allow science to be taught without any religion feeling they are beoing slighted, and it will allow parents to more directly supervise their childs religious instruction.
Except it teaches atheism at the expense of other religions, therefore your argument is false.
Science is about the quest for knowledge. Teaching students that any knowledge that can in any way, shape or form be linked to a religion is false and not worth studying is itself not based in science but solely on a political, and perhaps religious agenda.
The constitution of the USA is clear - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" so the argument that a valid scientific theory has some base in religion and cannot be taught is in violation of the Constitution and the basic rights it grants Americans.