Darwin, we're not in Kansas anymore. Recently, the Kansas Board of Education--which last summer removed evolution from standardized public school tests--voted to remove the Big Bang theory from state-wide teaching standards so that the "Young Universe" theory may be taught. In contrast to the prevalent Big Bang theory, which states that the universe was formed from a single atom over 4 billion years ago, the Young Universe theory explains how it is possible to use the Bible in order to show that the universe began only 10,000 years ago.

Yet, the Young Universe theory has not, and will not, undergo the trying scientific scrutiny that evolution has been subjected to for years, largely because its proponents understand that it would fail to pass a test of logic and the scientific method. Whereas evolution has years of documented research proving convincingly that it is a valid theory, there is no scientific evidence to support creationism and little to support the "Young Universe" theory. Instead, the changes in educational standards instituted by the Board will have long-term detrimental effects on the quality of education in Kansas public schools and will only harm the students whom they were designed to help in the long run.

Evolution is theory and not fact. All of science is a changing story. With each new discovery, our knowledge of the universe grows and becomes more precise, and new hypotheses are supported and disproved at an alarming rate. But while creationism is presented as a scientific theory, it has been refuted fairly convincingly by leading scientists. Our knowledge of the world around us thrives because we teach theories that withstand scientific scrutiny and the test of time, not those that are unsupported.

It is troubling that creationists argue that students should be allowed to decide for themselves which theory to accept. Children simply have neither the time nor the attention spans to study all of the research supporting the different theories in order to make up their minds as to which theory they wish to believe. We cannot present any and all theories of how the earth began as explanations with equal merit. It is our responsibility as adults to decide for them from among the current theories which is the most convincing scientifically. Moreover, there are very few teachers who believe both theories have equal weight. It would be very difficult for a teacher to present these theories solely on the merits without allowing their own biases to color their presentation of the material.

There are far-reaching implications of these new discrepancies in teaching standards for Kansas students. Eventually, many of these students will leave Kansas for other areas of the world, and they will be unprepared to deal with many common current scientific ideas. Granted, not knowing the theory of evolution probably won't have a great effect on one's quality of life, but the precedent being set foreshadows an increasingly large split between education standards in the Midwest and the other regions of the country. As a result, students from the Midwest will be at a strong disadvantage in the job market and in life in general should the trend continue. And, in the real world, although Kansas's students won't know it, it's survival of the fittest that matters.

The Kansas Board of Education should take note of this fact. Even though the members disagree on the principles of what should be taught in the classroom, they should realize that in order to provide a high quality of education for the students, scientific theory must be taught. If parents wish to instruct their children differently, they have every right to teach these theories at home. However, by removing scientific theories from the state curriculum, the Board provides a disservice to its students by limiting their education and hampering their prospects in the American job market. Therefore, the Board should reconsider its decision in the interest of the students' well being, which is what truly matters.

Robert J. Fenster is a first-year in Matthews Hall.