RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: Letters to the Editor, Anti-Evolution in the local fishwrap< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Mister DNA



Posts: 466
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 07 2007,21:30   

My local paper, the Corpus Christi Caller-Times has had a rash of anti-evolution letters lately in response to a recent editorial about creationists on the Texas BOE. This gem appeared today:

 
Quote
Just a theory

In reference to a letter written to the editor on Darwin's theory of evolution: Anyone who has ever studied science will tell you that a theory is just a theory until it is proven fact through further experimentation.

The theory was never meant to be a test for the creation of life on this earth. There are theories out there that if the dinosaurs had not died out when the great asteroid that hit the earth millions of years ago, they would not have evolved further in the chain.

All Darwin did was study the turtles of the Galapagos Islands and how they managed to survive in such a harsh environment, with very little fresh water. He found the tortoise through time had developed a water bag under their shell to store fresh water needed for their survival. Through adaptation, the species have learned to survive in their chosen environment.

The theory was never meant to be a test for the creation of life on Earth. It still takes a male sperm and a female egg to create life of any species. So far, no one has been able to create a sperm or an egg through science in the laboratory. I wasn't there at the time of creation, so I tend to believe in the creator of life -- God -- who put order throughout the universe.

Jesse Moreno

(Battle Creek, MI)


As anti-evolution letters to the editor go, this is pretty much par for the course for our local rag; the only thing missing is a Piltdown Man reference. Anyway, here is my response:

 
Quote
In his letter of October 7, Jesse Moreno claims that “…a theory is just a theory until it is proven fact through further experimentation”. The phrase “just a theory” is too often thrown around by those who deny evolutionary theory, as if the word “theory” in the scientific sense is the same as a guess or a hunch.

Should the US Navy scrap all of its nuclear-powered submarines because atomic theory is “just a theory”? Should doctors no longer be required to sterilize their instruments because germ theory is “just a theory”? Should creationism and its city cousin, Intelligent Design, be taught in science classes because evolution is “just a theory”? Creationism and Intelligent Design don’t even pass the “just a theory” test.

Furthermore, Mr. Moreno is woefully mistaken when he claims that it “still takes a male sperm and female egg to create life of any species”. Millions of species – including multicellular organisms - reproduce asexually.


There's a 200 word limit, and I managed to finish with 43 words to spare. There's so much tard in that letter that it was tempting to go over the limit...

Anyway, it would be nice if AtBC had a sort of "response squad" for letters to the editor - if anyone would like to respond, there's an online form here or you can send it snail mail to this address:

Letters to the Editor
Corpus Christi Caller-Times
P.O. Box 9136
Corpus Christi, TX
78469

--------------
CBEB's: The Church Burnin' Ebola Blog
Thank you, Dr. Dembski. You are without peer when it comes to The Argument Regarding Design. - vesf

    
Henry J



Posts: 4565
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 07 2007,23:05   

Did this Jesse Moreno think Darwin's trip was last month or something, so that scientists haven't had time to check it out yet? Also, he forgot the finches and iguanas.

Henry

  
Mister DNA



Posts: 466
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 08 2007,05:25   

Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 07 2007,23:05)
Did this Jesse Moreno think Darwin's trip was last month or something, so that scientists haven't had time to check it out yet? Also, he forgot the finches and iguanas.

Henry

The 200 word limit kept me from expounding on that. I would have liked to have told him that there's been a few developments in the theory since 1859...

Maybe he gets his news from Overwhelming Evidence...

--------------
CBEB's: The Church Burnin' Ebola Blog
Thank you, Dr. Dembski. You are without peer when it comes to The Argument Regarding Design. - vesf

    
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 08 2007,06:17   

Here's a good one, from the Oct 4 2007 edition of the Manhattan (KS) Mercury.
Quote
To the Editor:

This was almost an indignant complaint about the article headlined, "Faith can blind some to the truth" on the religion page Friday, Sept. 28. My first reaction was that an article bashing faith did not belong on the religion page. As I read the article, however, I realized that it was actually about two religions, and therefore properly placed. I strongly believe, after having examined much scientific evidence from many sources, that the age of the Earth is what the Bible teaches — somewhere around 6,000 years old.

I admit, however, that I was not there when the Earth was formed. My faith is not blind, but well-informed. It is, though, exactly that — faith. The other religion? Evolution/Old Earth — billions of years, of course. Unless there are people on this Earth much older than they look, not one of the people who believes in the "geological ages" and the theories that seem to go along with them, was there when the Earth was formed, either. They look at the same evidence that I do and come to different conclusions.

Since I believe that I am right and that they are wrong, I guess I could also say of them that their "blind faith irrationally ignores that evidence." Without anyone alive today who was there when it all began, and with so much evidence viewed with such widely differing conclusions, I contend that both Young Earth and Old Earth theories require a certain amount of faith from their followers.

Linda Mullin
Saint George


--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
Henry J



Posts: 4565
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 08 2007,22:23   

Quote
Quote
They look at the same evidence that I do and come to different conclusions.


At the risk of sounding cynical: bullfeathers. There's just way too many things known that would take way longer than any 6000 years to form by any known process. (Plus many of those things would be damaged or even destroyed by the alleged flood.)

Henry

  
JohnW



Posts: 2767
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2007,10:58   

Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 08 2007,20:23)
Quote
 
Quote
They look at the same evidence that I do and come to different conclusions.


At the risk of sounding cynical: bullfeathers. There's just way too many things known that would take way longer than any 6000 years to form by any known process. (Plus many of those things would be damaged or even destroyed by the alleged flood.)

Henry

This comes up again and again as the creationist's last resort.  See the Christopher Gieschen thread for a recent example.  I find it interesting that unyielding fundamentalists are so willing to turn to postmodern relativism if it suits their purpose.

The whole premise is, of course, utter nonsense.  Simply claiming "I'm looking at the same evidence as you" does not mean your explanation fits the data as well as mine does.  All science is provisional, but that doesn't mean all explanations are equally valid - the data we have allow us to dismiss many hypotheses.  We don't know everything about chemistry, but phlogiston is never going to make a comeback.  We don't know everything about astronomy, nuclear physics, geology, chemistry, archaeology, paleontology... but we do now know that the Earth is very old.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
J. G. Cox



Posts: 38
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2007,12:07   

No doubt, the statement about looking at the evidence is totally fallacious too...

  
Mister DNA



Posts: 466
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2007,09:13   

My letter was published last Friday - minus the last paragraph...

In today's paper, there was a letter from one Howard West with the quote:

Quote
Additionally, Darwin did a great deal more than study tortoises on the Galapagos Islands. His conclusions were based on observations made on a five-year cruise around the world on a British naval vessel.


I wonder if he read Henry J's post...

--------------
CBEB's: The Church Burnin' Ebola Blog
Thank you, Dr. Dembski. You are without peer when it comes to The Argument Regarding Design. - vesf

    
  7 replies since Oct. 07 2007,21:30 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]