Evolution is a matter of opinion

Ah, evolution! Taken by itself the idea of evolution is no mystery; it means "change over time." By example, look at parents and their children. The kids are not the same as their mom and dad. They've changed.

The trouble with that word, evolution, is that it has become a code which means creatures from the distant past changed into contemporary species. This has never been proven and never will.

Widespread agreement on this idea does not make it so; it is theory, not fact.

Mr. Eastman and other promoters of evolution take a very simplistic approach in their replies. They offer no evidence of their belief.

Rather they assume the following about nonsupporters:

None are particularly knowledgeable (". . . depth of ignorance of biology and the scientific)

None have taken any basic science courses (I have five years of science, including microbiology and engineering at an accredited university)

None neither know nor understand the scientific method (I do)

All are creationists (implying that there are only two sides to the question)

So far, evolutionist writers claim that anybody who does not dwell in the church of St. Darwin is totally wrong or worse.

A collection of skeletal remains, no matter how large, does not constitute proof of evolution. It is only marginally useful beyond showing that such creatures existed. No soft tissues, no muscle, no skin--just bones. And lots of assumptions.

Convergence of opinion and agreement on a subject is fine. That's the method we use to advance our knowledge. But when complete reliance upon opinion becomes the basis for truth, this is a problem.
Lorin Wainwood
Newbury Park