I read your article on user fees revisited (Headwinds, December 2005). I also agree that user fees are ridiculous.
One comment I have is Creationism is not intelligent design, but one type of of intelligent design among others. For instance, some people believe aliens created life — that is also intelligent design.
I have a physics degree and understand the scientific methodology. For evolution to be completely scientific, scientists must be able to recreate it repetitively like all the Newtonian/quantum mechanics, etc. Micro-evolution, mutation and crossbreeding doesn’t count for a complete change in families.
Most theories in science — even unproven and sometimes ridiculous — have always been up for discussion, such as time warps and infinite universes. However, bring up alternatives to Holy Evolution and that is not acceptable.
Just as evolution has its fossil record and proved micro-evolution, intelligent design has its irreducible complexities, such as DNA code, that violate the tenants of evolution. I think both sides should be allowed discussion. It was once thought the Earth was flat and the center of the universe and other theories were prohibited. Now the courts are trying to prohibit alternatives to evolution.
Mark Wilson
via email