Douglas Roise letter: Evolutionists don't have all the answers
Davis Cope (Forum letter Dec. 27) believes in and defends the modern evolutionary paradigm. I don't know what denomination of evolutionism Cope follows, but the hard core orthodox evolutionists believe life came from dead matter (a resurrecti...
Davis Cope (Forum letter Dec. 27) believes in and defends the modern evolutionary paradigm. I don't know what denomination of evolutionism Cope follows, but the hard core orthodox evolutionists believe life came from dead matter (a resurrection miracle), ameba became fish, fish became frogs and eventually frogs became princes. They believe pseudopods became fins, fins became legs, legs or arms became wings, scales became feathers and skin, etc. They believe hundreds and hundreds of such strange things with little if any empiric support.
Just think about this for a minute or two in terms of eyes, ears, language, animal sounds, bird songs, flight in birds, insects, and mammals, sexual reproduction, bipedalism, etc. and all of the genetic material additions required, amongst a ton of other complex anatomic and physiological changes. The evolutionists have faith these things happened and can happen, even though there is no empiric (truly scientific) justification for such beliefs.
Evolutionism is a religion masquerading as science. The battle between evolutionists and creationists is not a battle between science and religion. It is a battle between the science of one religion and the science of another religion. It is a battle about what is true, about who is telling the truth. Teaching "modern science" should not be the first purpose.
"Modern science" from the past taught as a fact that decaying meat created flies, that one could create a mouse by putting pieces of cheese, wheat or other grain into a dirty laundry receptacle, that bacteria were spontaneously generated from decaying milk, etc. These things were believed by past evolutionists. Those who disproved them, like Louis Pasteur, were ridiculed by the great "scientists" and popular press of their day. Teaching what is true should be the first purpose.
Of course, Cope believes frogs turning into princes over eons of time is true. His is a belief contrary to observation, unsupported by history, and defying common sense. He believes it anyway. But that doesn't mean you should.