Jack Lin letter: Critic of evolution has his facts wrong

Ken Koehler's charges against evolution in his May 29 column in The Forum are indicative of several misconceptions about evolution.

First, to say that evolution is devoid of evidence is to deny 150 years of scientific literature regarding the theory from Darwin's own "The Origin of Species" to Stephen Jay Gould's "Punctuated Equilibria." From Darwin's meticulous observations with his pigeon aviary to modern observances of change in bacteria, viruses, and fruit flies, science has amassed an overwhelming amount of evidence in favor of evolution. I'm sure Koehler hasn't bothered to read any that literature. The November 2004 issue of National Geographic is a good place to start, though.

Secondly, to claim that Intelligent Design liberates science in some sort of way is flat out wrong. The Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution explains the shortcomings of ID as a scientific alternative to evolution: "No predictions are made, so there is no reason or direction for seeking further knowledge. This demonstrates the scientific uselessness of creationism. While creationism explains everything, it offers no understanding beyond, 'that's the way it was created.'"

From Koehler's letter, it is clear that he is attempting to use ID as a mechanism to conform science to Christianity. To do so would severely hinder scientific creativity.

The American Botanical Society sums it up well when it states, "Science as a way of knowing has been extremely successful ... But people who oppose evolution, and seek to have creationism or intelligent design included in science curricula, seek to dismiss and change the most successful way of knowing ever discovered. They wish to substitute opinion and belief for evidence and testing. The proponents of creationism/intelligent design promote scientific ignorance in the guise of learning. As professional scientists and educators, we strongly assert that such efforts are both misguided and flawed, presenting an incorrect view of science, its understandings, and its processes."

Jack Lin

Fargo