To the editor:

This is a response to the 5-23 ‘Science is not religion’. The author mis-represents what ‘Intelligent Design Theory’ is. It is not ‘Creationism’.

The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

He stated: “But we must base what is taught in science based on what is provable by empirical data and replicable experiment”. He lists 3.5 billion years of evidence as backing up evolution, also the fossil record, and the many varied species that have inhabited our planet, and genetic data.

So I would ask him to give us a specific item “based on what is provable by empirical data and replicable experiment” that backs up any of those areas he cited; fossil record, genetic data, etc.

I would especially like to see an explanation of how DNA, which contains the instructions on how to build the vast array of horrendously complex molecular machines came about by random mutation and natural selection. No need to use a lot of words, just give a brief overview similar to the way I stated in my 5-17 letter, when I said:

“You need to have a ‘Theory’ tying the evidence to the conclusion. The ‘Theory’ then must be checked by calculating probabilities to see if they are within reason. The reason we don’t see them is because probability calculations do not support random mutation/natural selection producing things like dual coding genes. An article in Computational Biology, 3 (2007) 855-861).stated” “Dual coding genes are statistically unlikely” in other words, next to impossible to be produced by random chance. Yet here we have the education establishment telling kids that the human cell with it’s 10 million factories (ribosomes) and vast communication network that rivals the internet; — all came into existence by random mutation and natural selection.”

Teaching kids ‘Species Evolution’ is promoting a ‘faith’ that preaches there is no Creator.

Phil Drietz

Delhi