Today’s letter-to-the-editor — like so many others recently — appears in the Midland Daily News of Midland, Michigan. The letter is titled God had a hand in all that constitutes science. There’s a comments section at the end.
The letter-writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure. Although she claims to be a scientist, she gives no details, so we won’t use her full name. Her first name is Barbara. Excerpts from her letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!
According to Norbert Bufka’s letter of Dec. 29, “evolution is science” and “creationism is religion-based.” How does one disenfranchise an inventor from his patent or an author from his copyright or the “inventor” of the universe from his creation?
Bufka’s letter is the second one here: Readers’ views. It was a brief response to an earlier letter written by Barbara. Then she says:
Bufka wants to relegate God to a restricted position when God had a hand in all that constitutes science. As a scientist, I could not ignore order and design. Those require intelligence. Intelligence can’t come from inanimate matter.
She’s a scientist? Perhaps, but only if that word is so distorted as to include creation scientists. Let’s read on:
The second law of thermodynamics also still holds and consider the fact that living substances cannot live without protein but proteins are formed by living substances. Protein and living substances had to come into being together.
Oh yeah — the second law of thermodynamics. As for proteins, it’s possible to create them artificially — see this in PhysOrg: Creation of ‘Rocker’ protein opens way for new smart molecules in medicine, other fields. Barbara continues:
Evolution has not been proved and no writer to this paper has yet supplied any proof except his own word. When he says that no scientists have doubts, that evolution is a proven fact, he doesn’t include me or any scientists I know or those about whom I’ve read. My objection is that macroevolution is false science and that it tries to erase a belief in God. I know that teachers scoff at God when discussing it.
There’s a lot of confusion here about the word “proof” in the context of a scientific theory. It would be better to say “overwhelmingly supported by all available evidence, and contradicted by none.” Anyway, it’s clear that Barbara moves in a strange circle of scientists. Here’s more:
As far as the proof of a Creator is concerned, one doesn’t have to be a scientist to recognize that he exists. Paul said in Romans 1:18-20: [big bible quote].
Ah, there’s proof! Moving along:
It should be impossible for anyone with an open mind to not recognize God’s workings, especially in nature. I have several books that show how science points to the existence of a supreme power. Such knowledge is available. There are also proofs that this world has probably existed no more than 10,000 years, i.e. the shrinkage of the sun. More on that will come later.
Ah yes, the shrinkage of the sun. That’s debunked in the TalkOrigins Index to Creationist Claims — see The sun is shrinking at such a rate that it would disappear completely in 100,000 years.
Barbara wraps up her letter with another scripture quote, which we’ll omit. Her letter is very scientific, and a fine addition to our collection.
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.