Evidence

By Bryce Hand

This letter was featured in the Kansas City Star newspaper on November 9, 2005.

To the Editor:

Tuesday was a sad day for Kansas.

Yes, there is controversy surrounding evolution, but only among nonscientists. Those who reject evolution present no arguments scientists haven’t heard (and adequately countered) again and again, and have no special knowledge that scientists have overlooked.

Organic evolution is so well established that to allow room for doubt is to misrepresent science. Evolution is supported by a rich and well dated fossil record, by population biology, comparative anatomy, cell biology, biochemistry, genetics, artificial breeding, and by observations of how bacteria and viruses respond (over time) to antibiotics. Computer algorithms invoking simple, Darwinian rules are being used to solve a wide range of previously intractable problems, and important biochemical molecules (including RNA and DNA) have been modified (“improved”) in astonishing ways in test-tube experiments using Darwinian principles. Any one of these mutually corroborating approaches could stand by itself as strong evidence for evolution; together, they are indistinguishable from proof.

Nonscientists have no business meddling in the content of science classes. “Intelligent design” is not science, and should not be represented as such.

Congratulations to those members of the Board who voted sanely.

——

Bryce Hand, Ph.D., is professor emeritus of geology at Syracuse University.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *