Both sides ignore points in argument

  I find the recent letter to the editor titled "Misinformed about evolution theory" to be very good at expressing the politically correct opinion. The author, however, shows his ignorance of the opinion he is opposing; in other words, he hasn't done his homework.

  In saying scientific theory is based on observation of data he is correct, and it is not called a fact scientifically until the theory can be demonstrated to be true by anyone who can duplicate the conditions and consistently produce the expected result.

  When we speak of origins, we are speaking of conditions we cannot duplicate and, therefore, cannot prove. In these cases we come up with the best theories we can, but we can never prove them in the scientific sense.

  These theories are based on presuppositions that are used in explaining the evidence. So both sides are looking at the same evidence but coming to different conclusions because they are working from different presuppositions.

  Many on both sides choose to ignore evidence which doesn't support their beliefs. An example is in wanting to deny the veracity of the creation account. They are quick to trust radioisotope dating that supports their beliefs, and ignore the radio isotope dating that doesn't support their beliefs.

  All the while they are not considering that there are several presuppositions on which the theory of radioisotope dating are based which are not necessarily true. One of these theories is uniformitarianism, which is contradicted by evidence in the earth. I am not a scientist to explain this in depth, but there are some excellent books on the subject.

  For over 200 years, critics have tried to minimize the truth of the Bible. Often they do this by swaying public opinion by speaking of believers in a condescending way. However, after all this time, the more people have honestly examined the evidence, the more the Bible has been shown to be by far the most accurate record of ancient history, and it is a faithful guide to a healthy lifestyle. It supports a moral lifestyle with the benefits of good relations within the family and in society.

  The last few years, the findings in science have shown that an instantaneous creation and a worldwide flood, as Noah experienced, is supported by the geological evidence far better than the evolutionary model.

  The Christian no longer needs to feel he is being shamed for having faith in God's word. He only needs to study this evidence that the evolutionary crowd passes over to promote their favorite views, and his faith will be stronger than ever.

JIM RICKABAUGH, Yuma