John Peloza and His Teachings Are Taken to Task

Mr. Peloza attempts to advance a valid argument on a basically flawed premise that creationism, like evolution, is a theory.

Creationism does not even qualify as a hypothesis--an educated guess.

The word theory has a different meaning to a scientist than to a lay person unfamiliar with the scientific method.

A theory is a scientific explanation for natural phenomena based on known facts gathered as data through quantitative and/or qualitative observations and measurements. Electromagnetism and Einstein’s relativity are two examples of scientific theories.

Mr. Peloza argues that students should be given the opportunity to “interpret the data for themselves--drawing their own conclusions, without being told what to believe.”

This sounds reasonable on the surface until one asks for the irrefutable “data” that creationists claim to offer our students.

Evidence of evolution, today, is stronger than ever before. It employs such principles as genetics, geology, zoology, paleontology, systematics, archeology, physiology, embryology, anthropology and biogeography. Creationism, by contrast, offers no data to support its claim, and as such is not deserving to be a part of a science curriculum. In fact, creationists have not presented a single new argument or fact in the last two decades.

FRANK FARSAD, Biology teacher, Rancho Alamitos High School