Teaching Creationism

* Your editorial, “Teach Science as Science” (July 27), concerning John Peloza’s attempt to teach creationism to biology students, was excellent, but it overlooked a critical point. Peloza and his ilk would have everyone believe that evolution and creationism are competing scientific theories. But, while refusing in the face of overwhelming evidence to acknowledge that evolution is a fact, they offer no evidence that creationism is even a theory.

A theory is a proposition for which there may be insufficient proof but which nonetheless has a functional scientific application. There is no evidence whatsoever for creationism and it has no such application. The authority for the creationist’s belief is the Bible, and the Bible is not a science text. The place in the public schools for creationism, if indeed it deserves a place at all, is in a lesson on world religions and their concomitant myths.

MAGGIE DOUGLAS

Bakersfield

* I object to your premise that evolution as an explanation for the origin of man is more than theory. Since no “missing link” has been found, science has offered no proof of its validity. And new discoveries in Asia have once again challenged existing theories of evolution. Science is not infallible.

Religion may not belong in schools. But creationism has its evidence, and as the belief of millions of people of faith it deserves more than dismissal as merely another “wild-card idea” as you suggest.

The two theories may not even be mutually exclusive. Until we have proof, I suggest we keep our minds open to both possibilities.

CANDICE CETRONE

Burbank

* I want to take exception to your editorial. I think your side as stated smacks of dogma just as much as much as John Peloza’s side.

Scientists admit that evolution is a theory and not a proven fact. Also, science is always changing. If the theory of relativity had not changed Newton’s laws of motion, we would never had gotten to the moon.

With all the genetic engineering going on, no one has produced a new species--the most they have done is improve the same one.

The point in this should not be evolution versus creationism, but whether the Constitution allows John Peloza the right under the First Amendment to tell students there are other theories that are not as well accepted as evolution as long as he doesn’t try to convert them to a religion.

GEORGE SMITH

Laguna Hills