Reply to “Science vs. Religion,” Saturday’s Opinion page: Columnist Ann McFeatters cited a Gallup Poll that 46 percent of Americans believe God created man (humans) in their current form. This is alarming to her since the overwhelming scientific evidence is that evolution is true.
If evolution is true, why did 100 respected scientists in the field of study of how things came to be sign a resolution rejecting evolution? Does she know that Asian scientists in this field prove evolution is false and do not teach it? Does she know that many European scientists have also carefully examined Darwin’s theory and reject it?
We have all seen a picture beginning with a monkey or ape, with following drawings ending up depicting modern man (humans). In the parade is the Java man. Many do not know that what is called the Java man is made up of a skull cap, three teeth and a leg bone. Scientific evidence now asserts these fossils were human and the drawing we see was done by an artist with imagination trying to fit him into an evolutionary parade.
Twenty to 30 years ago, the media, National Geographic and other circulars told us evolutionary theory is fact. But they did not call it a law, like the law of gravity. This flew in the face of Bible teaching concerning creation.
My faith in God as creator never wavered. So I decided to dig into this from a scientific point of view. We are to study and know our enemies.
Haeckel’s drawings of embryos depicting the embryos of a fish, salamander, tortoise, chicken, hog, calf, rabbit and human side by side was considered proof of Darwinism. Haeckel’s drawings were set forth in the 1800s. But examination of all these embryos under microscope proved there was no comparison and no progression besides being highly in error as drawn.
I end citing Jonathan Wells: “Darwinism is merely materialistic philosophy masquerading as science and people are recognizing it for what it is.” Read Well’s book, “Icons of Evolution.” It’s not an easy read for me. I began with Lee Strobel’s “The Case for a Creator” which is easy reading.
George C. Kaulbach