Reader’s Respond -- Intelligent design draws intelligent response

I am writing in response to James E. Young’s letter about trustee

Wendy Leece’s attempt to add intelligent design to school curriculum

(Mailbag, Jan. 29). It is quite obvious that Young has never done any

serious study on intelligent design before and is extremely biased.

He is using circular thinking in trying to defeat Leece. He states

that there is no empirical evidence for intelligent design. Well, how

does he know? Evolution requires that life comes from nonlife and lizards

turned into birds. Where is the “empirical evidence” for that? There is

none.

In my study of intelligent design, I have found that intelligent

design is often far more sensible than what they are teaching us in

school (only evolution). Furthermore, it would not be a “corruption of

knowledge” to put intelligence design in textbooks.

To have only one view in the textbooks, when the other is just as

worthy, is ignorance. And ignorance is a corruption of knowledge.

MORGAN LAIDLAW

Newport Beach

* EDITOR’S NOTE: Morgan Laidlaw is a Newport Harbor High student.

First, I’d like to thank trustee Wendy Leece for accurately

representing the majority of people who believe in creation by a higher

intelligence. It is about time someone stands up for the science and

factual explanation of creationism. James Young, in his letter, has his

facts very much wrong regarding the study of who is God and what has he

done that can scientifically be proven.

There is, and has been since the 1800s, when Darwin first questioned

God’s existence, a strong scientific representation of God’s existence.

In fact, when I was doing some library research for children’s Egyptian

art studies, I ran across a book published in the 1920s explaining that

the Babylonian Gardens were located by a scientist-anthropologist who was

a devout Christian. He used only the Bible to locate them.

One may recall these gardens as being one of the Seven Wonders of the

world. This may not seem like much to modern-day Christians, but at this

time Darwin had completely debunked the Bible and all its content very

publicly and emphatically. He called it a fairy tale book. The story of

this expedition and the difficulty maneuvering finds across a desert by

camel are amazing. I wish I remembered the name of it.

Today, there is an institute founded and operated in the San Diego

vicinity called the Creation Research Institute. The two gentlemen who

oversee the institute are highly qualified scientists. Each and every

research procedure is done very meticulously. Only people with

exceptional qualifications are permitted to even volunteer. I have an

uncle who introduced me to this center because he volunteered in the

research department. My aunt, not having a scientific degree, was

relegated to the library for sorting research books. My uncle refined

rock for study. Very labor intense and a little interesting, but most of

all preciseness was the goal. To my uncle, though, this was a natural

next step in life because he had spent his life teaching science and

God’s existence. The more scientists’ research, the more facets of

Darwin’s theory have been disproved. That’s fact.

In fact, I’m willing to go out on a limb and clearly predict: The

missing link will never be found. However, I know that to some people the

hunt is the fun of life, so have fun. Just don’t throw scientific

evidence out the window in doing so.

JANE ALTMAN-DWAN

Newport Beach