To:     Mensa Bulletin

Letters to the Editor

Betty Curry, Letters Editor

I first of all want to thank the Mensa Bulletin and Betty Curry for allowing this

column to be a forum where the debate between evolution and creationism is allowed.

It has been enlightening and enjoyable to read.

With respect to Eric Krein's letter (Letters, December), he set up the classic straw

man argument. He stated that the contention of creationists boiled down to "evolution

is wrong and creation is right because the writer says so" and that evolution is wrong

because it hasn't been proven right and creationism is right because it hasn't been

proven wrong. And then Mr. Krein spends several paragraphs proving that this is faulty

reasoning. Well, duh!

You have embarrassed yourself, Mr. Krein, in revealing your total and abysmal

ignorance of our position and arguments. Obviously, you have never read a single

book which scientifically disputes the theory of evolution. Most creationists would be

happy as clams if science teachers would teach both the evidence for and against

evolution and not even mention God. In instances where that has been done on the

college level, the result is that the class ends with significantly more creationists than

it began with. Probably the single best book on the scientific evidence against evolution

is "Bones of Contention" by Marvin Lubenow. In this volume is a much more thorough

collection and examination of the human fossil evidence than can be found in any book

that supports evolution.

You further claim that you would abandon evolution if there is a theory which better

fits the facts. Not that I believe you, Mr. Krein, but try Dr. Gary Parker (his doctorate is

in biology) and Dr. Henry Morris' book "What is Creation Science?" where that issue is

specifically addressed. These books should be on the shelves of every academic

institution which is not afraid of the truth.

The letter from Howard Paris (Letters, December) was far more interesting. Like

most rabid creationists, I originally believed in evolution. It seemed so logical and so

right, not because I had carefully examined the evidence, but because that is all I had

been taught. Few evolutionists have even a clue as to how profoundly that has affected

their own personal dogmatism. What Mr. Paris pointed out is that my belief in Jesus

Christ and my belief in creationism either stand or fall together. When I first believed

in Jesus Christ, I was an evolutionist and did not realize how accurate Mr. Paris was in

that observation till perhaps twenty years later. However, because I did not give that

particular issue a great deal of thought, I went for years not realizing how intertwined

these two beliefs are.

Now, Mr. Paris, as for the idea that my evangelical belief in creationism is a front

or a smoke screen for my own psychological inadequacies because of my religion

(obviously, I am paraphrasing here, and I hope not too inaccurately), that simply is not

the case. In fact, in this respect, you project, a common characteristic which I have

observed in evolutionists who write disparaging letters about creationists. You must

cling to evolution otherwise you must face the possibility that there is a God to whom

you are answerable. Without evolution, you must face the possibility that God really did

take upon Himself the form of a man and walk here among us; and that He then chose

to go to the cross.

Finally, to all you evolutionists: please don't think that the essence of debate

between evolution and creation has been distilled in this letters column and that you can

dismiss creationism on the basis of your superficial perusal of this column. There are

hundreds of books out there which tackle evolution from the standpoint of genetics,

biology, and archeology. If you purport to have an open mind and "the enlightened

position", then what could it hurt to actually examine the more detailed position of the

creationists? You certainly realize that an issue as complex as this cannot be covered

in a few hundred words.