Two recent letters to the editor made some erroneous criticisms of evolution. In a May 10 letter, David Ormand wrote that evolution is "not a valid, testable, scientific theory," and that "experiments have proved that it is impossible for life to form in the way required by evolution." These two statements are contradictory. If evolution is not testable, how could it have been disproven by experiment?
Ormand is mistaken in both claims. Evolution is testable, and it passes the tests. The works of such researchers as Sidney Fox, Manfred Eigen, and Graham Cairns-Smith provide several plausible scenarios for the evolutionary origin of life.
In a May 9 letter, Mark Anderson says, "Evolutionist refuse to acknowledge the most recent breakthrough in quantum physics that leads conclusively to the concept of a creative intelligence behind the universe." He fails to say just what these breakthroughs are. I know of nothing in quantum physics that requires a creative intelligence behind the universe. Anderson calls it "silly thinking" to suppose that design in the world arose by chance. I, as an evolutionist, agree with this conclusion. The design in nature requires explanation, and evolution provides just such an explanation--not chance. It is a woeful misunderstanding of evolutionary theory to equate it with chance.