I am not sure whether I am more apalled at Holguin’s lack of logic or his evident misunderstanding of the topic being argued. As convincing as his words may sound in the solitude of his room, mock humility and condescension should not take the place of logical argument or forethought.
To Holguin: As a member of the evolutionary school of thought, I resent the implication that scientists have a “hard time understanding that there is a God and that His ideas created the Bible.” You criticize Carey for thinking the Bible beneath him intellectually, a statement Carey never made, but you then use an identical argumentative tactic on your side of the issue. I have read your letter carefully, but due to my low grasp of the subject as a scienctifically minded person, I have failed to find any argument whatsoever other than a particularly zealous focus on making fun of Carey. Perhaps you can answer a small question for me…How can Carey be “god-hating” if he is also “athiestic”? Can one hate something one does not belive in? I would like also to applaud your Christian attitude, especially at the end, where you state “I recognize that I was just as condescending in my letter to Mr. Carey as he was in his, but I just couldn’t resist.”
To those who believe in fossils and dinosaurs instead of thinking like them: Science and religion are separate. Many great scientists believe strongly in intelligent design and the existence of a Deity. In fact, the more one studies the genome, the workings of the human body, and the ecosystem of the planet, the easier it is to believe that something out there is directing the course of evolution and life as we know it. It does however become more and more difficult to believe that humans appeared on earth in modern form as the result of a mixture of clay and water, or in the female case, growing from a rib. One only has to look at the fossil record or the structure of chromosomes to see a clear evolutionary pattern. Carbon dating methods put clear ages on fossils found, showing a clear chronological progression that supports Darwin’s theory, and shows the logical impossibility of the world appearing less than 10,000 years ago. Do not equate belief in evolution with rejection of the Bible. I too, agree that the world would be improved if more people lived with the ten commandments in mind. I am not arguing against the Bible, nor even against religion. I cannot however support an argument that starts with a conclusion and then searches for facts in lieu of one that has its conclusion drawn from observable facts in our world. I argue that the evidence for evolution is irrefutable, and that while I see life as part of a greater purpose, the story of genesis is more of a parable than a scientific truth.
Audrey Rosengarten ENG 2004
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
