Letters to the Editor

Leave intelligent design to philosophy

This is in response to Aaron Vandenbos’s letter to the editor advocating that intelligent design be taught in our classrooms.

Unfortunately, Mr. Vandenbos seems to have a poor understanding of how science works. Science is about making theoretical predictions that can be tested empirically with experiment. The theory of evolution – which Vandenbos calls “Darwinism” – satisfies this criteria; intelligent design

does not.

Intelligent design postulates that the complexity we observe in the universe could have only arose by the design of some superior intelligence. This idea does not explain how the complexity arose, it just sweeps the complexity under the rug so that we don’t have to explain it-we just have to say that it was designed.

But then isn’t the designer also complex by his/her very act of designing complexity? So the designer must have also been designed, and that designer was also designed, and so on into an infinite regression.

Mr. Vandenbos asks for fair treatment of all the evidence. Scientists will gladly consider the evidence for intelligent design when intelligent design has provided some empirical evidence or theoretical prediction, which has yet to happen.

In the scientific community, philosophical speculation and wishful thinking are not considered evidence. The fact of the matter is that intelligent design makes no predictions that can be verified by empirical observation or experiment.

Therefore it is not a scientific theory, but rather a philosophy. Once intelligent design offers a prediction that can be experimentally verified, or offers an explanation for an empirical observation, it will be an idea that should be considered in the science classroom.

Until then, leave intelligent design in a philosophy or religion course, where ideas like intelligent design belong.

J.J. Durrant, Boise, ID

It’s time to change the double standard

Isn’t it nice how homosexuals have to live by different standards than their straight counterparts? If you are straight, it is fine for you to make a spectacle of yourself with your significant other. I cannot count the number of times I have had to endure a couple swapping spit in front of the world. If they’re a man and a woman, that is fine. But, Lord forbid if two men express themselves in the same fashion. They would be subject to ridicule, and also they could get attacked or even killed for doing what straight people take

for granted.

Why do we have to live by different standards? Are we not all guaranteed the same rights? If so, then why are people doing their utmost to persecute homosexuals? Uh, oh. I may be touching a nerve here – too bad When was the last time straight people have faced legislation on their personal lives? When was the last time a straight person was murdered for flirting with someone?

It seems that homosexuals are accepted if they stay in the closet and not disturb the fragile sensibility of the straight world.

I spent 29 years being a good homosexual, but I am sick of it. We, as a community, need to step up and demand the same rights afforded to heterosexuals. We have been treated like second class citizens for too long.

I am sick of having to censor what I say so as not to offend straight people. If I have to hear about your boyfriend or girlfriend, then you should hear about my significant other. Fair is fair, and right is right. I refuse to be who I am not to make

others comfortable.

Casey Sievers,Boise Idaho

Related Posts:

1. Letters to the Editor
2. Letters to the Editor
3. Intelligent Design gets ‘Expelled’
4. Letters to the Editor
5. Breaking down the definition: Intelligent Design