In his letter May 18, Bill Carsley contradicts his own arguement. While claiming that the evolutionary process is indefinetly long, he also acknowledges that there have been periodic bursts of evolutionary development.

Scientists have shown that evolutionary development was not a smooth process; instead, interupted by numerous periodic bursts.

With these bursts of development, the finite time limitations of the universe are not the problem Carsley claims they are.

Just as Carsley claims evolution is “interesting,” his own arguments are, too. He brings up the fossil record, which demonstrates the gradual progression from simpler to more complex organisms.

As to his final question, evolution remains the scientific explanation for the development of life, not because it is certain fact, but because no other theory comes close in evidence and feasibility.

Intelligent design, creationism, and the other competing theories, lack the evidence and feasibility necessary to be considered on an equal basis.

It should also be added that this was shown very clearly in the case of Tammy Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District. It is not just educators and scientists who are “blurred” by Carsley’s standards, but also the U.S. court system.

Calder Phillips-Grafflin, Lewiston