In his May 25 letter, Calder Phillips-Grafflin misses the point of my May 18 letter on evolution. I don’t, as he says, acknowledge “periodic bursts of evolutionary development.” I only note the Cambrian era explosion of new life forms. Contrary to his statement, scientists have not shown that “periodic bursts” of “evolution” have occurred; only that individual life forms did appear rapidly. In reality, they have no plausible evolutionary explanation for this, and fossilized transitional forms only confirm micro-evolution.

The “rapid burst” evolutionary model (“punctuated equilibrium”), first proposed in the 1970s by Jay Gould, was an attempt to reconcile macro-evolution with the fossil record’s lack of transitional forms. Evolutionists now know that genetic mechanisms can’t accommodate this scenario.

Closely related is the false assumption of chance generation of “simple” life. Scientists today are at a loss to explain how such a complex process could have occurred, even if an eternity of time had been available. Francis Crick (co-discoverer of DNA), recognizing the remarkable complexity of the simplest cells, felt compelled to explain their origin by a theory of “directed panspermia” (the “seeding” of earth with micro-organisms by extra-terrestrials). He was so persuaded of macro-evolution’s impossibility, that he essentially proposed his own version of “intelligent design.” He considered this acceptable because there’s no appeal to God.

My point is a simple one. I’m not promoting the teaching of creationism in public schools. I’m simply appealing for greater honesty in the way evolution is taught.

Bill Carsley, South Paris

Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.