Re: The science of intelligent design [Letter, Village News, 3-31-2011]

Mr. Willis supports creationist Behe’s intelligent design and rightfully attacks those who “demonize” its supporters and claim they lack knowledge.

It takes but one example to trash Darwin’s theory, as finding a fossil rabbit in Precambrian, but in 150 years, nothing has been found to negate his theory. Behe hoped that his bacterial “rotary engine” flagellum would do it, but it didn’t.

There is nothing that can trash intelligent design. Unlike Darwin’s theory, it is not scientific; it is theological like creationism and irreducible complexity. It is opinion and speculation, not a theory; it can be denied but not refuted.

Only seven percent of the National Academy of Sciences and 3.3 percent of the Royal Society membership strongly believe in a personal God. These organizations are composed of their country’s most eminent scientists. They are predominately nonbelievers who accept Darwin and reject Behe. People who usually reject Darwin are those who believe in virgin births, sin, angels, hell, miracles, etc. Either way, this is a matter of personal choice that is not to be judged by others.

My choice is pragmatic. About 98 percent of all species that ever existed are now extinct. Humans started out four-footed and suffer physical ailments caused by standing erect. Our DNA is filled with useless strings of junk found in much lower creatures. So, given an ill-designed human body and a 98 percent species failure rate, I think the “designer” is more inept than intelligent, so I choose Darwin.

Thomas Evans