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

In the April 21 issue, Darren Casteel confirmed my contention that the Opinion page is the wrong forum for complex subjects as evolution. After using disparaging words such as “discredited” and “not credible” in describing Mr. Michael Behe’s books, he refers readers to third party sources, none of which have a 250 word limit.

I did review one of his suggestions: http://www.talkorigins.org, and as I expected, its objective was to refute intelligent design and creationism. Mr. Casteel then wrote, “People will be much better informed reading these books, rather than Behe’s.” This is like suggesting that one should not attend a Broadway production, but instead read the critics’ reviews selected by someone who wants to pan the production.

Mr. Michael Behe, a biochemist, wrote two books: “Darwin’s Black Box” and “The Edge of Evolution.” In these books he points out the obvious flaws in random mutation, natural selection, and common descent. In doing so he also refers to the influence of intelligent design.

In referring to the Dover trial, I wonder if Mr. Casteel would submit a paper to a scientific journal suggesting that any scientific conclusion not proven by the use of the scientific method should be decided by the courts.

Dennis Willis