How Often Does Science Have to Refute Creationists Arguments?
Thomas J. Wheeler, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Biochemistry University of Louisville Thomas J. Wheeler’s letter was published in the Louisville Courier-Journal Recent letters on the creationism-evolution controversy included creationist arguments which have been refuted many times by professional scientists. An October 11 writer claimed that evolution was not science because, “We cannot observe our origin, nor can we wholly experiment and test any hypotheses.” This is false; direct observation is not required for a principle to be scientific. In evolution and other historical sciences (such as much of geology and astronomy) scientific evidence is used to reconstruct past events. Hypotheses are tested, through experiment where possible, but also by other methods (such as the discovery of transitional fossils with predicted characteristics). That evolution has occurred is abundantly confirmed by numerous lines of evidence. The writer claimed that evolutionists cannot look objectively at
