OCR Text |
Show AID Wednesday, August 24,2005 S)OEfDD(DfD Public Forum Letters to the Editor What is your opinion? The Vernal Express welcomes letters from its readers concerning any subject pertinent to the Uintah Basin. There are no restrictions on contents, if not libelous, vindictive vin-dictive and in good taste. The letters need to be a reasonable length, two typewritten double spaced pages. Letters must be submitted exclusively to the Vernal Express and bear the writer's writ-er's full name, signature, phone number and address. Letters for the sole purpose of expressing express-ing thanks to individuals or groups will not be printed in the forum. Letters may be mailed to P.O. Box 1000, Vernal, Utah 84078, faxed at 789-8690 or through email at editorvernal.com. The name or names of the persons submitting letters must appear on all published letters. All letters let-ters are subject to condensation. Letters express the opinion of the writer and are not necessarily necessar-ily the opinion of the Vernal Express Editor. u Science or faith? Dear Editor, I have some comments in regards to Virginia Harrington's article about Utah Senator Chris Buttars' proposal to include the teaching of divine design in science. I haven't studied Senator Buttars' proposal but since I have taught science in college and have studied the theory of evolution for over 40 years, there are a few things about which I believe she is incorrect. She implies that science and the theory of evolution is strictly "scientific or factual" and doesn't require faith. She probably doesn't know that there are now several eminent scientists that question Darwin's theory of evolution and are disappointed that there is no real evidence of the existence of transitional forms or of macro evolution (one species to another). Creationists readily agree that there is broad variation within species but this is not evolution. The leading evolutionary evo-lutionary thinker at Harvard, Dr. Stephen Jay Gould admits, "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design... has been a persistent and nagging nag-ging problem for evolution." Dr. Harrison Matthews (who wrote an introduction intro-duction to a recent edition of Darwin's "Origin of the Species...") states, "...biology is in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory is it then science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation both are concepts which believers know to be true, but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof." Evolution from cells to monkeys to men is not based on proven scientific fact and is therefore there-fore in reality a faith system. Dr. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D., Professor of Physics, gives fourteen scientific facts for a young world in contrast to the evolutionary theory that the universe is billions of years old. Among them are: too few supernova remnants, comets disintegrating too quickly, not enough mud on the sea floor, not enough sodium in the sea, biological material decaying too fast, too much helium in minerals, and too much carbon 144n deep geologic strata. , , , , It is also now known that many animals which evplutionists have believed to be closely related in the evolutionary chain have been proven to be unrelated when studied at the molecular level. With new research in DNA and genetic studies (just since 2001), a growing number of the top biologists in the country from universities such as Princeton, Cornell, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Ohio State University, Purdue, and the University of Washington among others have signed this statement concerning the theory of Darwinian evolution: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection selec-tion to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory theo-ry should be encouraged." Many of them are now considering and accepting the theory of intelligent intelli-gent design. Mrs. Harrington says that the scientific process pro-cess will, over time, fill in holes in our data base and knowledge of evolution. She apparently has great faith in this. I have great faith in God and what the Bible says about the origin of the universe uni-verse and of all species. I believe it is true and that scientific investigation will continue to factually fac-tually support what it says. Mrs. Harrington has every right to believe she came from a monkey or a chicken as she suggests (but no proof). I hope that she will someday come to believe in "divine design," and that we were created different from the animals in the image of God and for His glory. Dr. M.J. Bardon Editorial note: The actual name of Darwin's book is "The Origin of Species," not "Origin of the Species" as Dr. Bardon states. Fair Parking Dear Editor, When my wife and I moved from Southern California to Vernal a little more than three years ago, no small part of the decision was the friendliness and consideration we had experienced experi-enced on a couple of visits here before we moved. After the move we were not disappointed. What we experienced in our associations at church and in community activities was that most people were trying to live the golden rule. What we experienced expe-rienced in parking recently at the Uintah County Fair made us realize that not all were that way. We worked at the fair as unpaid volunteers throughout most of the week. On Saturday, when the demolition derby started, we decided to go home as we were tired and not really needed there. We were parked in the unpaved parking lot to the north of the north entrance to the fairgrounds. fair-grounds. When we got to our car we found that we were surrounded by other cards so that there was no way we could drive out of there. We were blocked front and back. As near as I could see our whole row of cars was in the same situation. This was our only car, so our only reasonable alternatives were to stick around until the demolition demo-lition derby was over or to walk home together and then walk back and drive the car after the derby was over. We chose the latter. I guess that we did have one other alternative have a demolition derby right there on the parking lot However, that was not seriously considered. Fortunately, we do live within walking distance, but it was particularly hard on my wife because ofa bad ankle. The causes of our problem I would rank as fol lows: 1. Some very inconsiderate people, some of whom, I presume, are local residents. If we were the only ones blocked in I would consider it as just an isolated incident of inconsideration, but there was a whole row of us. I hope that someone who may have been thoughtlessly involved reads this and reconsiders before making a decision to greatly inconvenience someone else. I noticed that there was parking further north on the lot for those who were willing to walk a few more steps. 2. Failure of either the city or the county to either (1) make a real legitimate parking lot out of it by having parking attendants or paving and lining, or (2) posting "no parking signs." 3. Our own thoughtlessness in parking in such a lot when we should have known that this could happen. The good news is we have been informed that this parking lot is scheduled for paving and lining lin-ing the week after the fair. Why couldn't it have been two weeks earlier? George M. Johnson Vernal Evolution Dear Editor, I found it necessary to respond to the article written by Virginia Harrington in last week's Vernal Express. I am not writing to challenge her views of how things "came to be." I am responding respond-ing to her lack of knowledge with respect to what recognized science has been publishing regarding regard-ing the origins' issue. The writer apparently walked away from her alma mater without ever looking back at the subject since the Scopes trial. How convenient it is for the uninformed to consistently con-sistently place "Intelligent design" into the "religion" "reli-gion" box and evolution into the "science" box. The facts are that hundreds of well-degreed biologists, microbiologists, biophysicists, astrophysicists, astro-physicists, nuclear chemists, biochemists, atmospheric atmo-spheric scientists, geneticists, zoologists, astronomers astron-omers and anthropologists believe in intelligent design. My wife has a degree in anthropology and geology and would be happy to catch Mrs. Harrington up with the latest evidence. The writer's comments concerning evidence with respect to this subject is simply a century behind. If she wishes to debate the evidence, this is commendable, com-mendable, but to ignorantly imply that intelligent intel-ligent design is relegated only to the sphere of religion, while evolution is rational and scientific, scien-tific, is laughable at best. I would like to add that I do believe that intelligent design should not be taught in the public schools. My concern is that the subject would be dominately represented by people like the uninformed writer of last week's article. That is just too scary to think about. I would like to close with one of the hundreds of quotes from which Mrs. Harrington should make herself familiar: "The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40 thousand zeros after it. It is enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There is no primeval group, neither on this planet or any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random they must therefore have been the product prod-uct of purposeful intelligence." Astronomer and mathematician Sir Fredick Hoyle. The purpose here is not an attempt to prove that Mrs. Harringon's belief in evolution is wrong, but rather an attempt to admonish her to check with her fellow scientists before making unsupportable claims. Brad Scott Wildbranch Ministry BLM continues fuel management in Spring Creek, Diy Fork areas Bill Stringer of the Bureau of Land Management Vernal Field Office said his office is thinning trees in an effort to eliminate excess fuel. In light of the recent Dry Fork fire, excessive foliage needs to be removed to help prevent additional addi-tional fires and to make any fires that do occur more manageable. Stringer said the work is not being done as a fire break but rather as a hazardous hazard-ous fuel reduction. The cedar trees are being cut in a mosaic pattern so it won't leave one unbroken, unbro-ken, treeless area. While some residents in the Spring Creek area are protesting the cutting of the trees, Stringer said this is an authorized and publicized effort and shouldn't be a surprise to residents. City candidates file The certified list of nominations for this fall's election for Vernal City includes Allan Mashburn for mayor, running unopposed. Two four-year terms on the Vernal City Council are available. Running for these positions are incumbents Bert Clark and John Parker plus Dennis Glines and Phil Washburn. In Naples City, incumbent Mayor Niles Mott is opposed by current Councilman Dean Baker. Naples also has two council seats up for election elec-tion with six candidates. The candidates are Robin Bemis, David Cook, Robert Hall, Dennis Long, Hugh Oldaker and Mary Ann Spainhower. Because there are six candidates, Naples City will hold a primary election Oct 4. THESE POLES CAN so many mm ONLY,TT Gin's Gems How are we protecting our children? By Virginia Harrington Express Writer Several years ago a friend of mine lost custody of her children. The story is not only sad, it could possibly be tragic. She was going through a difficult and rather vicious divorce from her violent husband who had beaten her numerous times. She admits she was angry following one particularly rough meeting and was driving too fast when she was surrounded by unmarked vehicles driven by law enforcement officers wearing street clothes rather rath-er than uniforms. She didn't recognize them as police officers and tried to get away from them. She was eventually arrested for felony evasion. This arrest led to the loss of her children into the custody of her husband. Since then she has spent nearly every cent she earns trying to get her children back. Her now ex-husband ex-husband is a known drinker and drug user. She is very concerned that her children are learning his behaviors and habits rather than the values she would like them to learn. The ex-husband was recently charged with assaulting a neighbor's child. The child ended up in the hospital, badly beaten. My friend has remarried and she and her new husband are both fully employed. They are in the process of buying a house large enough for her children to have their own bedrooms. When her ex-husband was arrested and incarcerated, she felt certain this was finally the time that she would get her children back. That didn't happen. She went before a local judge who told her that since the child her ex-husband ex-husband had beaten was not one of hers, her children chil-dren are not in danger. This is surreal to me. How can anyone think that children are not in danger if they are living with a man who will beat any child whether his own or not so badly that hospitalization is needed? The Division of Child and Family Services has told my friend there is nothing they can do to help her. Which means there is nothing they can do to help those innocent young children who are being forced to live with a violent man. Where are our laws and what has happened to our values val-ues if we, as a society, let this continue? Must this woman stand by and wait helplessly helpless-ly until one or more of her children is viciously abused before she can get them back? Why must these children remain in danger and in fear while the state officials sit on their hands? The Children's Justice Center is filled with child abuse cases. Must my friend's children become part of that case load? Why can't they be protected before something happens to them. None of this makes any sense to me nor to my friend. I don't want to write an article for this newspaper detailing the abuse these children are likely to suffer in the future. I want to see them safely placed in their mother's home with only supervised visits from their father. Deja vu, all over again rrvH II V If 1 Bill O'Reilly by Bill O'Reilly Thirty-five years ago this summer, the USA was exploding in pro test over the Vietnam War. And today, the radical left wants to revisit those awful days by replicating the antiwar anti-war movement over the Iraq conflict. The question ques-tion is, will they suc ceed? As you know, the radicals radi-cals have latched on to Cindy Sheehan, who lost her son, Casey, in Iraq. Mrs. Sheehan strikes me as a decent woman who has no clue with whom she is currently swimming. Sensing a chance to humiliate President Bush, the Michael Moore crowd has rallied around Mrs. Sheehan, and she has become the anti-Iraq war poster person. But it's sad to watch this woman being used by organizations orga-nizations that not only oppose the Iraq war, but also believe the USA is a fundamentally flawed nation. Cindy Sheehan's byline now leads the Michael Moore website. Is she really that bitter? . It is one thing to object to a war, it is quite another to throw in with people who are consistently consis-tently hateful toward traditional America. Cindy Sheehan now calls President Bush a murderer and the USA an "imperialistic" country. But the woman has paid a price for her political leanings. Her husband filed for divorce last week, and some reports cited his wife's radicalism as one of the reasons. I'don't believe Cindy and her radical left pals will succeed in dividing the country this time around. It is true that most Americans now believe the Bush administration is fumbling the war, and that may well be true. Certainly, the continued violence in Iraq is troubling. But it is an open question as to whether the Iraqi people themselves will fight hard enough to win freedom, free-dom, and that is the crux of this matter. The communists prevailed in Vietnam because they had a stronger will to win than the U.S.-supported South Vietnamese. At great sacrifice, sacri-fice, America gave the South a chance to be free. They did not step up. The result was decades of totalitarianism that continues to this day, and millions of South Vietnamese and Cambodians murdered by the communists. Funny how the radicals never mention that or the decades of atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein. President Bush has made two major mistakes in Iraq. The first is keeping Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Rumsfeld, understandably, is simply exhausted. He needs to be replaced by a battle-hardened commander who will bring a fresh perspective to the conflict. Second, Mr. Bush must define the danger he sees if the USA "cuts and runs." The WMD controversy con-troversy and poor post-Saddam planning does matter now. Terrorists want to kill us, and a victory vic-tory in Iraq will embolden them and deliver huge momentum to their jihad. Why isn't the president presi-dent on TV every day saying this? If America cuts and runs in Iraq, the place will devolve into another terror state where Al Qaeda will have free reign. No one in their right mind would want Michael Moore, George Soros or Cindy Sheehan calling shots in the war on terror. If Mrs. Sheehan had any perspective at all, she would also protest outside the homes of Bill and Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Tony Blair, all people who understand that cutting and running will lead to disaster for the USA. But in my opinion, Mrs. Sheehan isn't interested in the big picture, she just wants to embarrass Mr. Bush. The question is, will Americans buy what Cindy Sheehan is selling or, instead, focus on what is really going on here? Unlike Vietnam, we are now fighting a war against people who want to come to our country and destroy it. These people peo-ple are the driving force behind the "insurrection" "insurrec-tion" in Iraq. They have chosen this battlefield because America made a mistake by underestimating underesti-mating the difficulty of imposing democracy in a culture that does not revere it Once again, that mistake is history. What President Bush must do now is clarify the stakes in Iraq and rally Americans to support the global glob-al war on terror. If Mr. Bush does not do that, America will be in big trouble. Veteran TV news anchor Bill O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of the book "Who's Looking Out For You?" To find out more about Bill O'Reilly, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. This column originates origi-nates on the Web site www.billoreilly.com. COPYRIGHT2005BillOReilly.com. y t.i V |