Don Desbien's lambasting Dr. J.P. Michaud's exposition about what is the scientific method primarily, and only evolutionary theory secondarily, reminds me most people are not schooled in the scientific method of inquiry at all. Hence the confusion about evolutionary theory.

Accumulating odd and assorted facts¬ between grades one to 12 so that these can be regurgitated on standardized exams at periodic intervals¬ to meet educational guidelines and outcomes is not the same as really learning how to pursue scientific research and evaluate theory, in spite of whatever value this practice¬ might have otherwise.¬ 

Most students who grasp any of this in college (almost none do in high school)¬ do so only after several years of demanding study in a given scientific discipline. Not everyone who gets an undergraduate degree in a scientific discipline really has this on board. Also, to have gained this ability in one area of inquiry doesn't mean that it's readily¬ transferable to another.

In order to get a grasp on evolutionary theory, a lot of basic biology must be learned, including the physics, chemistry and math that apply to it. As is often said, the devil's in the details. Once over lightly is not enough.

Sweeping generalizations about evolution,¬ pro or con, are necessarily superficial and as a result unavoidably misinform others, especially those who haven't had the opportunity or haven't taken the time to study the material thoroughly. We all need to show reluctance about making such assertions¬ if in doing so we are grasping at¬ something¬ beyond our intellectual means. A modicum of humility would go a long way in avoiding such errors.

Gary J. Whitesell

213 W. 21st