Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device. <\/p>\n
Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about <\/p>\n
Re: Senate Bill 55: Neither creation nor macro-evolution is science. <\/p>\n
Try Another <\/p>\n
Audio CAPTCHA <\/p>\n
Image CAPTCHA <\/p>\n
Help <\/p>\n
CancelSend <\/p>\n
A link has been sent to your friend's email address. <\/p>\n
A link has been posted to your Facebook feed. <\/p>\n
Glenn Fiechtner, Sioux Falls Published 7:38 p.m. CT Feb. 20, 2017 | Updated 9 hours ago <\/p>\n
Letters to the editor tile(Photo: Argus Leader)Buy Photo <\/p>\n
Macro-evolution through random mutations with natural selection is just one of many examples of wrong or one-sided presentations of evidence for evolution given in classrooms, today. Teachers and students should have the freedom to show the holes in these evolution arguments. <\/p>\n
Science is defined as, Knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method. Merriam-Webster. Science is defined as, Knowledge by observation or experimentation. <\/p>\n
Neither creation nor macro-evolution is science because neither can be observed or repeated. Both are based on belief. <\/p>\n
Natural selection and artificial selection (selective breeding) do work, but only on the existing gene pool. Natural selection and artificial selection can be observed and repeated. This is micro-evolution and is real science. E.g., various breeds of dogs\/wolves\/dingoes. Also, Galpagos finches. <\/p>\n
However, random mutations do not add new genetic information. Observed random mutations have only degraded (destroyed) information in the genes (blindness, albinism). This degradation is science because it has been observed. <\/p>\n
The hypothesis that random mutations increase genetic information (macro evolution) has never been observed nor repeated. So, macro evolution (molecules to single-cells to fish to man) through random mutations is not science. It is a belief. <\/p>\n
What this means is that the teaching of evolution, as taught in most classrooms and science biology textbooks, uses examples of natural selection (real science) and then mixes in a small amount of random mutations (which science shows only destroys) to explain what cannot be proved or observed macro-evolution. <\/p>\n
Read or Share this story: http:\/\/argusne.ws\/2loTZgz<\/a> <\/p>\n 0) { %> <\/p>\n 0) { %> <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Read more here:<\/p>\n Letter: 'Holes' exist in evolution argument - Sioux Falls Argus Leader<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device. Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about Re: Senate Bill 55: Neither creation nor macro-evolution is science. Try Another Audio CAPTCHA Image CAPTCHA Help CancelSend A link has been sent to your friend's email address Continue reading