In the space allotted by The Hays Daily News for letters to the editor, I can't possibly present a comprehensive argument for the essential validity of evolutionary theory (not necessarily natural selection exclusively however). In keeping with my friend Don Desbien's call (among others) for brevity, I can't expand on this here much either. (And if we aren't here in part to entertain a bit, which can't be dragged out too far, we're missing it anyway.)

So, let me make a few parting comments about this subject (as I see it) and then leave it alone. If you're really interested, please study biology. There's no getting around the effort required to understand the subject material.

First, no one should take evolutionary theory on faith. Scientific theory must be supported by hypothesis testing. This is where negation comes into play, i.e. the null hypothesis. This is done by examining factual evidence alone, "disinterestedly," and by seeing if the proposition can be proven wrong. Those who take evolutionary theory (in any form) as "received wisdom" are doing exactly what Desbien claims they are doing.

A scientific hypothesis is an educated guess about a given state of affairs in the natural world, that is in the observable and even countable world in which we live bodily now. It can't address or explain any parallel world (spiritual) or any world beyond (the hereafter), but it can tell us much about the past.

Desbien doesn't rely on the scientific method for getting to essential truth. Neither do I. Except that I made my living practicing medicine for 30 years, I have no (ultimately) vested interest in the scientific method. It doesn't contain any articles of faith, and it's not a mantra. Since Desbien (evidently) claims the Bible as his sole reference for "the truth and nothing but the truth," there's no argument that he will accept to counter any claims made that go against this conviction. So be it. What we have here is a gentlemen's disagreement between us two (if we are to remain gentlemen at all).

All I can say to parties intensely interested in this topic is to study it well (that is study biology well enough to get a handle on it). Then come to your own conclusions (not because I or Don or anyone else tells you what to think). Especially if this is a matter of spiritual import to you, you alone will need to come by your own convictions about it.

For Christians out there who are made to feel (wrongly, I think) that evolutionary theory somehow undermines the validity of their faith, just remember that Jesus Christ wasn't much concerned with how we got here, but rather with how we do here and in the future. He had "bigger fish to fry."

Since Desbien repeatedly calls for proof as to how new species have evolved, I'd like to leave you all with a proposed "hypothesis" about how to prove the arrival of a new species. On my blog, blogs.hdnews.net/whitesell/, I've outlined such, under the caption "The crux of the matter." It is slightly technical, so read it closely to see if you can follow the gist of it. If and when this is demonstrated in the real world, Desbien will have his proof, as he desires, by his own criterion.

Gary Whitesell

213 W. 21st