Barrett Maners’ “Heritage Foundation goal is more ignorant children” states that the public education system is superior because it teaches science from a Darwinian perspective. However, by all measures the public system, which spends more per student than any other system in the world, is failing most of our children, particularly in science. Maners appears unaware of the evidence that where there is competition for the education dollar there is a positive impact on both students and schools. He also infers several other false claims.

The first is the common assumption that creationists don't believe in evolution. What we don't believe in is Darwinism, which holds to the belief of macro-evolution. When applied to living entities, this is the ability to rise up from non-life elements, and through incremental changes and eons of time, to become higher life forms. The evidence for the first is nonexistent, while the second has never been observed or proven. All its support comes from presupposition.

What is readily seen is that most flora and fauna are able to adapt to environmental conditions while remaining the same species. This is called micro-evolution. Darwinism presumes that micro changes can be extrapolated to prove that macro changes occur. That is what we dispute. When Darwinism is applied to the evolution of the universe, all the variations of the Big Bang theory have severe problems to overcome, and some of those proposals are so fanciful they could never be proved or disproved.

The second is that if you don't believe in Darwinism you can’t function as a serious scientist in the modern world. The truth is that only a small segment of science deals with a Darwinian vs. creationism approach. That which does is as much about metaphysics as science. Both models are studied to have a better understanding of the past but have more to do with the why of the universe and man’s role in it than the study and application of science and scientific principles. For example, the laws of thermodynamics are much better understood as to their existence under creationism, but that is immaterial in the study and application of science because all scientists recognize and understand their existence.

Finally, Maners assumes that students who are taught Creationism are not taught Darwinism. This is rarely if ever the case. It would be foolish not to teach what others believe. This allows the student to draw their own conclusions and provides for a better understanding of opposing points of view and how to defend what they believe if it should become necessary.

The problem of public education in this country isn’t lack of understanding Darwinism. The problem is it spends too much time propagating propaganda for a left-wing agenda.

Kenneth Laub

Rock Hill