Re: “Allow multiple views on evolution,” Dale Schlundt, Another View, Feb. 23:

The shocking proposal to pit the biblical fable, creationism, against the long accepted, factually based theory of evolution is asinine. Potentially, it means more fiction, less truth when teaching the development of the species. These issues are at 180 degrees of polarity, not the flip sides of a coin. How is “providing a choice of beliefs” without evidence helpful? Who benefits? It's not the student who needs to understand evolution as the basis of biology. Schlundt said we need creationism featuring our “ancestors,” Adam and Eve, because we are a Christian nation and evolution is controversial (Creationism is not?). This is nonsense.

We educate with facts, not unsupported beliefs. Most independent modern Bible scholars and many ministers regard biblical creation stories as fables or legends whose intentions are missed if the Bible is taken literally. Conversely, the concept of evolution was introduced in 1809 by Lamark, followed by research from several other scientists before being solidified by Darwin in 1859 (Origin of the Species) and the Descent of Man in 1871. Darwin also introduced natural selection as the “engine” driving the evolutionary process.

The word “evolution” means change over time, but scientifically, it means changes in species by small variations or gene mutations over a long period of time (hundreds-millions of years). Acceptance of the theory, backed by plausible, tested and repeatable evidence, as science requires, took years of debate and alteration; finally after 70 years of withering scrutiny, it became the accepted theory of all plant and animal species development. Nobel Laureate Dr. Harold Kroto, says, “There is no theory more proven than evolution and the evidence comes from every discipline within science.” Surprising to some, the theory doesn't deal with Abiogenesis, the origin of the earth and first life forms dated billions of years ago. The two front-running hypotheses are the “big bang” for the origin of earth, and a single cell, self replicating, photosynthetic microbe for life's beginning. That takes the pressure off the monkey.

Creationism makes a poor rival to science-based evolution, similar to modern medicine vs. a witch doctor. Creationism does however, fit in the field of mythological literature; this is honest.

As the son of a Protestant minister and long-time student of science vs. religion, I don't see belief in creationism and similar stories as a Christian obligation, and it is certainly not a metaphor for spirituality (see Hinduism and Buddhism). Religious beliefs cannot counteract truth; faith and belief should increase as testable evidence mounts. Being better educated in both subjects might have made the professor's proposal seem unnecessary. Donald Masters is a retired periodontist, dental implantologist, author and a post-doctoral educator.