I would like to respond to the letter "Syracuse candidate seems to oppose science, equality," Standard-Examiner, Aug. 19). The author claims that " ... Mr. Palmer proudly announced that he considers the theory of evolution to be stupid, that he opposes women's rights and gay rights, ...".
Now why would anyone consider the theory of evolution (molecules-to-man) "stupid"? Could this assertion come from the fact that the following events have never been directly observed, or that no credible evidence supporting such events has ever been found starting with the beginning of life itself:
1. Non-living chemical elements/compounds self-organizing into living cells to form building blocks of life.
2. Living cells progressing through random mutations into all complex life as it exists today.
3. Generation of vast amounts of encoded information (DNA) in the absence of an intelligent source.
The discovery of DNA should have ended Darwinist speculation about naturalistic origins of life by itself because DNA is encoded information. Information is a non-material entity, and its origin must come from an intelligent source. It is actually evidence for intelligent design.
Darwin's theory of evolution would have been an obscure biological theory if evolutionists/atheists had not started using the theory as support for their naturalistic beliefs (God or gods do not exist; nature is all there is).
The author also mentioned rights and equality. However, if molecules-to-man evolution was fact, then:
1. Where do individual human rights come from? If we are nothing more than highly developed animals, why should we have any rights at all?
2. The concept of "equality" is not part of the theory of evolution; instead, it promotes survival of the fittest or "Law of the Jungle".
Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, in his book of the same name, calls evolution "the greatest hoax on earth." Dr. Kenneth Poppe in "Exposing Darwinism's Weakest Link" states: "There is absolutely no scientific support for the monkey-to-man scenario -- absolutely none."
If this is the case, then who is really supporting science, rights, and equality? Not evolutionists! Terry Palmer's opposition to evolution should be a big plus in his favor.
Gerald J. Boyum