'Scientific creationism is oxymoron
In his Saturday letter, Mr. Poglitsh states "a growing number of credentialed scientists see serious weakness in the hypothesis of evolution." Wrong. Evolution is accepted fact, the same as gravity. Unfortunately the doubters that insist on mounting a scientific defense, cling to irrational writings such as the "Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth" by Jonathan Wells. Contrary to the writer's claim, Dr. Wells fails most criteria for an "impeccably credentialed scientist." A quick Wikipedia check reveals that Dr. Wells is a member of the cultish Unification Church led by Sun Myung Moon. Hardly the bastion of critical scientific thought. Further, Dr. Wells states his lifelong goal is to "destroy Darwinism." Not a mindset particularly conducive to writing an objective book about evolution.
Yes, there are a few that are willing to bear false witness to science. They shouldn't be surprised when their profession rejects them. Would a geologist who disputes plate tectonics be taken seriously? How about an astronomer who claims the sun orbits the earth? Or a doctor who believes that bloodletting can prevent illness. Absurd ideas have a short shelf life in science. It is time we rid ourselves of the senseless oxymoron that is "scientific creationism."
— Mark Chilcote
Girdwood
Split right down the middle
Yet another piece on why we are better off because of SB 21. What it says is, we're not getting screwed as bad as ACES … wow, thanks for that. Why are we letting SB 21 off the hook? There were voices on both sides of the aisle that had sensible ideas, one of which was a guaranteed minimum share for Alaska. Those voices were eliminated by gerrymandering in the highly engineered elections that gave us SB 21. So now, we are paying to remove our oil and ship it off for someone else's profit.
We're supposed to be partners … so here's my idea — 50/50. Oil companies get to deduct every normal business expense, but a council of citizens reviews them for eligibility. Then it's half for them, half for Alaska. Very simple. Doesn't matter what field it comes from, the state gets half of every profitable gallon sold.
I'm guessing the oil companies won't like that, and we will hear how they will leave if we do something like that. So what, how could that be worse than paying to export our limited resource? Also, when they leave, they promised to remove the pipe and restore the land. Guess what — that creates jobs too.
— Tom Mitchell
Anchorage
Tanaina much more than a day care
While I agree with E.J.R. David and others that Tanaina is important to UAA, I am surprised that very little has been written about the benefits it provides to the children it serves.
Tanaina is much more than a day care. Tanaina is an outstanding early education center. Its graduates are proof of the benefits of high quality pre-K education.
My youngest daughter attended Tanaina. She loved it. She was there for two years and left full of confidence and well prepared for kindergarten. She did well in elementary school and, along with at least three other members of her Tanaina cohort, was recently accepted into the highly gifted program at Romig Middle School.
Anchorage needs more pre-K programs like Tanaina, not less. I urge whoever is responsible to reverse the short-sighted decision to evict this exceptional program.
— Dr. Ian van Tets
Anchorage
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter for consideration, email letters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.