Your editorial, Shaking the Family Tree (5/27/09), is profound in the suggestion that knowing the past is crucial to understanding who we are today. The latest missing link, a fossil found in a German quarry, is heralded by proponents of evolution…

The gentleman that wrote in last Sunday saying that Evolution is just a theory and therefore simply a belief system and nothing more, needs to learn what scientists mean by the word “theory”. To a scientist, a theory is not…

William J. Momeno
2910 Kandahar Drive
St. Charles, MO 63303-3123
636-946-6011
wmomeno@excite.com
17 February 2009

EVOLUTION vs INTELLIGENT DESIGN

Science changes. Though the sciences are based on objective facts, the interpretation of these facts - the ways of tying them together into a coherent system - keeps…

The February 15 paper contains a letter which includes the following statement. “Science needs to be challenged in everything, not just to prove it wrong, but to force it to search for the truth.” I have a news flash for…

The Post Dispatch has erred concerning the article on evolution (Darwin’s Sin, February 8). According to the scientific method, the theory is neither proved nor provable. Nevertheless, I deeply regret the Post’s disappointment at the low rate of acceptance. A…

A recent commentary on your OPINION page, titled “Darwin’s Sin” contains a significant error. The error does not pertain to Darwin, but involves the article’s brief discussion of plate tectonics or continental drift.

Your article states that the theory of…

 I have been reading letters written  by Christians in response to the “Devilution” editorial. It is interesting that supporters of  “Intelligent Design” are at one and the same time deceitful and delusional. They are deceitful in that they are trying…

Thursday’s editorial entitle “Devolution” is just another of the Post’s many instances of writing about something they know little about. Evolution as defined by the article, small changes over long periods of time, is totally uncontroversial. Everyone believes that, even…

Mark Lasseigne’s letter to the editor (May 4), in which he simply denied that the T-Rex was related to the chicken on the basis of his perception of “complexity,” was loaded with factual errors. Mr. Lasseigne is wrong to assert…

This letter is in response to  “Tastes like…chicken” in the April 27 issue. It’s important to remember that whenever an editorial writer presents a piece about science, it is not about science. Rather it was a defense of established authority…