So I E-mailed This Letter

I wrote this yesterday and posted it, thinking that I was kinda clever. Then as the day went on I thought that maybe I was less clever and more immature, so I pulled the post. But today I reread it and thought that it may be "somewhat interesting", and so here is the post again.

My progression for reading the paper is as follows: I check out the front page, and read any interesting articles, then pull out the sports section, going through it completly. Then I go back to the front section and check on world news, which is usually in the middle pages of the front section, and then I go to the editorial page to get either a good laugh or my blood boiling. Lastly I browse through the remaining sections to see if there is anything interesting.

Yesterday in the GR Press I read an opinion piece by the very liberal sindicated columnist, Tom Teepen. Here is the beginning of his column. "It ought to count a a national embarrassment not just that the 10 Republican presidential aspirants were asked in their first debate whether they believe in evolution but, worse, that the question was called for. And worst of all, that three testified to their disbelief. So far has the Republican Party fallen into a sink of anti-intellectualism. Indeed, into fantasy. You might as well ask the canidates whether they believe in ghosts, faries and calorie-free doughnuts. One doesn't believe in evolution, any more than one believes or not in physics. Evolution simply is."

Now I use to just let these things pass, but I thought; "There is an e-mail address on the bottom of those opinion pieces, and golly, I have had some practice writing by doing my 2 Timothy blog, and - The dismissive attitude of every anti-intelligent design opinion piece really bugs me". So I sent Mr. Teepen the following:

Well, shoot! Thar ain't no intelligent design? Ya know, it cain't be easy being so ignorant like me that everyone else, and I mean everyone with half a brain, knows without even doubting that evolution IS. But being stubborn I tried to cipher them numbers so as to make some sense, cause my Daddy told me not to believe everything I read just cause it might be some salesman who got this great deal, cept it might not be what was advertised, you know? So I found out that the most simple cells have this DNA information chain thing that is 3 million links long. And that even the somewhat retarded cells in my body have DNA with 3 billion links. Wow! Seems that life requires that much information. I asked myself some questions. How did the first cell get even a fraction of that information? I mean, why would links form in the first place if they wern't going to help plow the field, if you know what I mean? Seems that it's not about chemistry. I read all those magazines and checked out the evolution web sites and it still seems that no one has the least idea, but they tell me that maybe I should'nt worry cause it's not that important. They says that what matters is gene mutation. So I asks this simple question. I can believe that whoever designed the millions and billions of information links could have put change into the program, so that you could get lots of dogs from the same dog. Even an ignoramis like me can see that. But where is the evidence for a dog becoming a cat, you know? Or a dog getting wings and becoming a flying dog? Seems that there is zero evidence (is zero too strong a word?) of anything being in the proces of developing more complex features. No fossles, no lab studies, nothing observed outside. Just change within the original program. And no reason why gene mutation would add design without immediate usefullness. So I asks myself one more simple question. What is the meaning of IS? Bob LaBarge

This morning I had a reply from Tom Teepen, sent at 1.42 AM, which means it was most likely from him and not a secretary. "Thank you for reading the GOP/evolution column and fer your comments. - -- Tom Teepen".