Evolution and creationism are both unprovable theories

This is a response to the Feb. 17 letter by Sarah Hartwell. I think, Ms. Hartwell, that you are being just as close-minded as you claim CRS to be. You have already decided that Duane Gish is wrong without hearing out his case. It does not follow that because their view lines up with the book of Genesis, that it is false. It is a non sequitur argument. I have heard folks like Gish argue for creation without ever using a Bible verse. Like many well-known scientists, I stopped believing in evolution based on scientific reasons (anthropology, genetics, thermodynamics, etc.) rather than a religious text. [Read article]

This guest commentary is in response to article printed on Feb. 13 regarding Delta Tau Delta and the sanctions we received. Unfortunately at the time the article on Delta Tau Delta was printed, the chapter had yet to receive official notification from the University of Arizona of the sanctions resulting from the hazing incident. Accuracy is very important to us, and without the Dean of Students' written notification, the fraternity felt that a comment would be inappropriate at the time. We now have received the formal document and can be confident in our response. [Read article]

The greatest sheep who ever lived was put to sleep last Friday in Scotland. The pink-nosed 6-year-old Dolly was the first critter ever to be cloned from adult genetic material ÷ an inspirational prototype to men and women involved in one of mankind's greatest fields: genetic engineering.

Dolly was a major breakthrough in the scientific path to using this modern and uniquely Western technology for the benefit of human beings. Like many first creations, Dolly may not have been perfect; she developed a progressive lung disease at about half the life expectancy of her breed. While it has not yet been determined whether her illness was caused by a virus or a genetic complication, many people ÷ mostly closet members of the Flat Earth Society and the Anti-Evolution Union ÷ have predictably seized the opportunity to condemn the researchers' work as "playing God." [Read article]

The U.N. Security Council doesn't want to talk about North Korea. Don Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice don't want to talk about North Korea. We, in our fever-pitched Iraq melee, certainly don't want to talk about North Korea.

It's almost comical: a red-eyed U.S. spoiling for a fight with a reluctant Iraq, while Kim Jong-il does his best to provoke the world.

The world's response ÷ "C'mon, North Korea, cut it out. Please?" ÷ is somewhat understandable; after all, it's a lot easier to engage a country with no realistic hope of manufacturing nuclear weapons than one that already has them. But is that really enough to explain the U.N.'s bizarrely noninterventionist approach to the brewing Asian crisis? Even China, which is far more initiated in Eastern politics than the U.S., has shied away from taking a firm stance on North Korea's recent belligerence. [Read article]