By Christos Economides
Arizona Daily Wildcat
November 7, 1997

Letter writers discredit evolution

Editor:

Mark Cogan's letter to the editor on evolution reflects the tiresome dogma which Ms. Alexander complained of. First, he criticizes Ms. Alexander for referring to evolution as a theory for how life originated. However, this is a purely semantic criticism, since, according to evolution theory, every living species but the first evolved in an evolutionary process.

Next, Mr. Cogan attacks her for noting the lack of transitional species, but does not bother to list any, or even describe one that has transitional characteristics which would prove evolution, e.g. a species with part lung and part gills. Instead, he attempts to justify the horse example with contradictory information. Yet according to G.G. Simpson, in his book The Major Features of Evolution, "The most famous of all equid trends, 'gradual reduction of the side toes' is flatly fictitious- In a rapid transition (not represented by fossils), early Oligocene horses lost one functional front toe and concentrated weight a little more on the middle hoof as a step-off point."

Mr. Cogan claims that Gould and Eldredge devised the theory of punctuated equilibrium to explain why the transitional fossils were not evenly distributed, not to explain why they didn't exist. However, that's not what a disillusioned Eldredge told The Guardian Weekly a few years ago, in an article titled "Missing Believed Non-Existent."

Mr. Cogan begs the question, "petitio principii," by assuming there is "serious proof" of evolution. He would leave no room for any scientific arguments to the contrary, although he claims the theory of evolution is still being debated.

Well, which is it?

Finally, Mr. Cogan makes slighting remarks regarding Ms. Alexander's ability to grasp this subject, yet does not give us any reason why he has any more insights than she, other than a pro-evolution webpage. Ms. Alexander obtained her research from several reputable scientific sources, including research done by Michael Denton, a non-creationist Ph.D biochemist who has done extensive research in the field of biology. I find it humorous that Mr. Cogan would characterize these arguments as a creationist who easily disabuses a first year biology textbook. Perhaps Mr. Cogan needs to read things other than what he finds on the internet.

Ms. Eychaner's letter to the editor also condescendingly dismisses Ms. Alexander's argument with the elitism of someone who knows. Ms. Eychaner claims that scientific people do not have time to contribute to newspapers. Yet Ms. Eychaner just had the opportunity to refute Ms. Alexander's arguments, but didn't bother. Oh, as an "evolutionary biology" major, she's already assumed the conclusion.

Christos Economides
Civil Engineering Junior