In Response to the Citizen's Article: For Todd Whitcombe - Evolution of the Planet Earth. Thurs., Sept. 20, 2012.
The subject title is somewhat ambiguous to me as I will try to point out below:
First statement - Where life originated (not even addressed in the article).
Second statement - How life originated (several contradictions throughout the article).
Third statement - "Answer is no one knows for sure." Whitcombe then contradicts himself particularly by his sure explanation of it all being - how life originated.
I guess if you can hoodwink or pull the wool over some of your UNBC students' eyes - that is supposed to be adequate grounds for doing so the rest of the public too, even during Raise A Reader week (Raise A Reader Day PG Sept. 19)
Whitcombe refers to the fossil record for "clues", he says, "good ideas of what must have happened": then never once uses a fossil example of what he is talking about during the "billions upon trillions upon quadrillions" of examples of molecular activity over billions of years (pretty hard to get a fossil of a molecule no doubt).
However without going into more of what I believe contradictions of Whitcombe's article here surrounding RNA (without first addressing DNA) getting living cells from non living matter, and Darwin's evolution - I close with a scientist's statement I came across recently - Inevitably, of course, not only those of us who do science, but all of us have to choose the presupposition with which we start. There are not many options -just two, really. Either human intelligence ultimately owes its origins to mindless matter, or there is a Creator. Strange, is it not, that some people claim that it is their intelligence that leads them to prefer the first to the second.