Don't you love it when somebody comes along and explains how you feel in a much more eloquent way than you can? It happened to me this morning when I read the featured Letter to the Editor in today's Orlando Sentinel. Writer Marty Sullivan, by the way, has one of those unisex names I like. You can't tell if Marty is male or female therefore you can't prejudge Marty's words. Marty wrote a letter explaining why "Creationism can't be called a theory."
Marty says, Creationism cannot be put forward as a scientific hypothesis, much less a theory, since it cannot be empirically tested. Words used by educators should conform to their precise scientific meaning, such as gravitational theory, energy conservation theory, mass-energy equivalence theory (E=mc2). These are supported by extensive, empirically tested scientific evidence, as is the evolution theory.
OK then. My belief that God created everything doesn't have to be debated or even explained. It's a belief. Marty goes on to say:
Creationism, as a religious belief, should be so respected. Subjecting it to scientific inquiry disrespects creationism as a theological belief. Educators should make this distinction. Our students deserve to learn the difference between the very different disciplines of theology and science.
Thank you Marty Sullivan. I couldn't have said it better myself.
***
