Here is a letter to the editor I sent on behalf of my father in Arizona.

Unrelated to the now Intelligent Design controversy, I have been writing a column in California called "Nature Never Stops Talking" for 10 years. My father who lives in Prescott faxed write in comments from your paper from a Thomas Atkins and asked for a response.

Here it is. I want your readers to know there are atheists who support Intelligent Design. They distinguish themselves from the creationists to maintain a scientific objectivity. Even Bible believing advocates of Intelligent Design are careful to omit any reference to the Bible or religion to keep the discussion based on scientific merit. Mr. Atkins went on for paragraphs unintentionally misleading folks about Intelligent Design advocating God as Creator and the age of the earth. That’s creationism, not Intelligent Design. He was pretty sarcastic and started making jokes about teaching flat earth and blood letting as though Intelligent Design was in the same category.

I’m going to agree with one of his sentences “A theory in science must be verifiable/falsifiable”. On that basis, evolution is in trouble. The reason we have endangered species is because there is no confidence in them evolving. We have no verifiable proof or experimentation for any animal having a baby that goes on thriving as a completely new species. And whenever we see something well designed by man we never assume it is from a car crash, a tornado, or somebody falling. We see design, we rightly deduce intelligence. That’s verifiable.

If any laboratory successfully creates life from non-living matter with absolutely no living tissue it will prove that it took many years of hard, intelligent work to do so. This proves that life can not be created by accident. That’s Intelligent Design. So far man’s intelligence is not great enough to accomplish the feat.

Why would Atkins poke such merciless fun at people who challenge a 150 year old theory that continues surviving even though it cannot prove any of its main assumptions with experiments? Why would any rational person mock the idea that brilliant engineering requires intelligence? Why are people so sloppy with the facts calling Intelligent Design a religious effort when the folks behind Intelligent Design have been so clear and careful separating itself from religion?

A copy of my brand new book "Nature Never Stops Talking-The Wonderful Ingenuity of Nature" has been donated to the library in Prescott by my father. It should be available in your local bookstores as well. Being a nature enthusiast and writing a column about the beauty and ingenuity that is so obvious in all of nature, I never mention God or Genesis but wink at the readers about such engineering that couldn’t be the result of chaos and mistakes. There is wisdom in nature and I think I can easily prove the scientific method shows design requires intelligence and there is no scientific credibility to evolution’s claims. I’ll do a public debate if you want.

Majority rule is not how true science works. To say most scientists BELIEVE something is not scientific evidence.

Ironically, nearly every un-scientific, religious accusation I have heard about Intelligent Design, fittingly applies to evolution. What is missing in nearly all of the criticisms about Intelligent Design from the evolutionary scientists is science. If Intelligent Design is not scientific and evolutionary theory is, then let’s make this simple and just have the evolutionists present the superior evidence. It will NEVER happen because although arguments and theories abound, the evidence does not exist.

Signed,

Samuel J Alibrando, Jr.

www.NatureNeverStopsTalking.com