Evolution or creation? Which is correct? Are they both right or wrong?

When Charles Darwin came up with his theory of evolution, he did not discard his religious beliefs. He had graduated from Cambridge University in England as an ordained minister.

In his book, he announced his amazement at God's creation. He saw no conflict between the two. Evolution was not seen as a means to exclude theology. In our own present-day interpretation, it is used by many to exclude any reference to a divine nature.

There is no doubt that many species have a lot of genetic variations. This change was likely built into the genetic code which Darwin knew nothing about.

It would take a multitude of "transitional forms," which Darwin spoke about, to go from the lower primates to modern man. Few of these forms have been found. Does the present evidence conclusively prove evolution? The likenesses between species could mean there was a common architect. The interdependency of plants and animals verifies a plan was followed.

To exclude intelligent design from consideration is being intellectually dishonest. It also indicates that evolutionists are unsure of their stand. Some believe that only confirmed scientific information should be taught. If so, it would exclude a lot of so-called support of evolution built on speculation and conjecture.

All ideas should be discussed with open-mindedness.

Dr. Robert L. Gordon, North Augusta, S.C.