The evolution of a creationist

  • Article by: ROSS S. OLSON
  • Updated: July 31, 2012 - 7:09 PM

Order of the kind seen in life does not arise spontaneously by natural law and requires an intelligent intervention.

  • 207
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
mullenschultJul. 31, 12 6:54 PM

Ross, if your faith leads you to believe this, fine. But please don't try to pretend that it's science. Because it's not.

prairiedoggyJul. 31, 12 7:11 PM

Interesting theory, but I have trouble with your premise that not only did a god create the universe, but man's sin is going to lead very soon to its destruction. That's expecting people to not only accept a belief in a higher power, but also your specific religious views.

fishergJul. 31, 12 7:12 PM

I certainly respect Mr. Olson and his beliefs however what he describes has nothing whatsoever to do with science. There is no reasoned thought in this piece only faith in which I am certain he is sincere.

griffin76Jul. 31, 12 7:15 PM

And your proof that it's not science is.... Sounds like the author made some very good points to me.

sw1engneerJul. 31, 12 7:16 PM

i understand that we should allow all types of views to be heard but this is pure delusion. we could have had something more insightful today in the strib but yet we allow this op-ed to be printed. Why not talk about witch craft or the Loch ness monster and the flintstones being an actual family

TeddyWelshJul. 31, 12 7:17 PM

And who or what created the creator?

regulus724Jul. 31, 12 7:19 PM

Where to start? How about the fact that our solar system is over 4.5 billion years old based on EVERY piece of evidence used to date the age of our solar system? Or should we go into the fossil record (3.8 billion years) which clearly shows a progression from simple life forms to more complex? No science in what the author claims to be scientific evidence that refutes what we already know about the history of earth. Humans walking with dinosaurs? PLEASE!!

utopiaJul. 31, 12 7:20 PM

The author of the book for which this article is based received his first post-doctorate before the war. That would be World War 2. Pharmacology is not geology, nor is it biology.

methuselahJul. 31, 12 7:25 PM

Life coming from non life is not science. Also, science has never shown that new genetic information, for example the information to give an animal flight or sight, can come about from natural processes. That is what is taught though in public schools and assumed as fact.

divineleftJul. 31, 12 7:32 PM

So, we should believe a pediatrician instead of professional scientists? Can't find many of those who would agree with anything stated in this opinion piece, nor any who are debating "models" of how Noah's flood had anything to do with the St. Peter sandstone. That was laid down in the Cretaceous, when there was a shallow sea covering the Great Plains. Thus, the marine fossils.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters