Pulitzer-prize winner intolerant of creationists!

April 6, 2000

Ellen Goodman, nationally syndicated columnist and the recipient of a Pulitzer prize for her commentaries, had her reputation for tolerance tarnished recently. She wrote an opinion piece late last month that stated that even though polls reveal that most Americans favor the teaching of creation in public schools, it should be censored anyway. She also grossly misrepresented the efforts of concerned Christians who are attempting to de-emphasize the teaching of evolution in schools; contrary to her alarmist claims, very few are advocating that creation be forced on public school students.

Recommended resource

Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics Dr. Duane T. Gish Dr. Gish is the world’s foremost debater on creation/evolution and has debated many famous evolutionists all over the world. In this extensive work, Dr. Gish answers his critics, showing that he can substantiate all the facts given during his debates, and more powerfully, refutes the evolutionist position. Anyone attempting to witness to an evolutionary scientist needs this book! ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY

Because AiG’s hometown newspaper, The Cincinnati Post, printed Ms. Goodman’s commentary right on the heels of two pro-evolutionary news articles, it was time for AiG to respond. Our letter to the editor below appeared in The Post on March 30. Because such a letter could be sent to almost all secular newspapers worldwide that printed stories about “snakes with legs” and a primate that is allegedly a “missing link,” we reprint it here for our international web audience.

Dear Editor:

The Cincinnati Post appears to be agenda-driven when it comes to the controversial issue of creation versus evolution. Hardly a week goes by without some article appearing as a propaganda piece for evolution. One would think that the editors would have learned their lesson and have been a little more discriminating about articles they choose to print. Remember “feathered dinosaurs?” Or meteorites from Mars with “life” on them? It wasn’t until a few weeks later that retractions were printed.

Recently, an article proclaimed that a snake may have had legs. Even if it did, this is not evidence at all for “molecules-to-man” evolution, which requires addition of new genetic information. Loss of legs could only be achieved through degeneration (the opposite of evolution) of DNA information sequences that determine leg development.

Then, there was a major article claiming that a “missing link” between lower and higher primates had been uncovered (a thumb-sized creature weighing perhaps a third of an ounce). But we only have a few fragments (foot bones) and no complete skeleton, so readers should be justifiably skeptical. They should remember the famous claim of a “missing link” between mammals and whales, the Pakicetus reconstruction, which was heavily touched up to appear that this whale had legs.

Most recently on March 21, there was a guest column from a commentator who prides herself on being “tolerant” and “open-minded.” Ellen Goodman decries recent polls that have revealed that an overwhelming majority of Americans support teaching creation in public schools (CNN reported it at 68%).

Ms. Goodman declares that evolution is absolutely true, apparently not aware that a significant number of scientists—holding graduate degrees in science—reject macro-evolution, and accept Genesis creation instead.

Furthermore, she sets up a “straw-man.” Almost all the efforts by concerned citizens who don’t believe in evolution have been directed at de-emphasizing the teaching of evolution as fact in schools. I can only count on one hand the number of people who have contacted Answers in Genesis who believe that teachers must be “forced” to teach creation.

Regarding the “science” articles on evolution, the editors of The Post should think more critically before presenting mere speculation as fact.

Sincerely Yours,

Ken Ham
CEO, Answers in Genesis

Help keep these daily articles coming. Find out how to support AiG.