Creation answers found in Genesis

To the editor:

I'm concerned that some readers misunderstand creationism. My views conform to that of the creationist organization Answers in Genesis (www.answersingensis.org), and I'll attempt to explain our general views.

Creationists support conventional operational science, which by definition studies processes that we can observe and test by repeated experiment. This science is adequately explained by materialistic theories and has no technical applications when not stated by them. However, today's science also includes origins science, which concerns how what we now observe came to be and so by definition concerns past processes, unobservable and unrepeatable. Thus, we can only discover them by physical evidence (like fossils) and not by experiment. This, however, requires interpretation, which is subject to our beliefs. Some believe the processes we observe now are the only processes that have ever occurred and are adequate to explain all that we now see. Creationists disagree, so we turn to our belief that the Bible is true and use its account of history as our interpretation of evidence. Thus, we say things like the created "kinds" of Genesis 1 explain the origin of species and natural selection and that the Noahic flood accounts for the large amount of sediment and fossils we see. I also questioned these ideas until I read Answers in Genesis' arguments and evidence covering various topics, most of which can also be found on its Web site.

ERIC LYNCH, Cape Girardeau