Discrepancies In Paper

Advertisement

Editor:

I would like to comment on several issues with the Roundup. I have felt discrepancies previously and have not written. I found these three things could not be ignored.

I understand that the cartoons in our paper are satires, but I would like to ask if the recent cartoon in the 5-3-13 edition of our paper was promoting illegal immigration or thanking our elected officials for doing the right thing? I felt as though it was degrading the proposed process from illegal immigration and to the proper process for legal immigration as the “rough neighborhood” they decided to enter. Breaking the law and the fact that we have to make illegal immigrants come clean and deal with each situation as individuals, like anyone else has to do, that break the law of this land/country, is not a joke.

If the latter was the case, then the cartoon was very offensive to the people that have worked hard their entire lives to make this country what it is, legally.

With the businesses I have been in, I have had to follow every law, regulation, ordinance and rule that the government has put in place. I have never been allowed to side step any because it was an inconvenience or because I didn’t like it. If I forget to follow even one rule, I have to face the repercussions. For example, out of the hundreds of pages of forms I have to fill out yearly, I missed filling out one, two-page form last year with the AZDOR and faced a $1,000 fine.

Secondly, in reference to the “MailCall” letter titled “Evolution debate continues” I feel that one of the problems today is when “journalists/actors” interject their opinion on issues. Journalists are not taught/trained/educated in every subject that they report on or that this world faces, so should keep their opinions to themselves unless they specify it is their opinion. I did not see your comment as your opinion, it appeared as you were overriding a public opinion. You state that, “Evolution doesn’t rely on faith at all — that’s why it is a scientific theory.” Do you know what the definition of “theory” is? You used the word and as a journalist/editor of journalist, I would expect you to know the meaning. A theory is in no shape or form “fact.” Every creation or evolutionist view is a theory, unless you know someone that was there and even that could be questioned.

The news page does state “Opinion” as the title, but the page also includes other factual information such as who the paper contacts are and your policy.

Jeff Daniels

Comments

Donald Cline 1 year, 3 months ago

Well, Jeff, it seems to me you are challenging semantics rather than asserting a claim that "The Theory of Evolution" is not a fact. Evolution is a provable fact, and the proof is well-documented. I'll describe the proof in a moment. However, all aspects of evolution are not yet proven facts, and it has become obvious a lot of evolution -- call it mutation, if you will -- occurs under what is called "Chaos Theory" which is a subset of "Entropy." For example -- here is my description of "proof" of evolution -- if you have a population of mice with tails of a random length throughout the population, and you remove from that population all mice with tails less (or more) than an arbitrary length and allow the remainder to procreate, and do the same with successive generations, eventually you will have a population of mice whose tails conform to your required measurement -- with a few throwbacks. In nature we have seen and documented that environmental factors making survival easier for species with a certain trait will cause, over time, that trait to predominate in that species. Creationists often support their THEORY by pointing to the complexity of the eyeball, which -- they say, but cannot prove -- suddenly appeared in species with no prior history of vision. There are all kinds of problems with the context of that claim in terms of proving lack of history, etc., but setting all that aside, this is where entropy and chaos theory come into play: There are an infinite number of mutations in every generation of critter, usually tiny, even infinitesimal in significance. Some are quite significant. Most of these either make no difference at all, some contribute to the extinction of that species, and some contribute to the survival of that species. Those that contribute to the survival of the species tend to cause the specie to live longer, and therefore have more opportunities to procreate. THAT'S "Evolution." And I see no conflict whatever between that and Creationism, because that is the Intelligent Design God Created.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.