Science in Christian Perspective

Letter to the editor

[response to Erdman and Mixter]

Editor:

From: JASA 5 (December 1953): 3.

In reply to C. Erdman and R. Mixter comment

It must be apparent to everyone how speculative the reasoning is relative to mutation rates and amount of mutation necessary for specific changes. We do not know what the mutant rate was in Eohippus,.or the number of necessary mutants to change Eohippus into the modern horse, if such occurred. Very little is said about the Kind of mutations required. The reason is simple; we don't know enough about it to discuss it. We will never know how closely related Equils and Eohippus are genetically because we cannot crossbreed them and study the differences in their chromosome maps. So the side you take on this discussion will be determined by other considerations. If you believe that order and design are artifacts of probability and so can arise by chance, then you are apt to see all kinds of evolutionary trends in fossil sequences. But if you feel that order and design are evidences of the handiwork of God, you will of necessity be dubious of any rnechanistic explanation.