I was appalled to discover that creationism is given credence in the University's general biology curriculum. Professor Christopher Brey began his first lecture on evolution by prefacing that although he is a Catholic, he believes in evolution, and that many people believe that creationism and evolution are compatible. He then went on to discuss several different types of creationism and concluded that while there is no evidence to support any version of creationism, the mere fact that so many believe it to be true prevents us from discounting it as a legitimate theory. Had this been where the religiosity ended, one might almost have forgiven its intrusion and the resulting errant conclusion. However, the coup de grâce to the University's reputation was then delivered, as he condoned the belief that the Earth may be only 2,000 years old, adding that he even has some friends who believe this.
What angers me most is not the impropriety of giving an account of creationism in a science course, nor is it the mistaken suggestion that a common belief, unsupported by evidence, deserves more credence than an equally unsupported, uncommon belief. What appalls me is any public university could be so derelict as to appoint a professor who cannot understand the difference between a lack of evidence in support of a belief and a deluge of evidence in direct contradiction to that belief.
What leads me - as a scientist - to believe that the earth is not merely 2,000 or even 20,000 years old? It is the same principle that leads me to believe that a football field is not merely two inches long: measurement. The age of the Earth has been scientifically determined by multiple independent methods, such as radiometric and meteorological evidence, and found to be on the order of 4.5 billion years old, with an uncertainty of about one percent. Put simply, the earth is so old that when stating its age, two million years is a rounding error.
Whether from an effort to foster religious tolerance, avoid religious backlash or simply endorse a particular religion, this professor and the University have phenomenally failed in their duty to provide students with an understanding of the basic principles of science, and to use those principles to think critically and with a healthy air of skepticism. Please, oh please, can't we keep creationism and this mindless controversy out of our science curriculum and send it back to the Dark Ages where it belongs?
Kent Horvath is a University College junior majoring in molecular biology.
