From the Iowa State web site, I learned Duane Gish debated John Patterson on March 8. It’s interesting to note how the debate was characterized by Daily staff writers.

In Andy Tofilon’s March 8 article (“Scholars to tackle evolution”) he writes: “The event, which will tackle the issue of evolution versus creationism, is titled ‘Which Viewpoint Provides a More Scientific Understanding of Nature?'”

In April Goodwin’s March 10 article (“Professors argue age-old creation question”) she writes: “In the end, Patterson and Gish agreed both evolution and creationism should be taught simultaneously in the public schools.”

Note that both writers used the word “creationism” instead of “creation”.

Whether intentional or not, this is a subtle way of suggesting to the reader that the creation view of origins is only an ideology or religious belief, whereas evolution is scientific.

To be fair to both sides, the terms “creation” and “evolution” should be used throughout an article.

To show just how slanted the reporting of the origins issue is, have you EVER seen a headline anywhere such as: “Debate tackles the issue of creation versus evolutionism”? I think pigs will learn to fly before this ever happens.

David Buckna

Kelowna, British Columbia