Letters and comments for October 3, 2011

By Observer Upload October 04, 2011 12:52 am
Letters and comments for October 3, 2011

Evidence leads to drawing conclusion

To the Editor:

In response to Tim Hoffnagle’s letter, dated Sept. 28, he repeated a challenge he made in The Observer several years ago, “for creationists to present a scientific test to prove that there is a god.” As you know, investigators can draw conclusions based on the evidence.

For example, in my case, for several years, I believed deer came into my yard, based on the evidence, but I had never seen deer in my yard until only about four years ago. The evidence included the following: I heard my husband say he had seen deer in our yard; I saw their hoof prints in the dirt around the flowers; I saw their droppings; I saw the flowers that were eaten and their hoof prints.

One year, we had apples in a box sitting outside our house, and soon there were bite marks shaped just like deer teeth in the apples. Sometimes the grass was fallen in shady spots that looked like a deer had lain there for a while. And I saw deer around the neighborhood. So, based on the evidence, I concluded that deer come into my yard. (When I finally saw a deer in my yard, I was quite disappointed. The mystery was gone.)

I likened my belief that deer come into my yard to the existence of God. Based on the evidence of how this world and universe stays together, I conclude there really is a Creator/God.

Lucy Gilchrist

La Grande