Letters to the Editor
Cayetano's stand deserves respect
Although I'm not known as a Cayetano supporter, I must admit his refusal to cave in to the teachers' union is impressive.
Whether it's truly visionary leadership on behalf of Hawai'i as a whole or he's just plain stubborn is for others to opine. Regardless, so far it seems he's balked at taking a fiscally problematic but politically easier route. This a rare trait among elected officials — especially in one-party Hawai'i.
In this regard, Gov. Ben deserves some respect.
Mike Rethman
Kane'ohe
Methods, assumptions not explained in article
Regarding your Aug. 9 article on the reported census undercount: How do we know there's an undercount?
Did someone find 26,747 real people living in Hawai'i, with names and addresses, not counted by the Census Bureau? Can they produce this list of names so your reporters can call a few of those people and confirm they exist, confirm they weren't counted and then ask them why they slipped through the cracks?
If you're going to present a partisan, politically motivated study financed by the Democrats as fact, perhaps you should explain what methods and assumptions were used to come up with this reported undercount.
Jim Henshaw
Kailua
Caption wrong in saying body buried in Kalaupapa
That was a most interesting and up-to-date article on Aug. 6 about the present status of the Kalaupapa Settlement. But I must point out an error in the caption describing the gravesite of Father Damien. The caption says that Damien is buried on the peninsula. Not so. His body was exhumed and returned to Belgium in 1936.
This was at the request of King Leopold of Belgium with the consent of President Franklin Roosevelt. I don't think there was a single patient, among other Damien admirers, who ever forgave either of these two men. The resentment still lingers.
There is also a most captivating human interest story to this event. Allow me to quote from my book, "Yesterday at Kalaupapa":
"The trip (to Belgium) from Ho-nolulu was aboard the Army transport 'Republic.' The ship stopped at San Francisco for a brief religious ceremony before continuing on, and a strange occurrence took place there.
"On the morning of the 'Republic's' arrival at San Francisco, the ship's captain, Edgar S. McLennan, could not be located despite a search of the ship from stem to stern. He was never found and the Army's board of inquiry, which thoroughly investigated the incident, reported, 'We have been unable to reach any conclusion, but tend to a theory of suicide or accident.'
"Many Hawaiians felt that with the removal of Damien's body a 'kapu' had been broken, that they had warned earlier that someone would die for the wrongdoing."
Emmett Cahill
Volcano
State, city need to study ways to increase supply
About this time each year the Board of Water Supply asks the community to conserve water. The board also should work with Mayor Jeremy Harris to come up with new ways of increasing our water supply.
Trying to conserve water with the increase in population and visitors while not increasing the supply of water seems to be futile. We need innovative ideas, such as building dams for the ponding of water in each valley that has an active stream. These lakes could be used for recreation purposes such as swimming, fishing and kayaking, while allowing the water to filter back into our underground system to replenish our supply.
The federal government helps to build dams in other states, so why not here? With the request from the city and the state, federal funding could be obtained.
It seems logical that an increase in population and visitors will deplete our precious water without some means of increasing our supply very soon.
Griffith R. Conradt
People who once had everything now have nil
I am writing in response to the June 21 letter by Paul de Silva. I disagree with de Silva when he says that what was wrongfully taken should be restored to all of the "multiracial subjects" in the Hawaiian Kingdom.
When the monarchy was illegally overthrown, of all the races that were a part of the "multiracial constitution," who lost the most? While other races prospered, land where generations of Hawaiians had lived and worked was confiscated in the name of progress and Christianity. However, I agree that ethnic Hawaiians exercised their right of self-determination by willingly creating a multiracial constitutional monarchy. I also agree that the Akaka Bill may sound racist.
Someone once told me, "The Hawaiian people are so greedy; they want their sovereignty, their land and they want to be compensated for the inequalities they feel they have suffered. They can't have everything."
My reply is, "Hey, why not?" We had everything; we shared; now we have nothing. Give it back.
Ronika Makekau
Newspaper lowered by Page One coupons
I can't believe this newspaper has lowered itself so low that it puts pizza coupons on the front page. I would think Liberty House ads would provide enough.
Chris Shively
'Aiea
• • •
Creationism in school
Any theory on origin of life is unscientific
It disturbs me that the many letters that have been submitted are confusing the issues of evolution, science and religion.
Teaching creationism as an alternative theory of the origin of life is no more "unscientific" than teaching evolution as the explanation for the origin of species. Granted, the theory of evolution is based on scientifically observable phenomena such as mutations and adaptations, including bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics and developing heartier vegetables via genetic manipulation.
But to extrapolate such phenomena into a theory explaining the origin of life is not science.
Empirical science relies on the scientific method of hypothesis proven by observation and measurements. We cannot use this method when dealing with the question of the origin of life to give us solid, factual answers. There is no laboratory where we can prove the origin of the species. All we have are theories.
In fact, the lack of fossil transitional species (missing links) and the basic law of entropy actually punch holes in any theory that describes simpler organisms evolving into more complex organisms with more complex organ systems, culminating in a human being. Even if this were the case, where did the first organism come from?
In my opinion, trying to convince people into believing that the process of evolution explains human origin is itself a "religion." Any attempt in explaining how life began is not science.
I agree that this question should remain in the domain of religion, philosophy, social sciences, etc. However, if teachers want this explained in a science class (where it doesn't belong), then there is no question that alternative explanations such as creationism be taught as well. Otherwise, keep the discussion of the origin of life away from the science curriculum.
Randall Nitta, M.D.
Mathematics unable to explain evolution
Evolution, or the theory that life comes purely from chance, is impossible from a mathematical point of view, even given billions of years. The vast array of beauty, design and wonder of life could never come from a haphazard collision of chemicals and molecules. It takes a lot of planning and energy to put together even the simplest of devices from raw material.
The theory of evolution goes against reality when it claims that things get better with time. One of the universal laws of science is the second law of thermodynamics, which in essence tells us that things break down, wear out or get worse if additional energy, resources and information are not brought into the picture. Things don't just get better with time, they get worse.
There are many scientists who agree with creationism, and much information, literature, video and audio tapes have been produced to refute evolutionary claims. I've been exposed to more than four decades of evolutionary dogma from the classroom, "natural history" documentaries and the like, yet I'm a creationist today.
While creationism takes a little faith to believe in, evolution takes incredible leaps of faith to believe its claims that life began and developed from pure chance.
Willis Maeda
Believing and knowing a concept are different
Knowledge is when the mind possesses a concept. Belief is when a concept possesses the mind. The absurd idea of teaching creationism as fact in public schools is unmasked when those who espouse it refer to creationism as what they believe.
Del Pranke
Pahoa
Scientific method welcomes new ideas
Some postmortem remarks on the so-called "creationism" flap at the Board of Education now that the hysteria has subsided:
Mathematical physicist Paul Davies in "The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin of Life" says that the solution to the riddle of life lies in explaining the origin of genetic information, something for which Darwinism has no explanation. Davies writes that a satisfactory theory of the origin of life requires not just more knowledge of the kind we already possess but "some radically new ideas."
It is all the stranger, then, that orthodox Darwinists are so resistant to admitting "new ideas" to the discussion table that they monopolize.
Philosophers and religionists are often fearful of new ideas that might threaten their world view. But it is the very nature of the scientific method to welcome and test new ideas. Some scientists, however, resist the idea of intelligent design as part of the origins discussion with epithets like "creationism under another name," etc., rather than with reasoned argument.
It is important to note that they do this not as scientists but as philosophers. When scientists speak as philosophers, they are no longer experts but are on an equal footing with the rest of us.
The philosophy of naturalism has long since insinuated itself into the halls of science with great success, disguising itself as scientific method. But naturalism is a faith, a quasi-religious commitment to the proposition that the universe must be explained solely on the basis of blind chance and physical laws. The naturalist refuses to discuss intelligence in the universe. No one who has "new ideas" that are incompatible with his philosophy is to be admitted to the dialog.
We want our science faculties to teach our children the scientific method. We do not want our science teachers to impose a philosophy upon our children in the guise of science, especially when discussion of alternatives is forbidden.
It amazes me that some scientists would deny our youth and teachers the opportunity to discuss objectively within the limits of scientific method shorn of its naturalistic biases. As Darwinist Richard Dawkins proposes, "Our universe is full of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."
Donald W. Baron
Should education include other beliefs?
There can be no debate over creationism versus the theory of evolution. Creationism is about how life began; evolution is about how species develop and change. The actual "debate" is about what people with different beliefs want taught in schools.
If creationism is taught in schools, I would hope the course would include the beliefs of the native people of the West Coast of America — that the raven created the world:
"The Raven flew through the dark with a large, heavy bag over his shoulder. When the Raven was too exhausted to fly any further, he decided that was the place. He untied the bag and took out the land and the seas and the sky. Next, he took out the plants and birds and animals and fish. It took the Raven a long, long time to put everything in its place. But finally, he thought he was finished. The Raven was about to rest when he noticed something in the very, very bottom of the bag. He reached way down deep into the bag until he found it. Then he pulled out man."
Terence C. Wade, Ph.D.
BOE member deserves vindication for stance
What great coverage by both newspapers on the debate of creation and evolution in science class. Sadly, I've waited patiently for some erudite theologian to illuminate the whole matter and vindicate state Board of Education member Denise Matsumoto from shameful treatment of her by evolutionists.
Permit me to submit some thoughts on the matter by physicist Gerald Schroeder, author of "Genesis and the Big Bang" and an applied theologian with an undergraduate and doctoral degree from MIT. In his most recent book, "The Science of God" (1997), he reconciles faith in science with a belief that the Bible is the truth. He is able to reconcile the 15 billion-plus years of the Big Bang with the 24-hour days of creation in the Bible by Einstein's Law of Relativity.
Schroeder also states that Einstein believed in a higher force, which some call God, directing the universe. This is the point Matsumoto tried to get across to the BOE and the public.
There is an alternative way of teaching and understanding science. Speaking of random mutation as the cause of the evolutionary process, Schroeder states, "The convergence observed in convergent evolution did not happen by independent random reaction. It must have been programmed." Yet I have read letters from science teachers and professors alike, stressing with unflinching certainty the fact of evolutionary process by random mutation. Schroeder also points out that statistical analysis of evolution is fraught with assumptions.
Do you want your children being taught by our prevailing system and teachers?
Wilfred Nagao
