Letter: Scientific theory means something

Thursday, Jan. 5, 2006 | 8:02 a.m.

I have a theory. Actually it is one of the beliefs of the obscure religion I belong to. We believe that our divine deity has connected all the planets with an invisible golden lariat. That is why the planets appear to revolve around the sun. So, obviously, we don't believe in this scientific gravity "theory" stuff.

It wasn't that long ago that one of the major religions didn't believe in this scientific gravity "theory," either. They believed that all the planets revolved around the Earth. And I seem to recall that they punished this fellow Galileo for using the scientific method to try to prove his theory.

So what if hundreds of years of discovery, observation, calculation, experimentation and testing say that there is something called "gravity"? Our religion, and our holy book, says otherwise.

Our belief in the "invisible golden lariat" theory is a lot like the belief of those who have faith in the "intelligent design" theory. They don't care what the biologists, botanists, paleontologists, evolutionary anatomists, DNA researchers, organic chemists and dozens of other "ologists" say. If intelligent design is going to be taught in public school science classes, then we demand that the "invisible golden lariat" theory be part of the curriculum as well.

Obviously, I am trying to use sarcasm to make my point. Any person, or group, can have a hypothesis, belief, philosophy or faith system, but none of these is a scientific theory. The term "scientific theory" has a very specific meaning, and intelligent design does not meet the criteria. Let's leave the definition of science to the scientists.

Bob Litt

Las Vegas