[rhema]

This writer are illiterate.

I are often guilty of a similar solecism when I make media a singular noun with a verb to match.

But to the point: What's to be made of the honest questions within the (apparently evolutionary) community?

. . .For example, a growing number of prominent biologists are signing on to the following statement: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

Written in 2001 to encourage open-mindedness within the scientific community, the statement has been supported by Nobel Prize nominee Fritz Schaeffer, Smithsonian Institution molecular biologist Richard Sternberg and Stanley Salthe, author of "Evolutionary Biology."

[Rudder]

Maybe these scientists really are skeptical of random mutation and selective pressures being the engine behind evolution, but they seem not too willing to provide an alternative.

Day in and day out for many, many years now, the theory of evolution has been and is tested in laboratories and field studies throughout the world. If there is a scientific alternative, I haven't heard of it.

I'm skeptical of the whole article.