To the Editor:

A recent article accused Paul Broun of “denying basic science.” The writer (not without bias herself as a member of the Democratic Committee) accused Paul of being “unscientific” and therefore unfit to represent us in public office. I must take issue with her conclusion. The writer has confused “science” with “political correctness.”  Paul Broun is guilty, but not of being unscientific.
Scientific conclusions on such matters as the age of the earth are arrived at by interpreting data. It has long been demonstrated that the present entrenched presuppositions used to interpret such data are based upon the Lyellian theory of Uniformitarianism, a theory that is hopelessly flawed – thus the wild fluctuation of supposed dates when examining the same samples. Even some of the most avid evolutionists have decried the evident flaws in the theory that guides such studies. The more progressive of the scientific community have begun to rethink and reinterpret the data and many have found them well within the scope of a Biblical chronology.
Paul Broun can be faulted, not for being “unscientific,” but for rejecting a current political correctness that, when applied to social and moral issues has turned all we ever accepted as moral, right and good on its head. Real history will vindicate Paul Broun, but in the meantime, while we grope through the fog of the present confusion, Paul Broun is guilty of rejecting the theories that produced the fog in the first place.   

Bill Shade
General Director, Source of Light Ministries
Madison
Via e-mail

Printed in the October 18, 2012 edition