Log in

Previous Previous Next Next
They Still Don't Get It - The Voice - Reader's Forum
Send letters to thevoice@uamont.edu
They Still Don't Get It
Colt's first op/ed piece and his response made to Dr. Hunt's rebuttal are disrespectful and lack the basic research necessary from someone who a school publication calls a staff writer. If it wasn't an op/ed piece this garbage writing would end up on an editor's floor. He makes false assertions which Dr. Hunt, a Ph.D. professor well versed in evolution and biology, refutes with his considerable knowledge of evolutionary theory and Colt calls him a liar while invoking evidence which supposedly refutes evolutionary theory. I would challenge Colt to produce a peer reviewed journal article which supports his stand. The website that Colt purports to hold evidence of the fallacy of evolution is simply a collection of articles written by believers in creationism, not scientifically researched data. The truth behind Colt's article is that it is written out of fear and ignorance. To those of you reading these articles who are unsure of your stance or what the research says, I urge you to take Dr. Hunt's evolution class, speak to him or another biologist about it, or simply research the theory of evolution on the internet or the library.

Martin Maxwell

7 Boll Weevils commented | Leave a comment
From: (Anonymous) Date: March 10th, 2008 03:46 am (UTC) (Link)

It's me Colt

my friend, my friend, my friend.

I'm surprised brother. Fear? Ignorance? Disrespectful? All of these accusations have nothing to do with science but are attacks against me personally. In a debate we usually keep these things out completely or to a minimum. I never once disrespected Dr. Hunt. I even inserted a disclaimer stating such. It does not matter who supports my stance. Your argument is an appeal to the majority and an appeal to an authority. Both of which are logical fallacies. So your comment boils down to name calling and illogic. My goal is to point out flaws in a belief system which advocates a minority view point as fact to small impressionable children. These children are then encouraged to foster a humanistic world view that we arrived here by chance. At the point where the text books are teaching the origins of life we need to challenge the method, reason, and science. You are trying to scare people away from my refutation instead of arguing or responding to my challenges. I think it is good to have this healthy debate that Dr. Hunt and I have entered into. I think you have made it unhealthy by the personal attacks, scare tactics, and illogical fallacies.
Thank you for the attention.
God bless!
From: (Anonymous) Date: March 10th, 2008 07:43 pm (UTC) (Link)


I see fear in the fact that you refuse to even attempt to understand the subject being debated. I see ignorance in the fact that you make up definitions of words to fit your argument. I see disrespect in the fact that you call Dr. Hunt, Hunt. Any person who takes the effort, time, and energy to write and defend a dissertation has earned his/her title. And since you refer to this as a debate shouldn't standards of debate such as truth be of importance? Your goal may be to point out a flaw but you have provided no factual evidence behind your argument. You say I am not responding to your challenges and that is true in a sense. Dr. Hunt did a fine job responding and you have failed to respond in a logical, honest manner. From the beginning you have used scare tactics in your "argument" by putting forth persons such as Dahmer and Hitler as advocates of evolution. Again, get your facts straight.
From: (Anonymous) Date: April 1st, 2008 04:57 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Response

the only part i wish to defend is that i have evidence in e-mails that I actually did call Dr. Hunt, "Dr. Hunt" but this was edited for some reason by "the voice". I too was a little disgruntled to find they had made that decision.
From: (Anonymous) Date: April 11th, 2008 08:20 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Response

In response to the "Dr." debate.

According to the AP Stylebook and The Voice's Publications Handbook, the use of "dr." can be misleading. The average reader would assume "dr." to mean medical doctor. Therefore, as a general rule, the editors remove such titles. If you would like to reference someone's credentials, then you must list that individual's degree(s) after his/her name.

Thank you,
Brooke Burger
From: (Anonymous) Date: April 4th, 2008 01:58 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Response

You say get your facts straight when pointing out that Colt says Dahmer and Hitler were advocates of evolution. Does that mean that was not so? I'm confused! All I see is people refuting an article because of their outrage that someone does not believe what they believe. Isn't an editorial supposed to be an opinion? Yes, you do need to have facts. I can't just come up with some outrageous tale and post it, but what some consider to be fact has yet to be proven. I for one to not find it disrespectful that Colt called Dr. Hunt, Hunt. In papers most students do this same thing. You say, Dr. Hunt once and from there on out it's Hunt. Just referring to the last name. I do, however find it offensive that people feel the need to post that those who believe in creationism are doing so out of fear and ignorance. I am a believer that God created this earth. I do however believe in evolution pure and simple, that things evolve over time. Things change, we know that. Do I believe that we evolved from monkeys? Nope! But that does not make me ignorant. I do have the utmost respect for those who give their lives and their minds to science, I want that to be understood. But, I find it offensive and just a bit haarsh when those who are "intellects" try to use scare tactics to make a student feel dumbed down. Just because your beliefs are of faith and not science does not make them wrong.
From: (Anonymous) Date: April 15th, 2008 02:15 am (UTC) (Link)


I did not know that this subject was going to cause controversy among students and professors. Everyone has their own versions of what happened with humans, but for the professors to be so up in arms over an debatable issue confuses me. Mr.Roan has the professors pretty much unraveled trading their professionalism for devolved aggression. Everyone has a constitutional right to express their disagreements and opinions but not to an extent that it's taken personally that you would allow yourself to be exposed instead of keeping your composure together. I hope this age old theory is resolved one day, but for now keep up the good controversy Mr.Roan and Dr.Hunt.

Chad Newton
From: (Anonymous) Date: June 13th, 2008 07:54 pm (UTC) (Link)

Theory of Evolution

This "Theory" has been taught in classrooms to children for so long everybody thinks it is "Fact" but it is not, it is only theory. Find a few parts of an old skull, guess what the whole thing looked like and it becomes a "fossil record" of our evolutionary ancestors. Take enough x-rays of the skulls of living humans and you will get a wide range of variations between eye-sockets, brow thickness, lower-jaw projections that will make you think we all did not come from the same type of primate ancestors. There's not much difference between Belief and Theory, it's just that one uses the heart and the other our so-called superior intellect. When you really think about it all our gadgets and things and convienences have de-evolved the human race not evolved it into something superior. Take a cave-man and drop him in today's world and he will have a thousand percent chance of surviving than the reverse. Is that evolution?
7 Boll Weevils commented | Leave a comment