In response to James Claflin (Your Views, March 30): On what list does the Big Bang appear? Perhaps Claflin is calling our attention to cosmic inflation where the earliest universe expanded from the tiniest speck to a vast volume, actually much faster than he suggests. It still took billions of years for matter to coalesce into what we see today.
Also, anthropologists don't relate everything to the process of evolution. They study the origin of human society and the resulting relationships. They understand evolution but evolution isn't the focus of their discipline. Anthropologists give no credit to creationism because it isn't science. And who said it's been “proven” that it would take 26.2 billion years to evolve humanity? Claflin may be referring to the thoroughly debunked creationist calculations based on their incorrect belief that evolution is completely random. It isn't. The molecules involved in the process of life behave according to the laws of chemistry, and natural selection is anything but random. While genetic mutation is random, evolution involves many nonrandom processes.
There's still a lot to learn about the universe and evolution. But as scientific discovery accumulates, the anti-science claims of creationists become increasingly irrelevant.
David Grow, Edmond