IN Mr Radlauer's letter (South China Morning Post, April 8), he said he would be interested to know which theories of science the evolutionary theory violates. How about the second law of thermodynamics? It says that energy proceeds from a more complex form to a less complex form. He also said no school of thought within biology today disagrees with the principle that species have evolved over time. Perhaps, but there is great disagreement among scientists about the validity of the evolutionary theory which is taught in schools asfact. Those who have studied the issue know that Darwin's evolutionary theory is in a great deal of trouble, and not just from American ''fundamentalists''. Creationism is not an invention of the American religious right. It was what scientists accepted before Darwin's evolutionary theory became popular. Australian scientist Michael Denton, who is not a creationist, states in his book, Evolution: A Theory inCrisis, that he believes the Darwinian theory of evolution will one day ''be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science''. Mr Radlauer also states that creation has no reputable scientific backing or ''ample logical evidence''. That might depend on how you define ''reputable''. Mr Radlauer may be surprised to discover that there are many scientists who believe in creation and no longer accept the evolutionary theory. The scientists realise that no true transitional forms in the fossil record exist, and that the random placement of fossils in geological strata doesn't support those neat orderly evolutionary models found in biology texts. If you consider all the evidence for creation, you will have to conclude that it is more likely that it happened in lieu of things happening by chance as suggested by the evolutionary theory. Laws of probability suggest otherwise. Mr Radlauer should realise that teaching creationism along with evolution as theory doesn't promote ignorance. Truth does not fear honest investigation. STEVE HOWELL Tai Hang
