To the Editor

Much has been said in the news as of late over whether Intelligent Design ought to be considered a scientific theory or a religious belief, and if scientists who hold to ID should be allowed to hold research positions or teach science.
      As a graduate in geology from Iowa State University (1990) and a pastor in Ames, I feel as if I'm in a unique position to understand both sides of the issue.
      The discerning reader needs to catch the underlying question here: can a person believe in a god that is, to varying degrees, actively involved in the natural world and still practice viable science? Or, does one have to believe in no god, or an impotent god, to be considered a reputable scientist?
      A brief look at history and an honest assessment of today's sciencists answers the question hands down.
      Practically every major scientific discipline was founded by men who believed in a god that was and is actively involved in the universe. A few notable examples would be Robert Boyle (father of modern chemistry); Georges Cuvier (founder of paleontology and comparative anatomy); John Dalton (father of modern atomic theory); James Joule (discoverer of the first law of thermodynamics); Gregor Mendel (father of genetics); Isaac Newton (discoverer of the universal laws of gravitation); Louis Pasteur (father of bacteriology), and the list goes on to the present day.
      I have personally interacted with 15 professors at ISU who seriously doubt Darwinism and have offered their assistance in helping college students work through the role of faith in science. Guillermo Gonzalez is by no means alone in his understanding that science points toward an Intelligent Designer. Colleagues that share his conclusions range from Donald DeYoung, who received his Ph. D. in physics from ISU, to Charles Townes, who invented the laser to the catalog of 400 scientists listed at www.discovery.org
      Charles Darwin prefaced the "Origin of Species" with this quote from Francis Bacon, the father of the scientific method: 'Let no man ... think or maintain, that a man can search too far or be too well studied in the book of God's word, or in the book of God's works.'
      What we are seeing in this controversy is the prodigal son of science is returning home. The fathers of science and their like-minded contemporaries are welcoming the return, but the sons of Darwin are lashing out in fear that their exclusive rights to science will be lost.
      Fear not, Darwinists, and join the party!