I suppose that it was inevitable that the so-called debate about evolution would make its way here. John Petrilli ("Natural law must get very critical review," April 4) claims that the issue is the existence of God. This is, at the least, odd, considering that the theory of evolution makes no claims about such.

Evolution is a scientific theory, not a philosophical view; it says nothing about morality.

Science is science, not philosophy or religion, and conflating them is to the detriment of all. Later, Mr. Petrilli changes his argument to one against a naturalistic worldview instead.

I would happily write a great deal more on that subject, but that is outside the scope of this letter. Now, Kelly Antonic ("All theories must get a look by 'science,'" April 4) says that "Intelligent design gets bashed by people saying that it cannot be proved, but evolution is only a theory itself." This is a misunderstanding of what are often-identified flaws in Intelligent Design, and also, a gross misunderstanding of the word "theory."

The problems with Intelligent Design are that nothing could in principle disprove such a hypothesis (it's unfalsifiable) and also, even if true, it makes no testable predictions, and because of these, it's unscientific. Make no mistake, evolution is a theory just like gravity and atoms. In science, a theory is a tested and well-supported hypothesis.

Theories like evolution and gravity are as confirmed as anything in science ever can be.

From a scientific standpoint, there is no question that evolution has occurred, even though there are many specifics still being studied ... much like in any science.