I felt it necessary to write in and correct the gross misstatements in Polung Yang's and David Lindsey's letters on evolution.

This pair, along with most, wrongly equates two separate and unrelated scientific phenomena as being the same, the source of this problem being genetics.

Genetic selection or natural selection as observed in nature is the process of nature favoring different existing genes over others.

For example, lighter skin tones allow for better absorption of sunlight in areas that don't get much sun resulting in better Vitamin D resulting in a natural advantage.

The keywords you should take from that are existing genes because this process has no method for introducing new genetic material.

Many claim that the fact that this occurs proves evolution and that is simply incorrect. Evolution is the process of adding new genetic material to form a new species and has been observed neither in nature nor in a laboratory.

Even if it had been observed, though, it would not prove scientifically that it actually happened because history is simply not scientific in nature.

It is not testable or reproducible so to say that evolution is as scientifically proven as gravity, a constantly observable phenomena, or even to suggest that anything in history could be is absurd.

Events in history can be speculated on given the evidence, not ever scientifically proven.

And evolution is simply a speculative theory of how the events may have transpired.