I was saddened to see Art Hobson’s views of what passes for science in Sunday’s paper (June 16), but I was glad to see that at least it was in the Opinion Section. His “Brief History” was almost totally unproven, unscientific opinion.

For instance, his opinion of star formation is in conflict with scientific laws. If there was ever a big bang, by the laws of angular momentum, everything would be racing outward, with no obstructions. How then could gas and dust form a rotating cloud?

And if a cloud could form, there is no gravitation attraction between dust particles (throw a handful of dirt into the air - you will never see it form into a ball, and we stand on a substantial gravity field).

And if somehow the cloud clumped together, there is no way to compress gas in a vacuum without the introduction of an outside force. In the same way, we cannot inflate flat tires with lung pressure.

Space limits my refuting all Mr. Hobson’s opinions on the age of the sun, plant formation, radioactive dating methods, with science facts. But the main conflict between science and the theory of evolution is the origin of life. It is impossible to go from inorganic material - dirt - to life by chance and natural processes. Not one of the experiments Mr.

Hobson alludes to has ever produced life. … And if any experiment had succeed in producing life, it would have been the result of intelligent design.

I believe God designed and created life and challenge anyone to show proof of evolution. There is none.

BILL CORBIN

Combs

Opinion, Pages 5 on 06/20/2013