How anti-evolutionists turn a perfectly respectable scientific discipline into an attack on religion.

There are really two theories of evolution. There is the genuine scientific theory, and there is the talk-radio pretend version, designed not to enlighten but to deceive and enrage.

The talk-radio version had a packed town hall up in arms at the "Why Evolution Is Stupid" lecture. In this version of the theory, scientists supposedly believe that all life is accidental, a random crash of molecules that magically produced flowers, horses and humans — a scenario as unlikely as a tornado in a junkyard assembling a 747. Humans come from monkeys in this theory, just popping into existence one day. The evidence against Darwin is overwhelming, the purveyors of talk-radio evolution rail, yet scientists embrace his ideas because they want to promote atheism.

These are just a few highlights of the awful and pervasive straw-man image of evolution that pundits harp about in books and editorials and, yes, on talk radio, and this cartoon version really is stupid. No wonder most Americans reject evolution in poll after poll.

The guy that wrote this article is one Edward Hume. He also has written a book entitled; Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul.

His points are very well researched and they answer one of my questions as to how people can reject evolution in this so-called "enlightened" age. But it beggars another question as well.

Do the people who invent this parallel version of evolution know that they are presenting a lie? Or do they also believe that their version represents the real thing?

Because if they do this knowing full well it is false, then they are liars who are beneath contempt.

But if they are merely confused about the facts then there still exists the opportunity to educate them and change their point of view.

Or am I just being naive?