It is disappointing to see that the same stereotypes are always resorted to in the evolution vs. intelligent design debate. The Sun has sadly enough fallen to the same tactics to justify their opinions. From a newspaper that I respect for its many accomplishments, I was surprised to see such a poor code of journalistic ethics and misinformation.

Obviously, thinking is not allowed nor important - dogmatic science must be correct and therefore must be blindly accepted. That The Sun had followed a series of fair essays discussing the issue of intelligent design (I.D.) by stooping to this narrow-minded and inaccurate account leaves me disgusted.

I do agree with you on one point. I.D. should be debated - Darwin himself said he learned best from his critics. But this is a scientific issue and not one of religion. I.D. is based solely on empirical evidence and does not rely on any religious text or authority.

Bravo to the Cornell students who are willing to think critically and step aside from the stereotypes and name labeling - the Bible thumpers, the dodos, the conservative Christians or redneck Republicans. Bravo to the Cornell students who have finally decided to be open minded and to question authority and the status quo. Even the dead can follow the stream, but only few question dogma.

For the record - I am neither a Christian, nor a conservative, nor Republican.

Rabia Malik '07

(Editorial resorts to stereotypes; Re: Who Is the Dodo?," Editorial, Feb. 13 by Rabia Malik)