This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. She’s horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. “They treat you really bad,” she says. “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.” For her, science and religion represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. “If you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you don’t need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that we’d never be able to prove his existence. And I think that’s really cool.”
Also a key quote in that paragraph.
I think a lot of YECers and IDers around here and elsewhere who seem to want to cram science and religion together into some bizarre amalgam could take a lesson from that.
She is a bundle of contradictions, but she has learned her pressure lessons well. Frankly, If God created the world, there is no possible way a scientist could ever fully understand what happened without contemplating the nature and power of the Creator. When you look at art you consider the artist. literature, the author. Architecture, the designer. To demand no thought of the source is to not really believe in the source.
Sounds just like someone saying the earth was created by God, but he made it LOOK like it was billions of years old just to throw us off the trail.
Fortunately for her, she firmly espouses evolution, so she won't be laughed out of her profession.
At least, so long as she makes certain to criticize creationists at every opportunity. She has to hold off the wolves until they can come up with SOME explanation of how they were so completely wrong about soft tissue, while being so exactly RIGHT about everything else.
Actually, what this shows is how belief in evolution precludes real science. Apparently for DECADES scientists, assuming the earth to be millions of years old, and therefore assuming soft tissue couldn't survive, NEVER EVEN THOUGHT to cut a single bone open to see what was inside -- at least that's what SHE says.
So while the masses assume they say there is no soft tissue because they never FOUND any, it seems they simply never LOOKED for it.
But again, they are evolutionists, so all will be forgiven.
Acts 17:26-2726. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.
27. God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.Romans 5:12-21
12. Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned--
13. for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.
14. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
15. But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!
16. Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.
17. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.
18. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.
19. For just as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.
20. The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more,
21. so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
24. "The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands.
25. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else.
26. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.
Was LUKE wrong about this?
One may be horrified without being surprised.
insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old.
Science is refuted because of their personal beliefs? Not exactly rational. Then they say:
“If you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you don’t need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that we’d never be able to prove his existence.
So they claim this is proof that supports their belief, but that there is no proof to support their beliefs, because God designed it so that we would have no proof...
so which is it?