What Scientists REALLY Say about God, Creation and Evolution
Have you ever heard that “All scientists accept evolution as a proven fact” or “real scientists don’t believe in God?” Did you believe it?

Have you ever heard that “All scientists accept evolution as a proven fact” or “real scientists don’t believe in God?” Did you believe it?
In The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow present religion and science as rivals and give the impression that they are irreconcilable. The following quotes present such an opposition, and they reveal an antagonism toward religion in the authors:
Ignorance of nature’s ways led people in ancient times to invent gods to lord it over every aspect of human life. 1
Modern science makes bold insistence that it alone has, in the last 250 years or so, unlocked the true formula for determining the age of creation. Christians under the influence of this thinking go along with the assumption that the creation account in Genesis is not already clear when read in its most simple and straightforward manner. They do this by isolating Genesis 1 from the rest of Scripture so the account of creation can be dismantled piecemeal and reconstructed in whatever way is necessary to conform to the wending ways of modern science. Rather than Scripture shedding light on science, modern science becomes the light by which all other things must be understood.
Although belief in a young earth is not in the list of things we young-earth creationists have in common with intelligent design groups, the intelligent design proponents have mounted a commendable attack against the dogma of evolution in the last several years. Casey Luskin is a Research Coordinator for the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Instititue, a notable intelligent design research group. Luskin holds graduate degrees in both science and law. He earned his BS and MS in Earth Sciences from the University of California, San Diego. His law degree is from the University of San Diego. Luskin recently published an article at evolutionnews.org for Evolution News and Views presenting the fallacy that science is only good science if it is published in peer-reviewed literature. The organization provides original reporting and analysis about the debate over intelligent design and evolution, including breaking news about scientific research. The following is Luskin’s article first published at http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/intelligent_des056221.html
Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking is Professor of mathematics at Cambridge University where he held the Lucasian Chair at Cambridge for 30 years. He is author of the best-selling book A Brief History of Time. Hawking suffers from ALS. His most recent book, The Grand Design, was published in 2010 by Bantam Books.
The objective of this article is to provide a review of some of the foundations of our beliefs as they apply to Biblical creation and creation science. Also, it is to help people come to faith in God, hold their faith if they have faith, and strengthen their faith to be effective with others in bringing faith in God to them. I first listed these foundations in the February 2005 issue of the TASC newsletter. From time to time it will be helpful to refocus on some of these foundations of our creation beliefs so that we may easily review and keep them in mind as we continue to address these foundations in our TASC newsletter articles and witness to others.
Most information in this article comes from Nature’s Destiny
by Dr. Michael Denton. 1
About 60% of the sun’s radiation is in the visible range, only about one trillionth of one trillionth of the entire electromagnetic spectrum. Amazingly, this same range is what the air, the atmosphere, is transparent to.
Figure 1
Richard Dawkins, Oxford:
“…alleged human bones in the Carboniferous coal deposits. If authenticated as human, these bones would blow the theory of evolution out of the water.” 1
Science via AP
From www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/
Unfossilized soft tissue from bone of Tyrannasaurus rex
A: The arrow points to a tissue fragment that is still elastic. How could elastic tissue like this have lasted for 65 million years?
B: Another instance of “fresh appearance”.