Discover Magazine - Mary Schweitzer

[Canuckster1127]

All,

I'd like you to read this article.

http://discovermagazine.com/2006/apr/dinosaur-dna

Incorporate the following thoughts as you see fit:

1. The source for the story may undoubtedly have some bias.

2. There may be more to the story here than what is presented.

With that considered, we have a scientist here, who is an evangelical Christian whose conclusions, training and expertise are coming from training and observation toward specific conclusions based upon evidence she's helped to uncover taking it on the chin from some elements of the Christian community.

In particular, consider this quote from the article:

While scientists struggled to make sense of the bones, another community had no doubt about how to interpret the results. The reports were quickly embraced by biblical literalists who believe God created life on Earth less than 10,000 years ago. For decades they have been working to place a scientific patina on their ideas. The Institute for Creation Research runs a graduate school near San Diego with 11 instructors who hold doctorates in biochemistry, geology, and other sciences. Conferences offer papers on topics like the physics of the Genesis flood. "Any time there's empirical evidence, that's gold for them," says Ronald Numbers, a professor of the history of science and medicine at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

To Schweitzer, trying to prove your religious beliefs through empirical evidence is absurd, if not sacrilegious. "If God is who He says He is, He doesn't need us to twist and contort scientific data," she says. "The thing that's most important to God is our faith. Therefore, He's not going to allow Himself to be proven by scientific methodologies."

Some creationists, noting Schweitzer's evangelical faith, have tried to pressure her into siding with them. "It is high time that the 'Scientific' community comes clean: meaning that the public is going to hold them ACCOUNTABLE when they find out that they have been misled," reads a recent e-mail message Schweitzer received. She has received dozens of similar notes, a few of them outright menacing.

These religious attacks wound her far more than the scientific ones. "It rips my guts out," she says. "These people are claiming to represent the Christ that I love. They're not doing a very good job. It's no wonder that a lot of my colleagues are atheists." She told one zealot, "You know, if the only picture of Christ I had was your attitude towards me, I'd run."

Ironically, the insides of Cretaceous-era dinosaur bones have only deepened Schweitzer's faith. "My God has gotten so much bigger since I've been a scientist," she says. "He doesn't stay in my boxes."

This site, which I support and participate, has in its banner,

Providing scientific evidence for the existence of God. Demonstrating the harmony of the Bible and science.

So obviously, I'm not saying evidence doesn't exist and can't be used as support, although I think it's fair to say that I don't believe Rich, myself or anyone else is saying that evidence where it exists is the primary basis for faith in God.

The issue here is how the evidence is being used.

What do you think this might be demonstrating?

Blessings,

Bart

(edited after initial post to clarify some things)

[Himantolophus]

Wow, if everybody was like her there would be no evolution/creation controversy. She finds something that the creationists celebrate and that scientists can't explain, yet she keeps her open mind and keeps working with no bias. She is published in secular journals. She won't put her apples in with the creationists nor will she take God out of her life. She seems to be an old-earth creationist by her religious background but she could be a theistic evolutionist as well. That is quite a story right there. Who knows what it all means... maybe we don't know preservation as well as we thought?

[Canuckster1127]

Wow, if everybody was like her there would be no evolution/creation controversy. She finds something that the creationists celebrate and that scientists can't explain, yet she keeps her open mind and keeps working with no bias. She is published in secular journals. She won't put her apples in with the creationists nor will she take God out of her life. She seems to be an old-earth creationist by her religious background but she could be a theistic evolutionist as well. That is quite a story right there. Who knows what it all means... maybe we don't know preservation as well as we thought?

It doesn't say if she is an Old Earth Creationist or a Theistic Evolutionist per se. I don't think it matters much in the context of the article.

It does say something about the value perhaps of adding, "I don't know" to our vocabulary of important phrases and avoiding the temptation of imagining that everything that is discovered has to be hammered into place to fit what we already think we know.

I think that might be a good lesson for secular scientists AND creationists alike (even us)

[zoegirl]

love it, nice article.

especially like

"I see a sense of humor. I see His compassion in the world around me. It makes me curious, because the creator is revealed in the creation." Unlike many creationists, she finds the notion of a world evolving over billions of years theologically exhilarating: "That makes God a lot bigger than thinking of Him as a magician that pulled everything out in one fell swoop."

and

Ironically, the insides of Cretaceous-era dinosaur bones have only deepened Schweitzer's faith. "My God has gotten so much bigger since I've been a scientist," she says. "He doesn't stay in my boxes."

very nice