From "The Case For A Creator" (Recommneded reading)
"Ironically, to say that science is the only begotter of truth is self-contradicting, because that statement in itself cannot be tested by the scientific method. It's a self-defeating philisophical assumption."
"Now there's no question that science does teach us many important things about the natural world. But the real question is, 'Do these things point to anything beyond themselves?' I think the answer is yes. Science teaches us many true things, and some of those true things point to God."
"I believe that the testimony of science supports theism. While there will always be points of tension or unresolved conflict, the major developments in science in the past five decades have been running strongly in a theistic direction. Science done right, points to God."
"In 1992, the historian of science Frederick Burnham said the God hypothesis 'is now a more respectable hypothesis than at any time in the last one hundred years.' I'd go even further. More than just being 'respectable,' I'd say that the God hypothesis is forceful enough to warrant a verdict that he's alive and well."
"I look at the stars in the night sky or reflect on the structure and information-bearing properties of the DNA molecule, and these are occasions for me to worship the Creator who brought them into exisitence. I think of the wry smile that might be on the lips of God as in the last few years all sorts of evidence for the reliability of the Bible and for his creation of the universe and life have come to light. I believe he has caused them to be unveiled in his providence and that he delights when we discover his fingerprints in the vastness of the universe, in the dusty relices of paleontology, and in the complexity of the cell."
"So in exploring the scientific evidence and historical evidence for God is not only a cognitive exercise, but it's an act of worship for me. It's a way of giving the Creator the credit and honor and glory that are due to him. To attribute creation to a mere natural process is a form of idolatry to which we're all prone. I don't judge my naturalistic colleagues for being prone to that. That's how I'm constituted as well. All of us have a tendency to minimize God, to think and behave as if we weren't really immersed in his creation and that we aren't ourselves the product of his unimaginable creative power."
"Looking at the evidence--in nature and in Scripture--reminds me over and over again of who he is. And it reminds me of who I am too--someone in need of him."
Jonathan Wells, PHD, PHD,
"My conclusion is that the case for Darwinian evolution is bankrupt," he said firmly. "The evidence for Darwinism is not only grossly inadequate, it's systematically distorted. I'm convinced that sometime in the not-too-distant future--I don't know, maybe twenty or thirty years from now--people will look back in amazement and say, "How could anyone have believed this?" Darwinism is merely materialistic philosophy masquerading as science, and people are recognizing it for what it is."
"And then, when you analyze all of the most current affirmative evidence from cosmology, physics, astronomy, biology, and so forth--well, I think you'll discover that the positive case for an intelligent designer becomes absolutely compelling."
"If you consider all the evidence , Darwin's tree is false as a description of the history of life. I'll go even further than that: it's not even a good hypothesis at this point."
"You can call them fudged, distorted, misleading, but the bottom line is that they were faked. Apparently in some cases Haeckel actually used the same woodcut to print embryos from different classes because he was so confident of his theory that he figured he didn't have to draw them separately. In other cases he doctored the drawings to make them look more similar than they really are. At any rate, his drawings misrepresent the embryos." Answering a question about Haeckel's drawings supporting evolution.
Physicist and Theologian John Polkinghorne
"Science and religion...are friends, not foes, in the common quest for knowledge. Some people may find this surprising, for there's a feeling throughout our society that religous belief is outmoded, or downright impossible, in a scientific age. I don't agree. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if people in this so-called "scientific age" knew a bit more about science than many of them actually do, they'd find it easier to share my view."
Pysicist Paul Davies
"It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in numbers, has been rather carefully thought out...The seemingly miraculous occurence of these numerical values must remain the most compelling evidence for cosmic design."
Robin Collins, PHD~Physics & Mathematics
"That's right. You'd conclude that this biosphere was not there by accident. Volcanoes didn't erupt and spew out the right compounds that just happened to assemble themselves into the biosphere. Some intelligent being had intentionally and carefully designed and prepared it to support living creatures. And that's an analogy of our universe. Over the past thirty years or so, scientists have discovered that just about everything about the basic structure of the universe is balanced on a razor's edge for life to exist. The coincidences are far too fantastic to attribute this to mere chance or to claim that it needs no explanation. The dials are set too precisely to have been a random accident."