The 'science' for which the United States is respected has nothing to do with the unscientific and baseless theory of evolution.

We're uncomfortable about considering history as a science. It's classified as a social science which is considered not quite scientific.

Goethe died in 1832. As you know Goethe was very active in science. In fact he did some very good scientific work in plant morphology and mineralogy. But he was quite bitter at the way in which many scientists refused to grant him a hearing because he was a poet and therefore they felt he couldn't be serious.

People and especially theologians should try to familiarize themselves with scientific ideas. Of course science is technical in many respects but there are some very good books that try to set out some of the conceptual structure of science.

In the post-enlightenment Europe of the 19th century the highest authority was no longer the Church. Instead it was science. Thus was born racial anti-Semitism based on two disciplines regarded as science in their day - the 'scientific study of race' and the Social Darwinism of Herbert Spencer and Ernst Haeckel.

This means that to entrust to science - or to deliberate control according to scientific principles - more than scientific method can achieve may have deplorable effects.

I also think we need to maintain distinctions - the doctrine of creation is different from a scientific cosmology and we should resist the temptation which sometimes scientists give in to to try to assimilate the concepts of theology to the concepts of science.

If Christianity is not scientific and Science is not God then there is no invariable law and truth becomes an accident.

Strictly speaking the idea of a scientific poem is probably as nonsensical as that of a poetic science.

Scientific theory is a contrived foothold in the chaos of living phenomena.