I asked, “If macroevolution has failed to prove itself to be a viable theory, then where do you believe the evidence of science is pointing?” There was no equivocation in Wells’s voice. Speaking with conviction, he said: “I believe science is pointing strongly toward design. To me, as a scientist, the development of an embryo cries out, ‘Design!’ The Cambrian explosion—the sudden appearance of complex life, with no evidence of ancestors—is more consistent with design than evolution. Homology, in my opinion, is more compatible with design. The origin of life certainly cries out for a designer. None of these things make as much sense from a Darwinian perspective as they do from a design perspective.” “Let me get this straight,” I said. “You’re not merely saying that the evidence for evolution is weak and therefore there must be an intelligent designer. You’re suggesting there is also affirmative evidence for a designer.” “I am,” he replied. “However, the two are connected, because one of the main functions of Darwinian theory is to try to make design unnecessary. This is what you experienced as you became an atheist. This is what I experienced. So showing that the arguments for evolution are weak certainly opens the door to design. “And then,” he said, “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.” — The Case for a Creator: A journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God (Lee Strobel)

To me, the range, the variety, the depth, and the breathtaking persuasive power of the evidence from both science and history affirmed the credibility of Christianity to the degree that my doubts were simply washed away. Unlike Darwinism, where my faith would have to swim upstream against the strong current of evidence flowing the other way, putting my trust in the God of the Bible was nothing less than the most rational and natural decision I could make. I was merely permitting the torrent of facts to carry me along to their most logical conclusion. Loc. 5200-5204

However, that’s certainly not my understanding. I see faith as being a reasonable step in the same direction that the evidence is pointing. In other words, faith goes beyond merely acknowledging that the facts of science and history point toward God. It’s responding to those facts by investing trust in God—a step that’s fully warranted due to the supporting evidence. Loc. 5208-11

On the other hand, the available evidence from the latest scientific research is convincing more and more scientists that facts support faith as never before. “The age-old notion that there is more to existence than meets the eye suddenly looks like fresh thinking again,” said journalist Gregg Easterbrook. “We are entering the greatest era of science-religion fusion since the Enlightenment last attempted to reconcile the two.” 5214-17

To many people, including physicist Paul Davies, this is a shocking and unexpected development. “It may seem bizarre,” he said, “but in my opinion science offers a surer path to God than religion.” Loc. 5218-20

Added nanoscientist James Tour of Rice University: “Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.” 29 Astrophysicist and priest George Coyne put it this way: “Nothing we learn about the universe threatens our faith. It only enriches it.” Loc. 5220-24 The Case for a Creator: A journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God (Lee Strobel)