Because God is not applicable directly to science. It informs the opinions and philosophies of scientists such as myself who are Christian most certainly, but nobody wants to hear what a scientists “feels” about the data in his science publications.
How can the author not be applicable to that which He is responsible for being in the first place?... that’s wholly and utterly non-sensical!
It sounds very sovietesque to keep your opinions thqat formulate your science philosphies silenced, as if they’re somnehow taboo! Not to mention puts up a wall between communications and scientific exploration!
The chemist didn’t talk about his feelings other than that he didn’t see any progress to be made with evolution, he could just as easily used the word I don’t “predict”, instead of “I feel” and you know it and everyone knows it.
The rest of your strawman isn’t worth arguing anymore, you’re just never going to understand it is strawman with your obvious bias in the way.
And what would incorporating God do to Science other than drive away any who didn't share your view of God? A
nd if one invoked God's blessing or whatever upon the science they do, would they not then defend their interpretation as if it were something of God's rather than just a working model that helped explain and predict the data?
Not that I expect a rational answer out of you, but I guess I must at least extend the offer.