Why does the NY Times hate Christians?

An Unexpected Softness
March 28, 2005, New York Times Editorial

There are always two tensions in scientific exploration. One is the effort to consolidate the known facts into a stable theory. The other is to discover new facts - with no guarantee whether they will reinforce or undermine the old consolidations. Last week a dinosaur bone upset everyone's expectations in ways that may ripple outward for a long time.

Workers at a field site in Montana had broken the 70-million-year-old fossilized thighbone of a Tyrannosaurus rex in half for purely logistical reasons - huge bone, small helicopter. When scientists examined the bone fragments in the lab, they discovered something no one expected to find - unfossilized soft tissue, including blood vessels and the cells that line them.

Just how these tissues were preserved is a very good question, one that may lead scientists to re-examine their theories of fossilization. This discovery has also led at least one of the scientists on the study team to speculate that there may be more dinosaur soft tissue hidden inside the large but unbroken dinosaur bones that already repose in museum collections. There’s a lot more at the link.

But, Dear Reader, how can a paper with the reputation of the Times show such a lack of respect for our right-wing-fundamentalist-reality-challenged bible-banging brothers and sisters who don’t buy that whole evolution “theory.” I mean, come on here, 70 million years old? When they know the world is only - what - 6,000 years old? Oh, the shame!

Giving credit where credit is due, I got the idea for the headline from Fark.com, a wonderfully zany and tasteless place.