Atheism wasted Science

Atheism wasted Science


An atheist biologist, P.Z. Myers[1], unloads ( )[2] on Christianity by citing several questions about nature that he believes atheists answer better than Christians do.  So let us see what he has to say.

Myers: “Some of us, like me, are atheists because religion provides nothing we want, is unsatisfactory at addressing what we do care about, and is really, really bad at answering a very human question, “Why?”  Instead, they prefer to make tirades against the other, ignoring their own failings, and pretending that the questions they ignore have been answered.

You want to know what those New Atheists, who are the same as the Old Atheists, are all about? We actually have important questions.  These question [sic] will not and cannot be answered by religious apologists.  The process of exploring them honestly is exactly what leads to atheism, so they have to avoid them.”

“What causes, leads to, creates, or encourages atheism.”   Here are a few of Myers’s questions from some appropriate (and possibly some inappropriate) answers:

“Why should I believe in any god?  We don’t need an intelligent authority to explain the universe…”

We need an intelligent authority to explain the universe.  The universe is complete with intelligibility.  Nature is governed by astonishingly complex and elegant physical laws, and the laws themselves are written in the language of abstract mathematics.  Theoretical physicists must often explore utterly new mathematical theories in order to explain the behavior of inanimate matter (and often times those their raise are based upon the imagination of the theoretical physicist, they may be mathematically sound of the intelligent is a different status) .

Newton developed calculus in order to do physics.  Heaviside (using Maxwell’s equations) needed to develop the calculus of electromagnetic oscillators to understand alternating current electricity.  Einstein (and his friend the mathematician Grossman) reinvented non-Euclidean geometry and tensor calculus to understand relativity.  Heisenberg had to develop matrix mechanics to understand the quantum world.  Dirac predicted the existence of anti-matter purely on the basis of mathematical considerations, and modern string theorists such as Edward Witten work at the cutting edge of mathematics.  Black holes were predicted based on singularities in the tensor equations of relativity, and the Big Bang itself was discovered mathematically by Georges Lemaitre (a Catholic priest!) before it was detected empirically.  (If you are unfamiliar with some of the scientists listed above, please feel free to look them up.  I would prefer that you use  Bing instead of Google, but it is your choice).

It is astonishing (and beautiful) that the very retinaculum[3] of the universe, from the subatomic world to the cosmos, is drawn in elegant abstract mathematics.  The universe virtually shouts intelligent authority made me.

To Myers’s implied question “Is the ground of existence[4] more like a thing or more like a mind?” there is only one possible answer: the basic ground of existence is like a mind.

Another way to understand the beautiful teleology that permeates all of creation is that it is information — the restriction of possibilities in the outcomes of natural processes.  This information is especially striking in living things.  The intricate nanotechnology that subserves cellular metabolism is governed and replicated by a genetic code with letters and words and sentences and punctuation that stores and sifts and actuates information in overlapping reading frames.  The intelligent authority — the Mind — that governs the cosmos and life through information has a remarkable fondness for language as well as mathematics, and is peculiarly solicitous of man, who is endowed with the capacity to discover the exquisite logic of creation.

Myers: “… in fact, assuming that the world is a product of natural, undirected processes has a far better track record of generating useful answers.”

Say what??  Modern theoretical science arose only in the Christian social environment. Roger Bacon, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Kepler, Faraday, Pasteur, Maxwell and countless other pioneers of science were fervent Christians who explicitly attributed the intelligibility in nature to God’s direction and order.  Even 20th-century scientists like Einstein and Heisenberg and Schrodinger and Rutherford and Planck attributed nature to intelligent design.  Einstein famously explained his quest: “I want to know God’s thoughts…”

Very few great scientists have attributed the world to “undirected processes.” Atheism, in fact, has a dismal record in the sciences.  For much of the 20th century, a third of humanity  has lived under the boot of atheist ideology.  What was the great science produced by atheist scientists in the Soviet Union?  What are the scientific contributions of Communist China and Cuba and Vietnam and Albania?  Compare the scientific output of East Germany (atheist) to that of West Germany (Lutheran and Catholic).  Compare the scientific output of North Korea (atheist) to that of South Korea (Christian and Buddhist).  Compare the scientific output of Egypt and other mid-Eastern countries (Islam-once one of the greatest contributors to mathematics) with  Israel (democratic, Judaism, Christianity)

Facts are that during the 20th century atheist ideological systems which “assum[ed] that the world is a product of natural, undirected processes” governed a third of humanity.  Atheism had its attempts and all it has done is heralded a scientific dark age in any nation unfortunate enough to fall under its heel.  Atheism is as much a catastrophe for science as it is a catastrophe for humanity.  The only thing atheist systems produced reliably (and still produce reliably) is corpses.

Myers continues with his useless rant: “Why can’t you explain why you believe without resorting to hand-waving, fuzzy, unconvincing nonsense?”

“Hand-waving, fuzzy, unconvincing nonsense”?  He has to be kidding, right.  Here is how Christians  can explain nature: modern science.  That is, the inference to intelligence and intelligibility in nature — the results of two millennia of Christian civilization and theology and natural philosophy.  Here is how atheists explain nature: Nothing made everything for no reason and made life from non-life for no reason and made themselves from amoeba like life for  no  particular reason.  What sort of mental blindness would lead an educated man like Myers to embrace the moral and intellectual squalor of atheism?

What leads to atheism?  Blindness in the soul.  The truth is all around us, more obvious than man’s hand in front of his face.  You either admit something caused the universe to exist or you have to believe things can begin to exist with absolutely no cause.  Keep in mind science has never found anything that begins to exist that does not have a cause. Things do not just pop into existence, with no cause and no explanation.  This has been true for all of human history.  We may not always know the cause of an event, but a fundamental premise of science is that all events have causes, even if you can’t see or directly detect them. Assuming then that the universe had a cause, we are forced to accept that some being or something outside of our universe caused it to come into being. Something that does not exist in our reality created our reality.

Religious belief in creation now fits squarely within the evidence of modern science and prevailing scientific theory. Creation implies a first cause; something outside of our universe that caused our universe to exist.


[1][1] an American associate professor of biology at the University of Minnesota Morris (UMM). He currently works with zebrafish in the field of evolutionary developmental biology.  He is an outspoken critic of intelligent design (ID) and the creationist movement, where he is widely regarded as a confrontationalist

[2] is about as far away from expressing free thought.  I have attempted to expression my opinion on several of them.  Since my thoughts disagree with theirs, I have been subjected to ridicule, vulgarity and everything  else including my intelligence and heritage.  So free thought exists only as long as it agrees with them.

[3]I won’t make you look it up.Any of various small structures that hook, clasp, or bind other structures to move them or hold them in place

[4] A changing from a more famous statement by Paul Tillich. a German American Christian existentialist philosopher and Lutheran theologian who is widely regarded as one of the most influential theologians of the twentieth century: “Theology formulates the questions implied in human existence, and theology formulates the answers implied in divine self-manifestation under the guidance of the questions implied in human existence.” So Atheist have perverted the saying to “the ground of existence.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s