Posted on Leave a comment

What do atheists believe in?

What Do Atheists Believe In? - Jahnu das

People of the modern world are brought up to believe i all kinds of weird, inane stuff. In fact, to avoid believing in God, people are willing to believe in the most confounded, improbable nonsense.

Take evolution, for instance… there are people who believe it’s a scientific fact, even though it’s the most bran-dead, idiotic, anti-intellectual theory in the history of mankind.

Of course, most scientists know that evolution is pure belief, with no evidence to back it up, still, this belief is being taught in all educational institutions of the world, as a scientific fact.

Before science came along, people needed religion to tell them about the world. Religion taught people that God created the world, that God was the original cause if everything.

Now a days, of course, we know better, because now we have science to tell us how the world works. Today we we know that chemicals combined to create life, and then evolution generated all the different species.

The theory of evolution according to Darwin is not even a theory anymore. It’s been upgraded to science. For the last five decades or so, evolution has been propagated to the general public as a scientific fact. This is how existence is accounted for by evolution. Note how it makes no sense.

You see, first there was a pool of chemicals. Then, by the fluctuations of those chemicals, an amoeba-like creature was formed, and then this amoeba gradually, through many, many intermediate species, grew legs and learned to talk. Ok, so far so good. Don’t even think about whether the first human that popped out of evolution was a male or female, that’s just an annoying detail you don’t have to worry about. You see, details are not taught in evolution, details are very unpopular in the theory of evolution.

For instance, the detail about how language evolved seems somehow lost to evolutionists. They don’t think, how did the first human learn to talk, when there was no one to talk to? How did language evolve?You are the first human on the planet, completely alone, no one to talk to. So what do you do? Do you sit down and wait for your counter part to evolve, so you can begin procreating? Maybe you grunt a little under your breath at the sheer idiocy of your situation. Also, when your counter-part finally evolves, you can begin grunting together and evolve some kind of language. Of course, don’t ask what language evolved, and was spoken by the first people, that’s just another annoying detail.

As far as we know Sanskrit is the mother of all languages, and how that fits into the idea in evolution of how the simple and primitive gradually evolves into complex and sophisticated, is not yet clear. Note, in contrast to the sheer idiocy of the idea of evolution, and it’s ridiculous linear concept of time, the logical, coherent and authentic explanation we are offered in the Vedic tradition – humans have simply always existed. Time is cyclic – civilizations goes through endless cycles of creation, maintenance, and destruction, age after age. At least that explanation makes sense to a rational mind.

The modern explanation of evolution is not only improbable and highly speculative, wishful thinking, it is also complete and utter anti-intellectual garbage. Still, it is being taught in all universities as an objective, scientific fact. It is considered completely rational and the best explanation according to observable facts. They actually teach you that in school – evolution is the best explanation we have right now to explain the world we live in.

Of course, nobody with a brain actually believes in evolution, but this is how it is being propagated to the general public. The fact is that modern mainstream people are highly brainwashed fools. They don’t have so much as one single independent thought in their brains. If they didn’t have TV, newspapers and magazines to tell them what to think and believe, they’d be up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

It’s a statistic fact that the general mass of people are more disturbed and dissatisfied than ever before.  Anti-depressants are selling like never before. Some years ago WHO reported that the biggest health problem facing humanity in the new millennium is that more and more people will be born with mental problems. Are those the symptoms of an evolved civilization?

It’s rather peculiar how people in this scientific age are so little scientifically oriented when it comes to God and religion. In modern society the dogma has been created that religion is faith only, and science is knowledge only. That’s hardly a scientific approach to religion and God. I can understand, how one may reject certain religions, but to downright deny the existence of a Supreme Being is simply irrational, and indicates an unevolved intellect.

There is nothing healthy or open-minded about being an atheist, and the proof is that at the same rate society dispenses with its former religious values, at the same rate society becomes debased, riddled with crime and insanity. Besides, it should be noted, that whether one calls himself a Christian, Hindu, Mohammedan, Democrat, Republican or whatever, one can still be of an atheistic mentality. It is not the designations we put on ourselves that determine our identity. It’s our mindsets and actions and the knowledge we cultivate that define who we are.

There is a saying in Sanskrit- phalena parichiyate – something is judged by its result. Or, like Jesus said – you judge a tree by its fruits. Things are judged and understood, not by their names, but by their effects and influence. And the effect modern society has on the world is one of destruction. Again, are those the symptoms of an evolved culture?

In conclusion, here is what science has to say about evolution:

“Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy.” (Charles Darwin, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin)

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX EVER.” — Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

“We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations.” — Franklin Harold, Emeritus Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State University, in an Oxford University Press text.

“Darwinian evolution – whatever its other virtues – does not provide a fruitful heuristic in experimental biology. This becomes especially clear when we compare it with a heuristic framework such as the atomic model, which opens up structural chemistry and leads to advances in the synthesis of a multitude of new molecules of practical benefit. None of this demonstrates that Darwinism is false. It does, however, mean that the claim that it is the cornerstone of modern experimental biology will be met with quiet skepticism from a growing number of scientists in fields where theories actually do serve as cornerstones for tangible breakthroughs.” –U.S. National Academy of Sciences member Philip Skell

“[The] Darwinian claim to explain all of evolution is a popular half-truth whose lack of explicative power is compensated for only by the religious ferocity of its rhetoric.” –National Academy of Sciences member Lynn Margulis

“Mutations have a very limited constructive capacity . No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.” –Past president of the French Academy of Sciences Pierre-Paul Grasse

“The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.” –Late American paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould

“It remains a mystery how the undirected process of mutation, combined with natural selection, has resulted in the creation of thousands of new proteins with extraordinarily diverse and well optimized functions. This problem is particularly acute for tightly integrated molecular systems that consist of many interacting parts.” –Two leading biologists inAnnual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics

“New species usually appear in the fossil record suddenly, not connected with their ancestors by a series of intermediates.” –Eminent evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr

Science now know that many of the pillars of the Darwinian theory are either false or misleading. Yet biology texts continue to present them as factual evidence of Evolution. What does this imply about their scientific standards? – Jonathan Wells

The bacteriologist Alan H. Linton wrote:

“None exists in the literature claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another. Bacteria, the simplest form of independent life, are ideal for this kind of study, with generation times of twenty to thirty minutes, and populations achieved after eighteen hours. But throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another. Since there is no evidence for species changes

between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not surprising that there is no evidence for evolution from prokaryotic to eukaryotic cells, let alone throughout the whole array of higher muliticellular organisms.”

Evolutionary biologists Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan echoed the same thing in 2002:

“Speciation, whether in the remote Galapagos, in the laboratory cages of the drosophilosophers, or in the crowded sediments of the paleontologists, still has never been traced.”

Leave a Reply