The threat that atheists pose to science
Throughout history atheism and atheists have always been detrimental to scientific progress and advancement. It’s time that someone speaks out against what atheists are doing.
Atheists and atheism have been given a free pass for far too long. Everything atheists touch and take over immediately becomes ruined and destroyed. Atheists are just like uncivilized animals, it’s up to Theists to civilize these uncivilized savages.
Since atheists don’t seem to understand what science even is it’s up to Theists to teach them.
The worse thing that ever happened to society was atheists taking over science. Theists have to make science become scientific again now that atheist animals are trying to ruin science and turn it into a pseudo-scientific joke.
Now that atheists are taking over certain things are happening in modern times to science:
- Experimentation and the Scientific method going into disuse
In the past when Theists ran science empirically untestable hypotheses or theories were not considered scientific. But ever since atheists took over science in the late 1960s and early 1970s they eliminated empirical testability as the main requirement needed for something to be considered scientific and substituted empirical testability with authority.
What this means is now if someone has authority they can propose any empirically untestable theory or hypothesis and it will be considered scientific. Gravitons, multiple universes, the string theory, etc…can all be considered scientific and allowed into peer-reviewed journals with no problem if they simply have authority figures to back them.
So why can’t atheists understand that something cannot be scientific unless it meets the requirement of empirical testability?
Atheists don’t seem to have any problem with voicing any opposition to things like Intelligent Design, so why don’t they voice any opposition to things like the string theory? It’s because atheists don’t genuinely care about what’s is science or not, they care about advancing their own political agenda or making fun of religion, not about science. This is the reason that atheists never will voice any opposition to empirically untestable theories but always voice opposition to Intelligent Design, because atheists are insincere and don’t actually care about science.
Back when Theists ran science the scientific method and scientific method alone would determine whether or not a hypothesis or model or theory was valid not authority or personal incredulity. If someone wanted to be taken seriously they absolutely needed to find ways to test their hypotheses, not just authority figures to back them.
It is the scientific method that determines if something is valid or not, not authority or incredulity as atheists believe.
In modern times now that atheists are taking over they instead focus on mathematical speculations rather than experimentation and the scientific method.
If I have the mathematics for something but no way to test out if my mathematics are valid then I essentially have nothing more than speculations. With this reasoning I can claim that virtually anything is true if I have the mathematics for it (even though I have no way to test out if my mathematics are valid). That is not science but instead pseudo-science since it does not adhere to the scientific method.
Some atheists have even gone so far as claiming that mathematical models are more important than experimentation. What this means is now in modern times if you have a repeatable experiment but the conclusions drawn from that experiment push scientists’ incredulity too far and you have no mathematical model you have a very high chance of being laughed at and ignored.
On the other hand if you have a mathematical model with no experiments or empirical observations to back it up, or anyway to test out if your mathematical model is valid, but authority figures to support you, you won’t be ignored by scientists in modern times.
In modern times atheists are pushing scientists away from focusing on experimentation and instead towards focusing on mathematical speculations and incredulity alone (pseudo-science).
What this means is now scientists don’t try to let reality unfold itself by looking at experiments and observations they instead try to fit their models into certain select observations and intentionally ignore other observations that contradict their models.
So what’s science without the scientific method and empirical testing? It’s the atheist version of science or pseudo-science!
- Free and open criticism destroyed
I was watching the news and saw someone claim that if you don’t agree with what most scientists believe then you’re “anti-science”. Of course the exact opposite is true. Blindly agreeing with what most scientists believe is actually an anti-science position. Questioning, criticizing, and scrutinizing what scientists believe on the other hand would be pro-science. Science isn’t about agreeing with what most scientists believe.
Back when Theists ran science free and open criticism was considered an important scientific principle.
Science use to be all about free and open criticism, questioning, scrutinizing, and attacking positions so that the truth would come out. The more people question, criticize, and scrutinize the closer we come to the truth.
But now that atheists have taken over they intentionally discourage questioning, scrutinizing, and criticizing positions based off nothing more than authority and incredulity (once again). After atheists took over science in they also made it much harder to get things into peer-reviewed journals, thereby blocking out free and open criticism.
So what’s science without free and open criticism? It’s like a fan site forum where moderators ban and block anyone who criticizes their fan-based positions.
- Belief without evidence, intuition, and thinking far outside discouraged
Atheists like Richard Dawkins intentionally discourage belief without evidence. So what can someone do in science if they have absolutely no beliefs without evidence? Well all they’ll be able to do is mimic and copy scientific facts or things that already have evidence.
Faraday and Einstein would not have been able to come up with their hypotheses if they had no beliefs without evidence or intuition. Without beliefs without evidence or intuition you have little room for generating new hypotheses, which means scientific progress would be limited and hindered. Initially many hypotheses start off with very little to no scientific evidence.
There is no harm in having lots of seemingly strange or crazy hypotheses because the scientific method and empirical observations will speak up and determine what is true (not authority or personal incredulity). The more testable hypotheses the better.
On the other hand there is a harm in having a lack of testable hypotheses. If Einstein never proposed General Relativity then scientific progress would’ve been hindered. The less hypotheses that exist the less chance there is of scientific progress.
We can see from history that belief without evidence, intuition, and originality directly cause scientific advancement and progress, so why are atheists intentionally discouraging these things?
So what’s science without any new hypotheses? It’s just like mimicking “scientific facts” or things that already have evidence.
In conclusion, science is not about authority or personal incredulity or about protecting positions from criticism or about mimicking scientific facts like atheists foolishly believe.
Science is about determining the truth using the scientific method and empirical observations. It is observations, empirical testing, and the scientific method that determine what is valid or invalid, not authority or personal incredulity like atheists believe. It is through questioning and criticizing that the truth comes out, and it is through intuition and beliefs without evidence that new hypotheses are generated.
We can see that atheists block human progress, hold back science, and pose the very greatest threat to mankind. No greater threat has arisen to science and mankind than the uprising of atheists. Back when Theists ran science, science use to be much more scientifically sound.
It would just be better if atheists stayed far away from science instead of trying ruin science like how they’ve ruined every other thing they’ve touched. You let a bunch of atheist animals run loose and look at what they did to science.
As long as Theists are alive there will always be people like me who wish to keep science scientifically sound.
Science is no longer about testing hypotheses and using empirical observations like it use to be back when Theists ran science. Now that atheists have taken over science, science is primarily about authority and personal incredulity, and turning into a big pseudo-scientific joke.
Atheists have held back science and human progress for far too long. Just look at what atheists have done to science since they took over in the late 1960s and early 1970s, it’s time that other Theists speak out against what they are doing to science.
Science is not a popularity contest, it is not about who has authority, and it is not about what seems impossible or possible (incredulity)!
All those who wish for science to go back to being about the scientific method, empirical observations, empirical testing, testing hypotheses, and experimentation should join me now and speak out against what atheists have done.
This is the nature of the threat that atheists pose to science.