Atheistic Evolutionists Faced With Incredible Dilemma
Posted: Friday, March 14, 2008
by Joel Hendon
http://hebronics.org/index.html
Outspoken atheists have always been in the minority, yet they boast of being also in the minority with highest intelligence. That in itself shows disdain for anyone who disagrees with them. But I do have news for them, there are many who profess to be atheists who know virtually nothing about atheism or theism. The goal for many of them is to eradicate the belief in God, or any god other than themselves. The famous and brilliant atheist Voltaire (Francois Marie Arouet) reportedly once said that, "one hundred years from now the Bible will no longer be read." Today, over 200 years after his death, it is still the world's best seller and has been so since it was first published world wide. And even more than being the best seller, it is the most widely read and studied. Others have attempted to destroy the integrity of the Bible for centuries, to no avail.
I do admit that they have confused millions into accepting portions of their imaginary supposition and causing many to be embarrassed (or even afraid) to question their false assertions. Although they may allow their conceit to make them feel more intelligent than all others, their ignorance comes through by their underhanded tactics, their abusive conduct towards their own associates who dare to differ on even minor points, and their many scams which they put forth to try and pull the wool over others eyes. Fortunately those they consider to be so ignorant, can see through their unethical activities. And most of all, their harsh efforts to squelch all dialogue on the differing views.
If they are so sure that their suppositions are fact, why then are they afraid to have open discussions concerning them? The answer is, they know themselves that they have no facts to back up their claims. And they know it. They know that there are amoebas and there are Smithsonian Institute Doctors of Philosophy. They know that there are literally thousands of life forms in between those as pertaining to complexity. They know that both are alive. That is the only things they know about them. They do not know that one is a descendant of the other. They do not know how it came to be that either are alive. Yet they teach that they are aware of how life came into being, how the professor descended from his forefather the amoeba. And they teach that all the answers they do not have will be forthcoming.
Let us look at some examples of the frenzy that overtakes these pseudo scientists when they are confronted with even a minor leak or disturbance in their secret society. I am sure that most of you may be thoroughly familiar with the episode of the release of the book/movie/video-cassette/DVD, The Privileged Planet, by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards. This book shows the many intricate necessities that are in place in order for the planet Earth to be suitable for intelligent life. Far more than any other known planet. When this was being released, the scientific community reverted to their Ape ancestry, climbing the walls, grunting and squealing. Richards and Gonzales both had outstanding credentials, Richards with a PhD (with honors) in philosophy and Theology from Princeton Theological Seminary with an impressive background (See brief breakdown: Click Here ).
Gonzales, a native of Cuba, earned his PhD in Astronomy from the University of Washington and also an impressive background with awards and grants from NASA and several universities. He was an astrophysicist and Assistant Professor in the Astronomy and Physics Department of Iowa State University at the time his book was published in 2004. He was denied tenure there in April 2007 after secret plotting by the administration and faculty for two years. He has appealed that decision through the board of regents which upheld the decision. Although the university denied that the reason for his being rejected had anything to do with his views on Intelligent Design, attorneys for the Discovery Institute and a local paper secured access to faculty emails which indicated that there was much private discussion objecting to his beliefs. A complete summary can be read by Clicking Here.
The case is apparently still under litigation. It is noteworthy, that Dr. Gonzales stated that he never taught Intelligent Design in his classroom, and was never accused of doing so by students, faculty or the university administration.
Another incident occurring in 2004, Richard Sternberg, holder of two PhD's in theoretical biology and molecular evolution, a Smithsonian Institution research associate and former managing editor of an independent journal called the " Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington ". Sternberg allowed an article to be published in the journal, the article "The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories". This article written by Stephen Meyer of the Discovery Institute. I am not aware of the specifics contained in the article, but it was submitted for peer review by Sternberg and was accepted. However, upon publication of it, the Smithsonian Institute went berserk and began a program of persecution towards Sternberg, assigned him to a menial position and other such degradations. The government Office of Special Counsel finally investigated the case and found the Smithsonian guilty of several items of retaliation and harassment nature. All of this and much more can be found by Clicking Here.
And, although not one of their own, there is much ado about much ado over Ben Stern's upcoming showing of his documentary, "Expelled-No Intelligence Allowed" in April. For details on this read my article swa309036 here on Searchwarp.
These high IQ people, due to their arrogance, inadvertently create high profile incidents out of their anger which only publicizes the very things they wish to squish. Besides that, it also diminishes their public image and their perceived integrity.
This Article has been viewed 398 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (8 total)hi joel, you are a very intelligent man, very impressive articles that take research and work for the good of all you share with. i've wondered sinse i was very young, how someone who didn't believe in God could watch a baby being born, or look down at them as they instinctually, right out of the womb, grab a hold of your finger as if for dear life. is this the work of an amoeba or an ape or anyone other than the One? i think not. hey, i marvel at humminbirds and crickets and spiders, and all nature i am lucky enough to be exposed to. thos hummingbirds are a real work of art, and bring God closer to my heart, not further away. thanks for a good article, it obviously :) made me think, my best to you, sueHi Susan. Again you are right in your thinking. Very few atheists, in my opinion, can fully believe what they teach. I've always said that the vast majority of atheists have evolved from humans who were unwilling to subject themselves to an almighty God. I have personally witnessed one man who was a Christian and a self styled preacher (not ordained or licensed) who never was able to keep himself straight. He began to question many things he was reading in the Bible and we had discussions for several years, but he grew more and more adamant and finally became totally against God and the Bible. He got to the point that he would cry when arguing and say that he really wished he could believe. He died about 6 or 7 years ago. I felt bad because my efforts were inadequate to convince him. I have diligently studied the Bible and about the Bible since I was 12 years old. But since his death I have multiplied my efforts to know and understand it.
Joel you always make a good point but I do think it loses something when you place your personal sentiments into the topic, ie, "That in itself shows that they are filled with conceit and disdain for anyone who disagrees with them." Your facts speak for themselves and you gain much more credibility by leaving them where they are. PS: I have to learn the same. Just a friendly thought and I hope it helps, keep writing.Hi Robert, thanks for writing and the comment. You're right, I do put my sentiments into my writing too much. I honestly try to get my points across without it but never seem to really be able. I knew this one held some harsh remarks and even went back through it trying to think some way to reword it without those very remarks you mention. But decided to leave them be. I'm not really a harsh speaking individual but frankly, I have had dialogue with atheists so much over the years that I find myself feelign toward them just as I know they feel toward others. Not the Christian attitude perhaps that I should have. But they have done so much in opposition to Christianity, ruthlessly and fraudently. They cannot meet Christianity face to face with facts, only scams. If you see the documentary I mentioned, I think we will all get some idea of what I try to get across. Anyway, I appreciate your trying to help me and I will put more effort towards it.
Hi Joel, excellent job! Wouldn't it be nice if school's would be fair on both sides. I say teach creationism and evolution - both as theories if they must, but at least give both sides of the story. But then this would be to logical. So instead they teach evolution as fact and creation as a fairy tale. It's a shame. Thanks for pointing out their need to had behind their erroneous theory. Keep studing and don't feel guilty about the man who died unbelieving. Its only our job to share, it is the person's choice to respond to the call of the Holy Spirit. Blessings to you. PS I wrote an article about passover and Jesus. Let me know what you think. TeresaThanks Teresa, I appreciate your comments very much.
Thanks for writing this, Mr Hendon. I always learn something when I read your articles. I have such peace about God and what He has said that I can't comprehend anyone logically believing anything else.Thanks L.M., for the comment and kind words. I am currently working on an article which is about a particular chapter in the New Testament that is grossly misunderstood by so many people. It is a very difficult one to be able to refute the errors about it. But maybe I can get it across. It is concerning the 24th chapter of Matthew.
Joel, just another example of the double standard our self-professed educational elite believe in. As for "Expelled", I've been to the Web site and have seen other sites with both pro- and anti-Intelligent Design commentary. Wow. This is a movie that I'm going to have to see!Thanks for reading and commenting on my article, Danny. I, too am eager to see the documentary. I'm not too familiar with those things...I'm not sure whether or not it will be in theaters or just on tv and maybe available on CD's. But however, I'm going to try and see it. Again, thanks for the comment.
A very interesting article and one I mainly agree with but for one point , but before I say what that is, though not religious I do believe in Intelligent Design. Ok now for my point. You said that most athiests don't know anything about athiesm, well they don't need to. There are many Gods for many religions, athiests just believe in one less God than you do. This said some knowledge re 'the lack of knowledge re the origin of life' might help persuade them to rethink their lack of belief in something at least. I post on science forums and the religious forum part of them is always the most active of all!Thank you for reading and commenting on my article Blogger. I don't disagree with what you've said, but notice that I sad "many" not "most" atheists. And I agree, nobody has to know anything about atheism to be an atheist, or theists, theism either. I know a lady now who claims to be an atheist and she has no clue why. I know "Christians" who don't know there are two testaments comprising the bible. I believe, if I had no reason to believe one way or another when asked, I'd just say, "duuuuh". My only reason for the remark was to try and let a little of the air out of the those who think they are overly endowed with high intelligence. They are not. I appreciate your remarks very much.
"many who profess to be atheists who know virtually nothing about atheism or theism" - atheism is merely the absense of theistic beliefs, that is all - other than its definition, there is nothing more that can be known about it. Could you point me towards some peer-reviewed papers published in genuine scientific journals that suggest evolution is false? I've not been able to find any.Certainly not. You won't find any. Those that disagree will not be published in any peer reviewed publication. But I can direct you to multiple dozens of off-the-cuff quotes from your finest, who acknowledge that they have no leg to stand on. That is what Ben Stein's documentary is all about. As to the atheist's bit. I know what atheist means. I worded that a little poorly, the thought I had was that many profess to not believe in any god, but can give no reason for it. You assuredly can give reason for your stance.
"Outspoken atheists have always been in the minority, yet they boast of being also in the minority with highest intelligence. "Sir, I do not boast."But I do have news for them, there are many who profess to be atheists who know virtually nothing about atheism or theism. The goal for many of them is to eradicate the belief in God, or any god other than themselves. " I'm an atheist who doesn't want to eradicate the belief in God. Why do you assert that 'most' of us wish to do this?"Although they may allow their conceit to make them feel more intelligent than all others, their ignorance comes through by their underhanded tactics, their abusive conduct towards their own associates who dare to differ on even minor points, and their many scams which they put forth to try and pull the wool over others eyes."You never met me. How do I have conceit?Way too much finger pointing in this article to have any fruitful discussion. Too many sweeping assumptions of atheists. We aren't belligerent, angry grunts bent on eradicating the belief in God. Please, speak for yourself.Thank you for commenting, if you are as you say you are, then you do not belong with "Most". And in such case, I was/am not referring to you. I have encountered enough of them to know how most feel.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.