Is Atheism doomed to extinction?
Though it may be a fact that it is the fastest growing religion (referred to in the media - I would call it a belief system), most atheists I know have few or no children, while religious people are having them by the dozens. Added to this is my personal belief that science is at a point where faith and belief are playing a much larger role. 300 years ago there were laws, 100 years ago they became theories, currently most of it is hypothesis with the future looking more and more like wide held beliefs and then faith.
Furthermore, I also see science facing what seems to be several impassable walls
1)We have now seen as far as we ever will see in the universe and every question seems to just lead to more questions which can never be answered (I think it’s called the hubble bubble)
2) We have also seen as small as we will ever see - we will likely never build a larger Hadron collider - leading only to guesses and speculation (yes I know they’re using the entire universe as a LHC but how could you ever have controlled results?)
3) The credibility in science is in jeopardy as any one can check out youtube and see Stephen Hawkings get his intellectual butt kicked by Leo Susskind, or have just about any current theory presented by a Phd and challenged by another Phd. How can there be a concensus?
4) Science is getting crazier and crazier
- Notions of singularities condencing a billion times the matter of the entire universe into an electron sized particle, annialating 99.9999999 of it in a trillionth of a second sound crazier then a bible story
- quintillions upon quintillions of other, unprovable universes existing just to explain the extreme fine tuning of ours. Lame - this does a huge discredit to science
Besides these plights which science has to contend with is my belief that sceptism is becoming sciences worst enemy.
While I would like to say I believe in evolution I find some fundamental flaws in it due to sceptism.
1) Why advocate the theory of evolution, but not promote the completely logical notion of higher evolved beings? By not promoting it evolutionists appear to be hiding something, they seem to be defensive or just plain ignorant. Why say that we could create a monkey cage in six days but hide from the idea that a higher evolved being could create our cage in six days? I’m not saying it did - just saying why couldn’t it? And why spend so much energy trying to dismiss it??
2) While I completely understand the notion of survival of the fitest, I can’t see why a molicule would want survive -let alone 6.4 billion of them want to line up extremely specifically in 60 trillion different cells in our body. Call me stupid - but you can’t get a million Phds to line up specifically, let alone trillions of non-intellegent specks -
3) If you believe in evolution you need to believe we will evolve out of the concept of it. Just as our brain evolved out of an protazoa - future intellegence -(if there is such a thing) will have no use for our primordial concepts
4) There are 60 trillion cells in the human body. Each cell has billions if not trillions of parts and functions. No reasonable person would say that paris or new york just happen without design. How can a reasonable person say 60 trillion paris’s just happen? Yes I know fractals - another lame answer that will do more harm than good to science.
So let me know what you think - I like most atheist as you seem to be pretty smart people, with a desire to know and a good sence of fairness.