Christian Paleontologist

Robert Bakker is a respected paleontologist who sees no conflict between science and Christianity. Neither science nor Christianity is going to go extinct. Atheists like Dawkins are living in a dream world when they say that atheism is slowly winning. Atheism offers people no reason to hope or love. Christianity has those two items covered. People are attracted to science and Christianity but are not attracted to the negative sterility of atheism. Combining good science with a Christian world view is the future. Robert Bakker is just one example of the future of science.

Attempts at destroying all religion are simply barking up the wrong tree. Atheism can only marginally survive in an artificial academic bubble but it can’t seem to gain wide spread acceptance without coercion . The old Soviet Union tried to enforce atheism in all aspects of life but was unsuccessful even with the full force of the state. Modern Russia now has plenty of religion and atheism is a weak political force.


Christianity is compatible with Science

Francis Collins is one example of an atheist turning to Christianity. Few people would argue with his scientific credentials in the field of genetics. He finds no problem integrating science and Christianity. Science does not require the scientist to be an atheist as Richard Dawkins believes.  Francis Collins is more knowledgeable than Dawkins about science and he is a Christian. I suspect that many out spoken atheists hate God and simply use science improperly to attack the religious beliefs of other people.

Dawkins views on sex abuse

Dawkins under attack for his lenient view of ‘mild’ sex abuse

Some of the articles I have read on Dawkins seem to suggest that he was sexually abused as a young person. He currently appears to make statements that are reminiscent of people with “Stockholm Syndrome”. He appears to want to justify his abusers. His hatred of religion may have been formed or influenced by his reaction to abuse. I think the sexual abuse he suffered can’t be justified for any reason even if it was done by hypocritical religious people. Dawkins current views on sex abuse would be detrimental to any society if put into public policy.

“RDFRS: Dodging the God Squad”

It’s amazing that an atheist thinks that it is necessary to hide their viewpoint to get along with people and advance their career. Atheists all seem to be such friendly and agreeable people! Always willing to accommodate the convictions and customs of people with religious inclinations. Why would anyone object to giving an atheist a position with authority over the personal lives of people or their children? I think atheists should be free to express their true opinions at work just like religious people unless it somehow interferes with the work environment. Obviously the person who wrote the linked article at Richard Dawkins website just needs to man up.

Richard Dawkins doesn’t believe in science?

Why I don’t believe in science…and students shouldn’t either

I accept science as a reasonable method of describing the universe but I also believe that science is not always entirely accurate in its conclusions. Scientists like Richard have a philosophical ax to grind which makes their conclusions suspect. Hatred of anything, even religion, is an emotion which serves to skew the results of the scientist. The Nazi’s in Germany used science to build significant technology and to murder millions of Jews. Their hatred caused them to use science to do evil. A scientist who spews hatred of people because of their religion is making his own scientific judgements less believable. Richard’s recent rant about the limited contributions of Muslims to science clearly shows his attitude. Why should I believe his scientific conclusions? It is not in the best interest of our society to grant authority to people that express hatred.