Atheists make for mad scientists

Mad Scientists.

Do you know how to make a scientist mad?  Try this some time.  Go up to a scientist and say that you believe the natural evidence of creation supports a scientific inference of a creator.  That is, explain that the abundant evidence of design in the universe and the world around you naturally leads you to believe there might be an intelligent designer.  Unless you happen to find one who practices the scientific method objectively, you will succeed in provoking the wrath of certainty from a dogmatic person who will lecture you on the difference between “science” and “religion”.

You will, in fact, create a mad scientist.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Oh, my servants, let me tell you one of my greatest kingdom secrets.  I’ve succeeded in making “science” the new world religion by carefully cultivating the discipline of science and the persona of scientists as being “objective” arbiters of truth.  Bias free, contemplating, rational minds inside humble bodies supporting white lab coats, dutifully doling out truth to the masses.

And my real triumph?  I’ve changed the definition of “truth” so that in effect, the only truth permitted by “science” and the new scientists must be, by definition, atheistic.

You don’t believe me?  Then you have never tried to make a mad scientist.

Try it.  You will see.  And then do your own research into what “science” is today, and you will find that the new paradigm is that “science” must posit only “natural” explanations for natural phenomena.

And God is not natural.

So science today is forced by the elite establishments of academia to be unnaturally atheistic regardless of the evidence.


Did you know, my friends, that over 85% of the members of the United State’s National Academy of Sciences are atheists?  And the atheists wonder openly how the other 15% got in.

Now you know why.

Please keep this information confidential; if this kingdom knowledge ever gets out my agenda could be set back to the days when God-believing scientists like Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin, Max Planck, and Albert Einstein made ground-breaking scientific gains while openly practicing a belief in God.

Let me illustrate my great success on earth with a news article that caught my eye today.  The Telegraph reports, in an article by John Bingham entitled, “Richard Dawkins: I can’t be sure God does not exist,” on a dialog at Oxford University during which Dawkins admitted to Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams,  “that he preferred to call himself an agnostic rather than an atheist.”


Richard Dawkins, one of my premeire beelze-buds, is as this article states, “regarded as the most famous atheist in the world.”

And now he’s “agnostic”?

Now, my friends, you know if you read this blog that I, like God, believe atheists to be fools.

There are no atheists in Hell.

But agnostics!  That’s a different story.  There are also no agnostics in Hell, but true agnostics on earth often never get here.

But after reading the article, I realize Richard Dawkins is as atheistic as he always was, which is to say, that like all those who profess to be atheists, he is merely an arrogant coward who refuse to face the evident truth of nature.  (I just hope Dawkins never realizes that he can be sure God does exist.)

But atheists do help further my kingdom on earth, so I find them useful fools (and, usually quite stupid on top of that!).

Let me explain, using Dawkins as Fool in Chief.

In attempting to sound intelligent, Dawkins, according to The Telegraph article, stated to the Archbishop:

“What I can’t understand is why you can’t see the extraordinary beauty of the idea that life started from nothing – that is such a staggering, elegant, beautiful thing, why would you want to clutter it up with something so messy as a God?”

Now, my servants, read that quote more carefully (I know many of you skip over quotes).  Think about what Servant Fool Dawkins said, and learn.

The idea that life started from nothing . . . why clutter it up with God?

That, my friends, is not a scientific observation; it is a statement of faith.

The idea that anything can come from nothing is antithetical to all of science.  A true scientist would never make such a statement.  Whether “life” (as Dawkins says), or any element of matter in the universe (as Dawkins believes), science is quite clear that nothing comes from nothing.

If ever there was truly “nothing” there would still be nothing today.

That’s science.

On the contrary, Dawkin’s statement is a statement of faith.  He is expressing the necessary faith of every atheist (although most are, frankly, not intelligent enough to grasp it): In the beginning there was nothing, and then “poof” out of nothing, came something.

It is scientific nonsense, but it makes perfect sense to atheists like Dawkins.

Here’s another secret, my friends: everyone believes something unbelievable.

Either something (the universe) just appeared like magic out of nothing (an unscientific thought, but held by Dawkins), or something was created by God.

Which statement is more scientifically valid?

Yes, you are right: God.

Because science says everything that came to be must have been caused.

Aristotle, a true scientist, decided there must be an Uncaused Cause.  And he was right.

Every thinking human not hindered by a philosophical bias comes to the same conclusion as Aristotle; the evidence demands it.

But not all humans are like Aristotle.  In fact, in today’s agenda-driven, philosophically constrained philosophical environment, humans who wish to be prominent, published, scientists must first express allegiance to practical atheism before they practice science.

Human => atheist => scientist is the progression I’ve arranged on earth.  Humans like Dawkins are, as shown by his statement above, atheists second, and scientists third.  Very simply, their “science” (something can come from nothing) is dictated not by the evidence, but by their atheism.

Human => scientist => atheist is impossible.  Humans who are scientists first, observing the evidence of creation and making natural, rational inferences, can never be atheists.

Which goes to show my great ability on earth, don’t you think?

And if you try to point out the atheist’s philosophical bias they get mad.  They lecture you on your ignorance of “science” and sue you for violating separation of Christianity and state, and deny you tenure, and call you names, and start blogs about you, and sit in their circle of atheist jerks and make each other feel good.

It’s a beautiful thing, really.

Now send Mr. Dawkins a thank you note for me, will you?

He’s a doll.

Can’t wait to meet him.

And those like him.

Mad scientists all, when they come rolling in my gates.

Something from nothing.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Madness, pure madness.


23 Responses to “Atheists make for mad scientists”

  1. Fantastic, Satan. I loved this post.

    I just want to say that for me you are very humble, maybe you are disguising yourself again.

    You do not turn just scientists mad talking about God. I always see the eyes of my friends when I talk about religion. It is so strange for them.

    It seems that you are dominating the culture, what it is really sad. Everybody just talk about futile things.

    Yesterday, I saw a huge line in the US to buy a Nike shoes, and I think to myself: oh my God, how can Santorum win with these people?

    Pray, Pedro, pray. Someone answered to me.

  2. Here is what makes me mad, just insane with frustration: the Church’s cowering before these spiritually blind “scientific” bullies. I get the arrogant denials of the obvious truth of God as seen in Creation and the stubborn clinging to obscenely contrived “science” such as evolution. I did the same thing as an unbeliever. What choice did I have if I did not want to acknowledge God?
    What I don’t get is the sight of the Church of Jesus Christ cowering behind the societal front lines while blow-hard Goliaths defy God and His people in the public square. Where are the Spirit-filled Davids who are more concerned for God’s glory than that they might be seen as “bitter clingers” by the Obamas of the world or “arrogant” by the quivering (but backstabbing of the “arrogant” Davids) pew-sitters? If you are waiting for our largely compromised clergy to step up, you will be sorely disappointed. They are about maintaining the status quo just like in Bonhoeffer’s pre-WWII Germany. No, Jesus intends to send people in His name, in the power of the Holy Spirit, not in the name of “seeker friendly” malarkey or church growth seminars. That is where almost all our clergy reside. Let the dead bury the dead I say.
    It’s getting late in the game people. We can go on offense with our spiritual slingshots and smooth stones of truth, or we can stand knock-kneed in fear behind our church walls. Be salt, be light. Rejoice in your God and not a program, and Christ Himself will open doors of opportunity for those with the faith to walk through them.

    • Exactly right, Mike. In fact, I didn’t write about it, but in The Telegraph article refrered to in this post, the Archbishop is quoted as telling Richard Dawkins that “he [the Archbishop] believed that human beings had evolved from non-human ancestors but were nevertheless “in the image of God”.

      This view has neither scientific support nor Biblical support. It is complete, cowering, ignorant nonsense.

      Bottom line: many, many Christians, in their hearts, do not believe the Bible on the point of creation. The Archbishop does not. He said,”The writers of the Bible, inspired as I believe they were, they were nonetheless not inspired to do 21st Century physics.”

      So the writers were inspired, but God (at the time) was just stupid about modern physics.

      Madness, pure madness.

  3. Mike, check out Haggai, the rebuilding of the Temple in Ezra, and 1 Corinthians 3:16. There has to be another rebuilding of the Temple, which is the body of Christ. Your observations are dead on.

    • Johnny:
      Right on my brother. Here is where we are as a nation and as a human race:

      “…I am going to shake the
      heavens and the earth.
      I will overthrow the thrones of kingdoms
      and destroy the power of the kingdoms
      of the nations; and I will overthrow
      the chariots and their riders, and the horses
      and their riders will go down, everyone by
      the sword of another.”
      Haggai 2:21-22

      Obama and the rest of the global socialist elites are laying the groundwork for the above-described global satanic system. But God is not mocked and he is, in fact, allowing this only to bring Satan and his Babylonian system down for good.
      Of course, the only real restraint on this antichristian spirit is a remnant of what is left of the wheezing Laodicean Church. The good news is that God is not constrained to save by many or by few. I believe that enough of us are awakening to what Christ is up to since the 1948 rebirth of national Israel to effectively throw Satan’s agenda back in his and his elitist human puppets’ faces.
      God will remove us and what remains of His hedge of protection around America only to prove to Satan that he has no real power and he has not truly prevailed against His Church. It will just be God stepping out of the way in an act of judgment on the whole world. Why? Because

      “…the wisdom of this world is foolishness
      before God. For it is written, ‘HE IS
      and again, ‘THE LORD KNOWS THE
      1 Corinthians 3:19-20

  4. Whatup, Satan. Atheist here. I just had a question.

    Are you working for God’s will or against it?

    I ask because if you’re working for it, then that pretty much says all I need to know about God’s character.

    But if you’re working against his will, then this all-powerful will seems pretty weak.


    • Why would an atheist care about God’s will or God’s character? Sounds like you are not an atheist, my friend. Answer me this, and I will answer you: Are YOU working for or against God’s will?

      • As an atheist, I’m obviously granting the existence of god and Satan merely for the sake of argument.

        My answer is therefore N/A. Now how about you?

        • N/A?? Then your original question is rather foolish, right? Why would my answer be any more “A” than yours? If “N/A” is really your answer, then my answer is also N/A. Any other answer to a fool would also be foolish.

  5. OK, I can see the game you are playing, but how about you break character for just a moment and answer the question as the obvious Christian blog author that you are.

    • Fair enough. You seem like a nice enough guy. I am working for God’s will. I’m sorry if my work does not reflect well on God’s character, but remember that I am not the one you should be looking to to determine God’s character. God’s perfect character is reflected in the life of another. I hope you discover him someday; he will not disappoint. Until then, thanks for reading and stay in touch.

  6. Lol, you’re a funny guy, L.d. Ablo

  7. Hey, Satan, I recently saw an article you inspired but noticed you hadn’t blogged about it. Something about it being okay to kill babies after they are born because they are not yet ‘persons’.

  8. Mike N. Says:

    Yeah, there’s lots of material out there. Let’s see, the US Senate agrees with Obama (along the Marxist/Democratic party line) that Christians must hand over their consciences to Caesar Obama no matter what the First Amendement of the Constitution says. Under penalty of law. And we get a year to sweat and fret and cringe before our dictator wannabe “president” (does a REAL president yearn for $8/gallon gas?) starts having people of conscience hauled off to prison.
    Breitbart dies, to the giddy, shrieking howls of Marxists everywhere. “Burn in hell, Breitbart” they tweet. Breitbart, in his own way, has done more to keep these fools out of hell themselves than any number of evangelical “pastors” I could mention. He dared to call the Marxist/Democrat party on their soul-destroying, life-crushing lies and exposed people to more truth than they could handle. Breitbart was a scandal to most of the quivering political/religious elites on “our side”. He just did not play “nice”. Neither did the prophet Jeremiah or any of the prophets. Wake up fools!

  9. Hi, I made a comment but it didn’t get posted. Did I say, or do, something wrong?

  10. I have an idea.
    I want to make a test.
    Red power I think its the result was.
    I am the center of the attraction, that is what they think, that is what others want to say for…
    I don’t know who are you.
    You may be loves me.
    I feel with pains.
    Why you loves me.

  11. James Szadolci Says:

    If evil government run public schools are prisons. Than everyone even in North America is being disrespectfully imprisoned in kindergarten, elementary school, middle school and high school with of course college being the exception where they can choose whether or not they want to go there and continue their education.

  12. Angelou Paxino Says:

    Why do so many Christians keep wasting so much time buying, selling and using the internet for anyway? If it says in the bible love not the world nor the things of the world. Than why do millions of Christians around the world love the evil and worldly internet so much for? Why hasn’t the internet become obsolete already? I am sorry that the internet was invented. It was created to take peoples freedom away from them to use books in libraries and to learn things normally through television instead of relegating all of that information to computers.

  13. Carol Perot Says:

    I like to get it twisted when I think a tyrannical and evil law like making recording someone without their permission “illegal” is a excuse to tell a relative of mine that just because he recorded my babies crying. Has anyone ever heard of recording babies crying being a “crime”? This law is based on having hatred, disrespect and unforgiveness towards the recorders who are recording them with cameras. Lucifer and the devils love it when people want to dehumanize people by hogtieing them and caging over something ridiculous like this. The devils told the governments to criminalize video recording someone.

  14. Master Harrington Says:

    So I heard this Scotsman who goes by the name Mr. McTavish was being pestered and threatened in Scotland by a creepy old Episcopalian over something as petty and trivial as placing junk and wood in their dumpster behind his church that MacTavish does not go to. He decided to be a troublemaker and give the police and script by calling them to waste his time by removing that stuff from the dumpster instead of paying a one hundred and sixty five dollar fine. Which of course no matter what country this is done in it is wrong for any creepy old man to sit on his ass all day doing nothing except for looking for trouble if someone is behind his church and saying something threatening like you better keep moving. That is not practicing the golden rule ladies and gentlemen. Christians should not be listening to Satan and the devils by childishly tattling to the police at night just because someone puts junk and wood in their dumpster and afterward a coward hiding behind a badge has the audacity to show up at his house to follow him to the church to force him against his will to clean up what he already was trying to get rid of. And it would not matter probably where the mess was found even in the woods next to any number of graveyards because this is illogical to make a issue out of this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: