Intellectually Embarrassing

Richard Dawkins says that evolution, or natural selection as it is often called allows him to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. I guess before that, you could still be an atheist, but you had to accept that you were kind of intellectually stunned. After all, atheism existed since long, long before there was anything that today's atheists consider to be evidence for their belief-system.

Regardless, natural selection allows nothing resembling intellectual fulfilment. Atheism has always been and always will be an anti-intellectual, anti-science, irrational and brutishly illogical means of denying the obvious – a supernatural Creator of the universe exists, and this Creator exists necessarily (Necessarily: It can't NOT exist).

For if natural selection is true, it is true only because the universe was designed (with a Creator's intent and purpose) in a way that allows natural selection generally and life itself specifically to exist. The theory of evolution does absolutely nothing to do away with the existence of Creator God. Because of that, the world-view called atheism remains as incoherent and irrational as it always was, even before this pseudo evidence for the non existence of a Creator was invented.

The facts of adaptation and natural selection have always been before us. Atheism has just given them a new and incongruous, non sequitur (natural selection exists therefore God does not) type of interpretation.

So we can ask ourselves. Which is more intellectually embarrassing:

. To believe that everything material came from nothing material by nothing?

OR

. To believe that matter and energy have always existed?