Isn’t that an interesting statement? Atheist high priest Richard Dawkins says that he’s “leery of strongly held beliefs in the absence of evidence.” That’s what he says. Yet those who worship Richard, and he himself states strongly that ‘There is no evidence for God.’
My question is, “Where’s the evidence that the universe could come into being without an eternal Creator or Cause?” I thought atheists needed evidence to make a statement like that? Don’t atheists want evidence to support their strongly held beliefs? Seems that the atheist’s favourite tool, rubber rulers, have been pulled out to get just the measurement they want.
This atheist dogma is doubly perplexing when we realise that science in fact refutes the atheist claim that Everything can come from nothing by nothing. Science and Philosophy tell us, and they tell us in a manner that is verifiable, trustworthy and clear as crystal that the universe couldn’t have come into being without an eternal supra natural First Cause.
So why do atheists persist in making anti scientific claims?