On virtually every atheist blog that I read, I was astonished by comments that seemed completely irrational to me, while seeming completely satisfactory to those who wrote them.
For example, atheist physicist Victor Stenger states, “So where did the laws of physics come from? They came from nothing.”
That is the logic and reason of atheism. As far as I can tell, Stenger has not been sanctioned or rebuked by any fellow atheists for making such an incoherent statement. In fact, making claims that go against the same scientific principles they hold dear, seems to be allowable as long as those statements muddy the thinking regarding the possibility of Creator God existing. Here are some more statements that, when compared to how scientists say they operate, well, it’s puzzling that they would allow themselves to work in this manner.
Smithsonian paleobiologist, Douglas Erwin, “One of the rules of science is, no miracles allowed. That’s a fundamental presumption of what we do” (bold mine).
Biologist Barry Palevitz, “The supernatural is automatically off-limits as an explanation of the natural world” (bold mine).
Astronomer and physicist Lee Smolin, If the universe started at a point in time, “This leaves the door open for a return of religion. The theory is to be criticized as being unlikely on these grounds”
How in the world can a scientist, someone who says that s/he is dedicated to following the evidence where ever it leads, leave out a whole category of evidence just because it goes against h/her world view?