Atheists Are Idiots: The Intellectually Challenged World of the Anti-Theist

2010

CHAPTER 1

What the hell is an atheist

Why was I born? Why are we here and what in the hell is an atheist?

Why was I born, where did I come from, where are we going and why are we here? These arguably are the most common questions asked throughout history by children, adults, philosophers and scholars. The child can easily answer these questions, he says ‘I came from my house and I’m going to play and I’m here because mommy told me to be- easy enough. However, as one grows up, of course, these answers don’t work anymore and, all but the dimmest, are forced to reach further to find satisfying answers, many ponder these questions till their last days and, even then, never see the light….

Questions concerning the true meaning of life are virtually endless, arising from many disciplines such as philosophy, psychology, spirituality, science, and, of course, religion. They proliferate like the ‘old swami on the mountain’ tale. We present here some of the main viewpoints that attempt to answer the question What is the true meaning of and purpose of life?

The religious devotee, of course, feels his true purpose is one of devotion to religion. Mother Teresa and the many thousands like her in service to God and humanity are examples. All religions presuppose a supernatural being. The followers are to connect with the higher power and do good works in the name of the deity or creator so as to benefit humankind. Devout Christians (and many not so devout) model themselves after the Christ and try to emulate him in thought and deed. The commandants, as delivered by Moses and venerated by Jews and Christians alike, are used as moral guidelines upon which to model ones life.

Atheists, by contrast, hold the opposite stance; they recognize no supernatural being or Creator. Atheistic views generally assume that the universe and all life simply ‘evolved’ under the laws of probability and look for non-religious meanings to explain life’s true purpose. The Golden Rule and the Ten Commandants hold that humans should treat others as they would themselves be treated and conduct themselves accordingly. This provides strong purpose in many religions such as Christianity and Judaism as well as Buddhism. The true atheist however professes no such moral restraints and has therefore, at best, adopted a kind of ‘moral relativism’ and, at worst, sees no clear difference or distinction between good and evil. These kinds of people are clearly capable of, and have committed, the greatest crimes in history. Why? There is nothing to hold them back, they have no fear of God’s punishment since, in their mind, there is no God. For them, nothing can be truly evil because the term evil itself is purely relative. The distinction, for these wretches, between good and bad, right and wrong, is therefore blurred such that no action they may take carries moral responsibility, relevance or significance.

Other ‘empty-suits’ (secular humanists) actually argue that the ‘real meaning of life’ is mostly biological. They feel that highest meaning of ones existence is to continue humankind through procreation of the species. Since, for them, the end of life is nothing more than a cold and lonely grave, they argue that the creation of more humans is the most important thing- otherwise, of course, humanity would cease to exist. What a logical and neat little argument….. cold, reasonable and empty! There are different types and stances of those who call themselves ‘humanists,’ many of whom see one’s individual purpose as being able to contribute to needs of the collective. Of course, this is 100% the Marxist and communist view and we know where that road leads!

In the appendices herein we have posted a list of the miracles of Jesus Christ. There are literally thousands of ancient documents in existence today that were written hundreds of years before Christ walked the earth. The accounts of the life and times of Jesus were well documented by hundreds of scholars and followers, many from first hand experience. Only the dullest of the dull and only the most committed and close minded of atheists can possibly deny that these recorded miracles by the Son of God occurred. In this respect, the Bible is a historically accurate document. What happened, and has been reported, did happen. There is no possible counter argument by the secular and Godless left that can explain away these facts! We list them here and defy any atheist to counter them. Were all those who wrote down what they saw and heard simply mad? Jesus proved to all that he indeed was the son of God and that those who would follow him would have life more abundantly and most certainly, that has been demonstrably true.

Many secular humanists express the view that the true meaning of life might be in some kind of ‘connection’ to others: biologically, socially and culturally. Here, it is important to note that many humanists that view mankind as constantly evolving beings see the true meaning of life as one that might well possibly change or be changing. (really?) Included in these sad groups we should give honorable mention to those environmentalists who find it convenient to worship mother earth. These groups are generally anti-human, anti-civilization, anti-modernity, anti-energy and anti almost everything. They worship at the alter of nature, wishing all human endeavor and progress to somehow cease and disappear. They know that the earth would be a better place were humans not present. So, we have here not merely anti-theists but a group wishing and ‘praying’ for the negation or all human life and all human activity. We posted a few of these silly groups in the appendices. Good grief!

For many secular humanists, hedonists and atheists by any other word, life’s true meaning is to make the most of life on a personal level. Their answer to the question of the meaning of life is that humans are here simply to just enjoy and strive for a happy existence. Sigmund Freud, the Viennese drug addicted doctor, who invented the psychological therapy method known as psychoanalysis, called this view the pleasure principle. The main idea behind this stance is that humanity is meant to experience maximum pleasure and minimum pain. We present, in a further chapter, a discussion of Epicurus, the Ancient Greek philosopher credited with founding this school of thought. Of course, not being of the hair shirt personal masochism school, on some level, I can appreciate the attraction…

The humanistic branch of psychology, most associated with Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers, grew out of a need for more personal meaning than Freud’s psychoanalysis could provide. Humanistic psychologists concentrate on individual potential and purpose in life. Many people do see personal achievement and the purpose of their own place in the greater world to hold a basic meaning of their lives. Maslow had the answer, eat drink and be merry and be content with the limited dunce you are!

Existentialists hold the philosophical viewpoint that some humans make individual choices in their existence. French existentialist Jean Paul Sartre said, Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. In this view, personal freedom may be seen as having the potential of both positive and negative outcomes depending on the choices one makes. Little comfort this does the dunce, who with limited potential in the first place, has made nothing of his life. Sartre had nothing to offer him or the 95% of humanity who are incapable of coherent reflection and who, in any case, lack the talent to change anything…

One argument that we find of significant merit in the search for life’s true purpose is to advance or help humankind. Many people feel that the one true meaning of life is to be grateful to our Creator for ones abilities and work to advance human happiness and decrease suffering. This outlook often contains views that humankind, especially those gifted with superior intelligence and ability, will find satisfying purpose and meaning by working to reduce and end suffering. Life’s meaningful purpose in this view includes the desire to devote ones talent to those pursuits benefiting those in need. The scientists who have found cures and preventatives for disease, of course, rank high under this formula. Doctors, Dentists, nurses and all those who help to directly reduce misery and suffering are obvious members of this group.

There can be many variations on what it actually means to help others. Many people may feel the answer to what their life’s meaning is about is to contribute to society through their work. Others may feel that it’s important to help discover technological or other types of advances to aid in the positive progress of humankind. Some fortunate people decide that following and developing their God given talents is their true purpose in life. Artists and musicians who create great beauty and wonders certainly find their lives meaningful as do writers and poets. Indeed, there is great satisfaction and joy in such pursuits. Michelangelo Buonarroti, Leonardo da Vinci, Beethoven and Mozart certainly fit into this category, as would Dr. Jonas Salk who, in 1952, developed the first effective polio vaccine.

Trans-humanism is another interesting school of thought suggesting the meaning of life is to improve the human body by extending that life. There is nothing in this discipline precluding those so engaged from having religious beliefs. In fact, many do. Trans-humanists seek mental and physical improvements in humankind such as the advances concerned with slowing and even arresting the aging process. Trans-humanist views hold that since life began through evolution, it is up to ‘evolved humans’ to control and extend the quality of life. Recent developments in the medical properties of nanobots, as they relate to the extension of human life through a slowing the aging process, suggests the possibility of almost endless life We are nearing a tipping point in life extension, thanks to technologies that enhance our health and maximize resources

Extending human life expectancy is not a new story. When our genes evolved thousands of years ago, it was not particularly in the interests of the human species to live past a child-rearing age, as resources such as food were always in short supply. Human life expectancy in the dark ages (450-800 AD) was about 37. Today, mostly due to technological labor saving devices, the use of petroleum etc., it is now pushing 80, and we have been adding about three months each year for the past several decades. Today, this is due mostly to advances in medical procedures, diet and pharmacology which however, do not address the bodies overall genetic aging process.

The science of life extension is however about to go into high gear. Until recently, health and medicine was a hit or miss affair. We would discover interventions such as beneficial drugs but many also had undesirable side effects. We did not have the means to design truly life-prolonging interventions on the cellular level. But, that is changing! The breakthrough in stem-cell biology recently reported offers just one example of the progress.

With the completion of the human genome project in 2003 and the advent of techniques such as RNA interference, which can turn off the genes that promote disease and ageing, medicine has transformed itself into an ‘information technology.’ It is now subject to what I call the law of accelerating returns - a doubling of capability (for the same cost) each year. For example, the amount of genetic data collected has doubled every year since 1990, and the cost has come down from $10 per base pair to a fraction of a penny. As a result, technologies to literally reprogram human software" (i.e. the genes) that underlie human biology, will, in the next ten years, be a thousand times more powerful than they are today and a million times more powerful in two decades. According to models, we will be adding more than a year every year to our remaining life expectancy in only 15 years from now. That will be a tipping point in life extension. Rather than the sands of time running out with passing time, they will be running in. The further out in time we go the more advances we will be able to take advantage of.

Within a couple of decades, we will have nanobots in our blood stream, (basically small robots the size of blood cells), that will keep us healthy at the cellular and molecular level. There are already dozens of successful experiments with a first generation of such devices in animals. One scientist cured type-I diabetes in rats with a blood cell-sized device. Scientists at MIT have microscopic devices that can scout out cancer cells in the bloodstream and destroy them. These devices will be a billion times more powerful than they are today in 25 years, and will continue the accelerating path to radical life extension.

The prospect of dramatically reducing human morality troubles some observers, as they worry about issues such as overpopulation and depletion of natural resources. Indeed, if we considered a world that had radical life extension but no other changes, it would surely lead to unsustainable stresses. But, these same technologies will dramatically change the resource equation as well.

In a world where humans live several hundred or more years, many things will have to change. Those seeking the true meaning of life will have to do a lot more thinking and indeed, they will have a great deal more time to allot to this worthy pursuit. One major change will have to be the churches’ argument of holding out the promise of everlasting life if only you will only repent, live the good life (as we tell you) and, by the by, drop a few coins in the ole collection plate. This argument will fall on deaf ears along with many other once persuasive ecclesiastical admonishments. When such a treatment becomes available, the role of the church will most certainly and necessarily change. Perhaps, it will sustain and find itself relative by providing spiritual guidance, which, without a doubt, anyone living 400 + years is going to really need.

I suggest that you give the moral consequences of a 400-year human life span considerable thought. For example, who would be injected with these remarkable, miraculous ‘doctorbots?’ Would it be only those who could pay $100,000 for the