Two Days AH (after Higgs) And What?

It's been pretty funny watching the attention of blog atheistdom going on from the brief Higgs boson excitement of just two days ago.   Beginning with the bizarrely held idea that, somehow, the Higgs belonged to atheists, that it was a confirmation of their ideology and the other bizarre idea that religious folk would be perturbed by its discovery and continuing to the inevitable loss of collective interest in the topic.   I've been tempted to quiz the atheists on the political blogs who were all caught up in the Higgs hype to name the last three subatomic particles that got a similar amount of razzle dazzle.   Only the few with a knowledge of that branch of physics among them would skew the results,  making that an ineffective measure of how devoted to science the self-appointed Sci-rangers really are.


I've never encountered an atheist who understood the most basic concept of the belief in God the creator.   God created the entire universe, every last part of it, including the subatomic particles, everything.   Anyone who believes that would believe that whatever science can discover about the physical universe  is merely a description of something about God's universe.   That concept is, literally, the first recorded religious idea in the Jewish scriptures,  that God created the heavens and the Earth, the stars the sun,  everything.   If you believe that then all science can tell you about it is  some of the details of how it was done and what it looks like at higher resolution.  

Science can tell you nothing about the idea that God created the universe, though some of those who invented science,  Galileo, Descartes, Newton, believed that their discoveries were revelations of God's action in the universe.   I think they were a bit optimistic as the subsequent culture of science tended more and more towards materialism, blinded by the impressiveness of the discoveries of their methods.    It's really not surprising, though, that, as the difficulties of finding what they wanted to rose, taking up more attention and time, more dedicated preparatory study in mathematics and the physical universe,  the habits of thought developed by scientists would lead to an ideological materialism and, so, atheism.   The oddest thing about that must be that, as they focused on narrower and narrower aspects of the universe and human experience, that so many scientists mistook their narrow view as being ever more macrocosmic.   That can only be done by ignoring, not only the possibility of God, but the actual validity of non-scientific, human experience.   That has been done by asserting that all of the universe, all of human experience is reducible to physical law when there is absolutely no evidence of that being true.  That assertion is typical of atheism,  you get the most extreme reaction from atheists when you point out the real problems of that faith in promissory materialism.

to be continued.