Hate Mail - Atheists Choose To See Things Ass Backward

You, as all materialists and, in my experience almost all atheists, have it backward. 

The fact that everything we perceive is done through our consciousness means that literally anything and everything we can talk about is the product of our consciousness.  Including everything we can say or know about material objects and how they move. 

The pretense that we can deal with, talk about, observe or even conceive of some supposed higher level of reality by pretending that we have access to an objective view of some absolute physical reality is just that, a pretense that we can achieve something which is literally impossible. 

Modern science, based by Descartes on his conception of mathematical perfection, has lent to that superstition.  Descartes doesn't seem to have realized one of the most salient features of mathematics, that mathematical objects are all the product of human imagination, they don't exist anywhere else that we can know of.  That is one of the differences between mathematical objects and physical objects, things which are so fundamentally different should not be expected to share all qualities in common or they would not be rationally categorized as different types of things.

Any absolute logical closure we can achieve in mathematics is a human conclusion based on objects which are entirely imaginary.   There is absolutely no escaping that fact, people are the ones who do it all, they do it through their minds.

Descartes thought that absolute proof possible about such objects was transferable to physical objects.  That that works best with extremely simple physical objects doing fairly simple things indicates that to an extent it works.*  But, as René Thom pointed out, that reliability quickly erodes as those objects become more complex.  Which is indicative that Descartes, surprisingly for someone as philosophically astute as he should have been - and virtually every current scientist who is in every way more philosophically lacking - were, in fact, unrealistic in their faith.   I have never met an atheist who wasn't, as well, naive about that and who didn't try to extend science's efficacy entirely past where it could reach. 

Eddington pointed out that mind is primary to everything we can know, to impeach the validity of consciousness, to try to reduce it in the way that materialists do is like some mighty warrior who starts the battle by cutting off his own head.

* Modern physics more than a century ago started confronting the limits that science has due to that fact of the centrality of human consciousness at the center of physics.   Mathematics followed on in the 1920s and 30s.  That mathematics cannot achieve absolute closure might just reveal that even mathematical objects can't produce Descartes' conception of perfection, just an approximation of what we imagine as perfection.  Perfection is possibly a human invention, too.