Intelligent Design scientists have been proving over and over that the nuts and bolts of evolution just cannot work.  Even Darwin gave a way for anyone to disprove his theory.  He said that if there was found a system in biology that could be shown that it could not come about by slow and gradual changes then his theory would be disproven.  The microscopic organism known as flagellum has 32 components to it’s rotating tail and if it is missing anyone one of those pieces it would not work.  Case closed right?  Well, not for many hardcore evolutionists, but why?First of all, no matter what you believe, whether it be Intelligent Design, Creationism, or evolution, there will always be some degree of faith involved.  No one saw an ape form into a Neanderthal and no one alive today saw God create Adam.  There are no scientificly testable tools to put those scenarios to a litmus test.  We can follow the evidence, but in the end it will never be proof on either side.

So I think a big clincher for many athiests is that they have to cling to evolution, so even though Darwin gave a means to disprove his theory, atheism is dependent on such a theory so many develop a deeper faith in evolution.  So much so that they will ignore any evidence that might possibly be presented against them.

Many even try to explain irreducible complexity away [1].  They put up these straw man arguments so that others will node their head and say “see, it can evolve!”.  The problem is they do the same thing as the rest of evolutionary scientists and they state vague overall statements without really scrutinising the details.  Even in this video, he stacks scenario on top of scenario without ever explaining how such a transformation could happen without the intermediary kinds dying off.   Such as the form with the “wiggly tail”.  If the tail wiggled slightly, the flagellum would cease to exist.  It would barely be able to move.

The video opens up by saying that “Logic tells us that Irreducible Complexity is an argument based on Ignorance.  Because I cannot image how something evolved, it must not have.”  I will leave out my comments on his misspellings and bad grammar and point out his logic is flawed.  The majority of intelligent design scientists began their careers as evolutionists, but once they began to study the intricate details they watched the theory fall apart.

Irreducible Complexity is not a conclusion based on not being able to imagine something, it is a statement of fact based on the inability of a mechanism to operate if even one component is missing.  If this cannot be so then it is impossible for it to develop over slow gradual improvements.

Atheists will not accept such a concept because to do so would deny their ability to be atheists unless they wish to follow in Richard Dawkins steps of believing aliens planted life on Earth.  However, conceding such a thing would mean that they are in fact not evolutionists but Intelligent Design believers as well.

I believe that no one becomes an atheist based on facts or logic.  I does not matter which one you talk to, if you go to the root of why they do not believe it has to do with a personal experience with someone who wronged them and was either a Christian or a deist of some sort.  Or they knew of no one who was a Christian or deist who could satisfy their questions and began to stereotype them as people who are uneducated and follow on blind faith.

I believe Richard Dawkins is the latter.  Aside from his arrogence, he just treats even highly educated peers, educated in the same college as him that disagree with him like drooling idiots.

I am willing to admit that not everyone who calls themselves a Christian becomes one for the right reason, but in the same turn many atheists do not believe in evolution because it is scientifically sound but rather because it supports the beliefs they already have.

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdwTwNPyR9w

Tags: Atheism, Biology, Clincher, Creationism, Darwin, Deeper Faith, Evolution, evolutionary scientists, evolutionists, Flagellum, Intelligent Design, Irreducible Complexity, Litmus Test, Microscopic Organism, Nuts And Bolts, proof, Scenarios, Stacks, Straw Man, Transformation