What's true? The Real Facts About...

The Problem with WorldViews… Is Materialism Dead?

September 1, 2016 in Religion

How Worldviews KILL Scientific and Intellectual Progress-
…How Materialism Died… and no one knew

Related- Is atheism the Opiate of the Uninformed?
With certainty on any particular subject comes a tendency to dismiss new views before taking even a moment of thought to determine if it has merit.  Why would anyone waste their time thinking about something they KNOW it can’t be true?   If an idea is in contravention to our own committed worldview, we often toss it aside without a thought. This is often true even though the evidence supporting the new idea is overwhelming…  It even happens to those who are unquestionably brilliant!  How often has your worldview caused you to not even consider the possibility of something, just because you KNEW it wasn’t true?  Many unwittingly discard truth and hold to incorrect beliefs due to their absolute certainty. 

Although, worldview bias raises its ugly head in many arenas, as discussed below, nowhere is this tendency more apparent than when it comes to evidence for God.  No matter what our belief system; when faced with new information we should always take a moment to loosen our worldview to objectively consider the evidence for, at least, a moment.  Otherwise, at some point, we will make the same mistakes that Einstein and hundreds of our most brilliant scientists have made in many divergent areas of science...   An open mind is the key to an informed mind…  

  • WorldView Impacts Scientific Conclusions- Even brilliant World renowned physicists often come to absolutely incorrect conclusions when a particular data set conflicts with their worldview.  What’s more, they often hold to them, in spite of mounting data.
  • Fred Hoyle never accepted the big bang, simply because of its obvious religious worldview implications.
  • Einstein refused to accept quantum physics because “God didn’t play dice”. He simply couldn’t accept the radical ideas that came with quantum mechanics and entanglement.  It conflicted too deeply with his ingrained world view.
    History is replete with, not just brilliant people, but entire branches of science being wrong and staying wrong for years… not because they were incapable of seeing the truth, but because they REFUSED to see the factual evidence.  They had too much faith in their worldview.  
  • Semmelweis’ germ theory. In the world of medicine even the simple idea of washing your hands before operating could not be accepted.  This was true even though there was a clear and unmistakable connection between puerperal fever and disinfected hands of the hospital staff.  Semmelweis’ discovery directly contradicted the beliefs of science and medicine of his time.  The medical world refused to accept his findings because it conflicted with their WorldView!...  they could not accept the possibility that they could be responsible for spreading infections. What was his reward for this life and world changing discovery?  He was declined a reappointment in 1849 i.e fired.   He was treated as a pariah and the continued criticism finally broke him. He was eventually committed to an asylum. He only lasted there for two weeks and died on August 13, 1865 at the age of 47. https://explorable.com/semmelweis-germ-theory

Isn’t this precisely what is happening in the debate within evolution, origin of the universe, intelligent design today?   Many who dared to argue the evidence and chose discuss the clear implications of facts have been ruthlessly abused and many even lost their jobs… only to later have it be found they were correct all along.  

Nowhere do I see these types of issues more often than when it relates to religion.  No one can prove that God does or does not exist. All anyone can ever do, is weigh the evidence and logically, HONESTLY follow it where it leads. Franky there is an enormous amount of natural data that constitutes evidence of God. But when one chooses to believe that God is impossible; that there can be no God, evidence often no longer matters! The tendency is to shut down any debate and fail to acknowledge the evidence right before their eyes even exists.  Their worldview gets in the way of their ability to objectively analysis the empirical data.  see…


No matter how brilliant a person may be, it is easy to become intellectually trapped by a worldview. The History of Science is replete with examples of this.

*Fred Hoyle*- The discoverer of stellar nucleosynthesis a brilliant astronomer and physicist denied the big bang until the day of he died. He preferred to hold to the steady state theory, http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/steady_state.html
He and many others held to it even though, there was not one shred of empirical evidence that reasonably supported it. The Data was clear and overwhelming.  However, his desire to believe in “an eternal universe” that would undermine the clear inference of a beginning that conforms to creation, overrode his ability to accept the actual evidence and empirical data.  

WHY would a man of such towering intellect hold to something so evidentially unsupported?
For one simple reason Wordview…
The big bang and it’s implication of a beginning to the universe had too strong a theistic implication!  Because he absolutely believed there was no God could be no God, did not want there to be a God, anything that could infer his existence, MUST BE WRONG!

*Also from Fred Hoyle*- After an in-depth study of chemistry, biology and the origin of life, he also concluded “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature (1982:)
In spite of the fact that his intellect clearly said there must be more; and that all we see in nature can not be the result of pure, blind chance… *he still died an atheist!*

Why? Even though intellectually he knew that what he saw in nature could not be “natural”, he could in no way countenance the possibility of God. *WORLDVIEW AGAIN, TRUMPS INTELLECT!*

WorldView Commitments Can Create Real World Inconsistencies
It’s telling that for centuries scientists were perfectly content with the idea of an eternal universe. They had no problem because it was in direct contradiction to the bible’s account of a beginning of the heavens and earth.  In other words an eternal universe seemed to mean the bible was wrong, there was no God and thus supported their preferred materialistic worldview.   Their commitment to their worldview, ultimately created such a degree of inconsistency of thought that it has in many respects turned to simple HYPOCRISY!

                   My, how things change when their worldview is put at risk!
As soon as Theists began citing the obvious implications of the big bank bang as an inference of the existence of God, amazingly, science then decided that nothing was allowed to be eternal. Now the atheistic argument became if God created the universe, who created God?! So, it was alright to have an uncreated universe, but inconceivable to have an uncreated God!  It is still used to this day! The existence of an eternal something was fine as long as the eternal entity was an undirected, uncaused universe.   However, as soon as the evidenced implied the eternal something might be the God that so many had spent their lives denying could possibly exist, their views changed such that an eternal something was no longer possible.  That is worldview bias in action!

Do I believe that the fact the universe appears to have a beginning, as stated in Genesis, is PROOF that God exists? Of course not, but it is an important evidentiary piece of a complicated puzzle that may ultimately paint an irrefutable picture of his existence. Throughout the various articles in this site, many more pieces of that puzzle will be connected.  No one piece is determinative, but like a puzzle, the more pieces put in place, the clearer the true picture of the pieces create becomes. 

A beginning to the Universe was just too much… and still is!
From the moment the big bang was proposed atheistic scientists have been trying to deny it, then looking for ways to avoid it… there continues a non stop search for any theory that eliminates a beginning of the universe. The result?

For 10 years a group of our most brilliant theoretical physicists, Armand Borde, Allan Guth and Alexander Vilenkin searched for a loophole around the space-time theorem.  
The Goal?  They wanted to prove the eternality of the universe; to find some theorem that would avoid the necessary causal agent beyond space and time that would have to be responsible for the beginning of all space, time and matter.

They published 5 papers on the subject and in spite of their Herculean  attempts to find to the contrary, they ultimately concluded, that any universe that expands on average, MUST have a beginning in the finite past.  In other words our universe i.e. all of Time, Space and Matter had a beginning.

So now atheist scientists continue to posit new ways around the implications of God… a multi verse, a statement that gravity caused the universe, or that it was caused by nothing etc… *this even though not one of these theories has  one thread of empirical evidence to support them!*

Intractable Adherence to preferred worldviews can result in ILLOGICAL THOUGHT PROCESSES. 
This is of course a two way street.  Often theists have the same issue, but for now, we’ll deal with only one side of the equation…

The atheist’s worldview is that there is no God;  that God is no more real than a magic man in the sky, a fairy tale. Therefore, no matter what they see or what the common sense inference of a data set may be, the conclusion of God can not be allowed as a possibility.  

But since when has science have to see a thing to believe it exists?:
A Theist is gernally willing to go wherever the evidence actually leads, whether we can actually see the cause or not. But there is nothing unusual about that.  That’s also how science usually works.  Effective intellectual inquiry has never required that we visibly see, touch or hear the causal agent of an event.  If the data provides sufficient inferential evidence, it is accepted that the cause exists.  In other words, there is no need to physically see the cause, as long as we can see the physical RESULTS of that cause.  

That’s why scientists acknowledge gravity, dark matter, dark energy, and various celestial bodies that we have never seen.  We see the effects so we know they exist.  

No atheistic scientist has an issue in believing in what can not be seen. But there is one caveat… they will believe in the best inference to any cause, as long as the best inference does not imply the cause was God“.

    The evidence indicates there is such a thing as gravity because we see things fall, we are held to the ground. However, no one has ever seen gravity or gravity waves (and when scientists thought they had, it was actually just space dust)… all we have ever seen or experienced is gravity’s effects. but we know it exists. 
  • *Evidence infers the universe consists mostly of Dark Matter. That also has never been seen.  Since it makes up a huge portion of the universe it is assumed we should be able to find, at least, a particle of it. But that’s not the case.   We devised many brilliant experiments to do so… all have come up empty-handed.   Do our scientists say it must not exist?  No. They continue to accept it because we see its effects.  We see spiral arms of distant galaxies whose formation is best explained by some unseen mass  It is believed to be unseen matter that is causing an extra gravitational force sufficient to explain the observed data.   Even though it 23 percent of all matter in the universe, we can’t observe it, we can’t test it, we can’t touch it, we can’t see it… but we accept its existence.
  • Evidence also infers there is Dark Energy that makes up about 73% of the mass of the universe.   Dark energy is causing the universe to continue on an accelerated non stop expansion.  But again, that too, has never been seen, but we believe it’s there.

There is virtually no scientist who does not accept all of the above as a part of our universe’s reality…  Even though none have ever actually seen them.  All that has ever been observed are the effects.  But we accept they exist.

OUR UNIVERSE INFERS THE EXISTENCE OF GOD-  Evidence of our universe and nature powerfully infer (although does not prove), a designer, via the big bang, fine tuning of life and the universe, computer code in the cell, etc…
As with Dark Matter, Dark Energy and Gravity, we have not seen the designer but we see the effect all around us, every moment of our lives.  In spite of the mountains of inferential evidence, the possibility of a designer is given virtually no credence by many in science. Why? It conflicts with the atheist’s materialistic WorldView.  They believe there is no God, so they are unwilling to accept, see or acknowledge the evidence that infers His existence.  But isn’t it possible that God does not exist?  Technically yes.  But i fervently believe the evidence of his existence is overwhelming. 

Personally I believe God exists, but not because of a worldview.  Rather, for me it is due to the unmistakable evidence that surrounds us all and the mountain of discoveries of recent science.  However, because of an intractable view that asserts a God can not exist, any evidence that infers an intelligent designer or something beyond nature is given little to no credence by those with an anti theistic worldview bias.

Following are a few of MANY FACTS that make the GOD hypothesis eminently reasonable…
For many, their worldview REQUIRES there must be a naturalistic cause to the origin of life.  Logically, it either happened as the result of random chemical chance events, or there was an intelligence that put the pieces together to create, at least, the first living cell.  The committed atheist does not want to believe in God, so they hold only to what evidence seems to support their position while ignoring everything else.  They don’t just say it’s wrong… it’s impossible.  Unfortunately for their belief system, even the best theory on the origin of life has problems that appear to be insurmountable.  

*It is a FACT* it has been shown that the chances of life arising spontaneously from naturalistic chance processes is so incredibly unlikely that few biologists still even consider it a possibility. Some actually believe so stridently of its impossibility that they prefer to believe that LIFE CAME FROM SPACE rather than God.

  •   This was posited as a possibility by Francis Crick (head of the genome project) and
  •   Richard Dawkins (Evolutionary biologist and Oxford Professor),  http://youtu.be/BoncJBrrdQ8 and
  •   Fredirich Hoyle, and many others. http://allsolutionsnetwork.org/blog/the-origin-of-life-who-wrote-the-manual
  •   The origin of life problem is so stark that “Eugene Koonin” a leading biologist and Origin of life researcher, states:the emergence of a coupled replication-translation system is unlikely to the extent of being, “EFFECTIVELY IMPOSSIBLE”.  He then goes on to say for life to have arisen naturally, we must be part of a “multi verse“.  Why?  Because with an infinite number of universes anything that can be imagined happens in at least one of them.  In our case, we would simply be the lucky one, on which life arose naturalistically.  http://www.biologydirect.com/content/2/1/15


  • *   We know that life doesn’t come from dead inanimate objects, but life exists, why?
    *   We know that something does not come from nothing.  But all the empirical evidence we have indicates that everything we see, came from the nothingness prior to the big bang.  How?
    *   We know that order does not come from chaos.  But we see an extraordinarily ordered universe that started with the incomprehensible chaos of the big bang.  How?
  • *It is a FACT* there are gaping holes in the fossil record and that the Cambrian explosion has proven to be a huge hurdle for Darwinian orthodoxy. http://allsolutionsnetwork.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi/1000/godis.htm#Fossil_Record-
  • *It is a FACT* the scientific community is so motivated to find evidence of transitional fossils that PROVE evolutionary theory that they have pronounced the bone of a pig a missing link. http://allsolutionsnetwork.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi/1000/godis.htm#Fraud_and_misinterpretation_in_the_Fossil_Records-
  • *Their WorldView* is so deeply ingrained and the need to confirm their pre-existing beliefs is so deep that it has created an imperative for the discovery of confirming ‘evidence” that is so over powering that many have been susceptible of being fooled as to the authenticity or nature of fossils… in some instances they even stooped to outright fraud themselves in their attempt to prove their worldview to others. http://allsolutionsnetwork.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi/1000/godis.htm#BIAS_OF_THE_SCIENTIFIC_COMMUNITY
  • *It is a FACT* all that we see… time, space and matter was created from nothing! (according to Steven Hawking and Roger Penrose) Doesn’t this sound a bit like Genesis?
  • *It is a FACT* that the universe and everything in it, gives the appearance of design. Virtually all scientists agree that from the awesome expanse of the universe to the tiniest incredibly complex cell, design is apparent. They acknowledge the appearance of design, they just insist that there must be a naturalistic cause rather than a designer.
  • *It is a FACT* that “something” does not come from nothing and we know that inanimate matter does not spontaneously grow into living matter. but this is what “the consensus” of mainstream science teaches. They simply insist that somehow, the origin of life was a natural process, in spite of the fact that all empirical evidence says otherwise...
  • *It is a FACT* that a computer program’s coding requires a designer. DNA is perfectly analogous to the most sophisticated computer code. And no, the issues aren’t just about complexity… it’s about information and instructions.
  • *It is a FACT* that the machinery of each living cell contains a more sophisticated DNA code than the most advanced computers known to man.

The more our scientists, chemists, astronomers, paleontologists, and biologists discover about the origins and details of life and the universe… the less that undirected, blind chance seems to be even a remote possibility.  There HAS to me more… but what or WHO might that be?

The concept of materialism; the belief that all we see and all we are is nothing more than particles of matter is all but DEAD! The empirical evidence proving there is more to reality than molecules in motion is overwhelming and continues to mount almost daily.   However, for many, even the most powerful compelling evidence is not enough; WHY?… because he who will not see stands no better than he who can not see.    Any objective analysis of the issues and facts makes it clear that the problems of strict materialism are legion…
* Origin of life research
* The Fossil Record.
* The problem of mind.
* The newest discoveries *Quantum Theory have destroyed materialism*.
The evidence against a purely materialistic reality has reached a tipping point.  A point where acceptance of the obvious implications of massive mounts of accumulated data is all but impossible to avoid.  But many brilliant people do so anyway.  WHY?  They are trapped by their commitment to a particular worldview.  No matter the empirical evidence, they either pay no attention, pretend it doesn’t exist or pretend it doesn’t even qualify as evidence.  Below will be provided an overview of the problems, the opinions of our leading scientists, their words and cites to their work and how and where you can learn more.  Virtually nothing contained herein is opinion; only facts and common sense inference.

This is an overview of a HUGE body of work that only touches on the many facts that are contrary to a materialistic philosophy.  And yes, many inferentially provide support for God.  Will It Prove God Exists?  No… Nothing can.  However, if one takes the time to examine the article you will find it provides strong circumstantial case for His existence. However, not one word of the article is biblically based.  The method of reasoning used for argumentation of facts to conclusion is precisely the same as our physicists use to prove the existence of many unseen celestial bodies and untouched aspects of our universe.  



None of the above PROVES that God exists- but in spite of what some say, nothing in science has ever come close to proving that God does not exist. Neither belief nor non-belief is an irrational position, but only one position can be right; the other is wrong.  


FACT–The last 50 years of scientific investigation has been undercutting atheism and materialism. I, like a rapidly growing portion of our most brilliant scientists, doctors, biologists, physicists and astronomers have come to the conclusion that the weight of evidence falls on the side of God. Many of our top physicists actually believe Materialism is Dead!  

  • The newest discoveries of *quantum physics*, entanglement, superposition and non locality have led to the conclusion that fundamental to reality, is not matter, but consciousness!  
  • Eugene Wigner Physics Nobel Laureate– “It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way *without reference to consciousness*.”  “It will remain remarkable, in whatever way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world led to the *scientific conclusion* that the content of the consciousness is the ultimate universal reality http://epjwoc.epj.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2014/15/epjconf_wigner2014_01010.pdf 
  • It is beginning to appear that fundamental to nature, is not matter, but rather mind.  But whose?
    *   Hans Halvorsen is a philosopher of quantum physics at Princeton University
    “…consciousness is crucial to making reality determinate.” (151)
  • *   Experiment confirms quantum theory weirdness – May 27, 2015
    Excerpt: The bizarre nature of reality as laid out by quantum theory has survived another test, with scientists performing a famous experiment and proving that *reality does not exist until it is measured*http://phys.org/news/2015-05-quantum-theory-weirdness.html
    *Does all this prove GOD?  No… but it strongly infers there is more than simple atheistic materialism.  The obvious question… who or what might that be?.
    If the many cosmological forces such as gravity, the strong and weak atomic forces, etc… were any different, life could not exist.  Not just human life… *NO LIFE!*  Are we really just that lucky?
     *As Fred Hoyle*, one of the most preeminent minds of the 20th century (an atheist no less), stated  “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that _there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/nave-html/faithpathh/hoyle.html

If you are not willing to have your worldviews challenged, do not watch these videos. Quantum theory is the most successful and well test theory in physics. It is also one of the most difficult to grasp to the extent that one can see why it is so destructive of materialistic views.  I’ve placed a few videos below. They are arranged in a specific order.

See what some of our most brilliant minds, free of the constraints of worldview bias have come to believe after reviewing all evidence.  

CHARLES TOWNES, Nobel Laureate in Physics.
“I strongly believe in the existence of God, based on intuition, observations, logic, and also scientific knowledge.” (Townes 2002a).

ROBERT MILLIKAN, Nobel Laureate in Physics
To me it is unthinkable that a real atheist could be a scientist.”

ERWIN SCHRÖDINGER, Nobel Laureate in Physics:
“…God and eternity, Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously.”
¨ In the presentation of a scientific problem, the other player is the good Lord. He has not only set the problem but also has devised the rules of the game

MAX PLANCK, Nobel Laureate in Physics
“Both religion and science need for their activities, the belief in God…  God represents the basis, for the latter – the crown of any reasoning concerning the world-view.”

The above does not prove the existence of God.  However, whether one wants to admit it, it has put a stake in the heart of the materialist view of reality.  If materialism is dead… what or who is left?

Of course, there are other worldviews and other religions so the above does not prove that Christianity, Judaism, Islam or anything in particular is true. However, as anyone who cares can see, there are volumes of evidence that point directly to Christianity.  see… http://allsolutionsnetwork.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi/1000/godis.htm

See Related articles.


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.