Science is not material, science is not material, and certainly the sources of science are not atheistic.

Science is not material, science is not material, and certainly the sources of science are not atheistic. Although this should only come out of an atheist, it is in any case completely false, regardless of who said it. There is the scientific materialist philosophy, the idea that science is limited to materialistic explanations, the idea that currently dominates the scientific community; the large institutions that give research funds; and the formal and semi-formal institutions that give credits and awards, but this does not in any way mean that science itself is material! To say that science itself is materialistic and atheistic means that you accept the truth that observed material things and physical forces are the only truths. Mind, free will, feelings, values, spirit, and God are illusions. Science today is governed by material philosophy, but this does not mean that science itself is material, science was not material when it appeared at the hands of believers, and will not become material and it is governed today by atheists and non-religious ... Why? Because, quite simply, scientific practice is neither material nor primary, collecting observations is neither material nor atheistic, making explanatory assumptions is neither material nor atheistic in the vast majority of scientific disciplines. So when does atheism appear? It appears only in two cases; 1) the ideological employment of the data and results of science, as we see in some ideological employments of the Copenhagen School of Quantum. 2) Atheistic materialistic theorists of atheistic science practitioners, as we see in some physical/naturalistic theorists of atheistic biologists, physicists and neuroscientists. So we're talking about atheism on the fringes of scientific practice, and no matter how much of the total scientific practice, it's never going to give the wrong impression that you think all science is atheistic, but the reason for that impression is something completely different, and that's the most important thing in the case. “There is not a single prominent individual among the pioneers of popularizing science who openly espouses traditional religious views, and there are very few who espouse views that can be described as religious.” They continue that many of these writers are “strongly hostile to traditional religions, and are committed to making it clear that science not only fails to demonstrate any religious perspectives, but can actually expose and disprove any religious perspectives.”1 This impression of science from the likes of Richard Dawkins, Jerry Quinn, Neil Tyson, Lawrence Krauss, and others is just misleading propaganda for a fallen philosophy. But it is the huge media proliferation of atheistic scientific composers that has spread the false impression that science itself is atheistic. A simple comparison between the disciplines in which atheist theories and employments appear, and the rest of the scientific disciplines (which have religious consequences in the first place), shows you how absurd it is to say that science is all material and its sources are all atheistic... Where is atheism or materialist philosophy in astrodynamics or research into the laws of motion and their relationship to rockets and spacecraft? Where is atheism or materialist philosophy in pathology or the study of pathogens? Where is atheism or material philosophy in analytical chemistry or the study of the chemical composition of natural and synthetic materials? Where is atheism or material philosophy in geophysics or the study of the subsoil and layers of rock in physical terms? Where is atheism or materialist philosophy in geoclimatics or the study of the gaseous atmosphere and elements of climate and weather? Where is atheism or materialistic philosophy in epidemiology or the study of the etiology of the spread of diseases in different societies? Where is atheism or material philosophy in biotechnology or the study of the biological world with the aim of exploring potential technological and industrial applications? Where is atheism or materialist philosophy in ethology or the study of animal behaviorology? Where is atheism or physical philosophy in biochemistry or the study of chemical compositions of living cell parts? Where is atheism or material philosophy in polymer physics? In motor dynamics? In electromagnetism? The list may take longer until the space for writing is finished! In contrast to the huge amount of scientific disciplines far from religious consequences, atheism only surfaced when talking about the rise of living things; when talking about Darwinism, or about the genesis of the universe; when talking about multiverses or models of inflation or chords, or when deliberate attempts to explain mental processes and feelings and consciousness through electrochemical and neuroscientific interactions. After Judge John Jones ruled intelligent design theory unscientific on December 20, 2005, D. Michael Behe wrote an article, putting to an end the conclusion: "A day after the judge's ruling, on December 21, 2005, as previously held, the cell proceeds with an amazing complexity and functional mechanism, which he would have realized was designed in any other context. On December 21, 2005, as previously held, there is no explanation for the molecular mechanism in life other than design other than dreamy speculation and fabricated stories."[2] The same applies here, so that the atheist takes his time in running the scientific arena as he wants, and to publish his ideas in the media as he wants, but in the end, the truth will remain as it is, science is not atheistic, and when investigated, science destroys the foundations of atheistism. Margins: (1) Karl W. Giberson, Donald A. Yerxa, Species of Origins: America's Search for a Creation Story, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. (October 9, 2002), p122. 2 Dr. Michael Behe, Retrial: The Hidden Story of the Dover Case, Is Intelligent Design a Science or Not?, Brahin Center 2017, p. 100. — Source: Published on Facebook's "Braheen Center" page https://www.facebook.com/braheen.org/posts/pfbid0278krqFqyERQm13DZWqkXFSzbRTyrebNp9Uoxkah9GkiPGfkvFTnptX5CyDuMDMK4l