Atheism is inconsistent with the scientific method.

For the Colson Center, I'm John Stone Street with the point.

Templeton Prize winner Marco Gleiser made waves when he said that back in 2019.

In his view, atheism is a categorical statement of belief and doesn't depend on evidence as much as assumptions.

This, of course, clashes with the claims of the so-called new atheists, that science has officially debunk God as an explanation for the universe.

Kleizer is an agnostic. He thinks scientists shouldn't close off the possibility of God.

This accomplished scientist is saying something very important. Atheism is not science's default position.

On the other hand, it's important to note that science is not silent on the God question either,

which is why generations of scientists have been drawn to a belief in the Creator, because of what they say

they see in the universe they observe. To put it another way, atheism isn't inconsistent

with the scientific method just because it's a categorical belief, but because it denies

the order, complexity, and intentionality that we see in the universe.

For the Colson Center, I'm John Stone Street with The Point.