The Bell test experiments and the double-slit experiment proves that matter and consciousness are entangled. That's interesting. Well, I know all matter was created in the Big Bang, and all its scientific properties were set at that instant. Sure, matter has undergone many countless changes in form for untold billions of years. But its all still the same matter that was created in the Big Bang.
There obviously were no humans, or anything alive, at the time of the Big Bang. Yet, matter and consciousness are entangled. Therefore, I have no choice but to just accept that there had to be a consciousness when the Big Bang occurred.
But this opens up a can of worms. Can it be that consciousness doesn't require a host made of matter to exist? Can this mean life can go on after death? Can this mean that things we would consider "ghosts" or "spirits" are actually real? So God is real?
As an atheist, I've always taken so much pride in how I require scientific proof for everything. It makes me come across as so intelligent.
So how do I come across as atheist/intelligent, without spouting off about how I require scientific proof for everything? Is it OK for an atheist to cherry-pick scientific proof for only things I want to believe in, yet still come across as intelligent? When science begins proving things I don't want to believe, I think it indicates the time has come for science to be banned. All atheists need to sign some kind of a petition, if we want to preserve our culture and our way of life.
We atheists have always put so much faith in science. And for what? It turns around and bites us in the ass.
