Skip to content

Yet Another Example of Dumb Atheist Scientists

Dan Shecktman Spews Eggs on Atheist Linus Pauling

In yet another example of the ENTIRE scientific community being wrong and ONE man being right, a Jewish scientist proves that ‘science was wrong.’ Just like one man thought the earth revolved around the sun, right? And yet, atheist scientists continue their historic arrogant march of ignorance- blinded by their own hubris, so sure in their ability to ‘know’ anything at all and their NEED to believe what they want to believe.  In the article below, you will see a ‘good’ scientist who believes in humility and that ANYTHING is possible. Ridiculed by the ‘best scientists’ of the modern-day and ignobly kicked out of the prevailing science community, he rises supreme above them all in victory as he claims the most coveted recognition in the science community- the Nobel Prize. He takes a dig at his nemesis, Linus Pauling, who mocked him as a ‘quasi-scientist’. Pauling is listed as being one of the 50 Greatest Atheist Minds of all time. Pauling proves the point I made in my previous article, “Why Atheists Make the Worst Scientists’, to a tee. Good science is not, nor ever can be, based on what can NOT be.  It must always keep its mind open to the possiblity that ANYTHING is possible.  Hence, atheist scientists’ claim that a belief in God is ‘unscientific’, ‘illogical’, or ‘irrational’  is equal nonsense.  A good scientist will always admit that.

STOCKHOLM — Israeli scientist Dan Shechtman was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry on Wednesday for a discovery that faced skepticism and mockery, even prompting his expulsion from his U.S. research team, before it won widespread acceptance as a fundamental breakthrough.

While doing research in the U.S. in 1982, Shechtman discovered a new chemical structure — quasicrystals — that researchers previously thought was impossible.

He was studying a mix of aluminum and manganese in an electron microscope when he found the atoms were arranged in a pattern — similar to one in some traditional Islamic mosaics — that never repeated itself and appeared contrary to the laws of nature.  He concluded that science was wrong — but it would take years for him and
other researchers to prove that he was right.

“The main lesson that I have learned over time is that a good scientist is a humble and listening scientist and not one that is sure 100 percent in what he read in the textbooks,” Shechtman, 70, told a news conference Wednesday at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa, Israel.

Israel has won 10 Nobel prizes, a source of great pride in the country of just 7.8 million people. Schechtman was congratulated by Israeli President Shimon Peres, who shared the Nobel Peace Prize as Israel’s foreign minister in 1994, and by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Every citizen of Israel is happy today and every Jew in the world is proud,” Netanyahu said.

“His battle eventually forced scientists to reconsider their conception of the very nature of matter,” the academy said.

Nancy B. Jackson, president of the American Chemical Society called Shechtman’s discovery “one of these great scientific discoveries that go against the rules.” When Shechtman announced it, other experts hesitated.

“People didn’t think that this kind of crystal existed,” she said. “They thought it was against the rules of nature.”

Only later did some scientists go back to some of their own inexplicable
findings and realized they had seen quasicrystals but not realized what they had, Jackson said.

Crystallographers always believed that all crystals have rotational symmetry, so that when they are rotated, they look the same. On April 8, 1982, while on a sabbatical at the U.S. National Bureau of Standards and Technology in Washington, D.C., Shechtman first observed crystals with 10 points — pentagonal symmetry, which most scientists said was impossible.

“I told everyone who was ready to listen that I had material with pentagonal symmetry. People just laughed at me,” Shechtman said in a description of his work released by his university.

For months he tried to persuade his colleagues of his find, but they refused to accept it. Finally he was asked to leave his research group, and moved to another one within the institute.

"Schechtman is a Quasi-Scientist! Atheists know what can NOT exist!"

Shechtman returned to Israel, where he found one colleague prepared to work with him on an article describing the phenomenon. The article was at first rejected, but finally published in November 1984 — to uproar in the scientific world. Double Nobel winner Linus Pauling was among those who never accepted the findings.

“He would stand on those platforms and declare, ‘Danny Shechtman is talking nonsense. There is no such thing as quasicrystals, only quasi-scientists.'” Shechtman said.

In 1987, friends of Shechtman in France and Japan succeeded in growing crystals large enough for x-rays to repeat and verify what he had discovered with the electron microscope.



  1. You write that Shechtman was “kicked out of the prevailing science community.” Then you write “he claims the most coveted recognition in the science community – the Nobel Prize.” Tell us, how does one win a prize from a community he’s not even a part of?

    Sure, he was unjustly kicked out of one particular research team (not the entire science community). Sure, the many scientists who were so dismissive of Shechtman’s claim turned out to be wrong. But scientists are human. They make mistakes. And besides, they had convincing reasons to think this was an absurd claim. Scientists hear incredible claims all the time, a vast majority probably false. If they jumped at every incredible claim they’d be spending most their time chasing phantoms. Being skeptical is not “dumb,” nor was every “dumb” scientist who initially rejected his claim an Atheist.

    Which brings us to the most important point. In the end it wasn’t just the triumph of this one outstanding scientist. IT WAS A TRIUMPH FOR THE ENTIRE SCIENCE COMMUNITY of Atheists and non-Atheists that you’re berating! Far from continuing their march of arrogance as you call it, they studied the evidence and finally admitted they were all wrong! What, they didn’t come around fast enough for you? Because you’re so perfect, right? Tell us, what does your holy book say about personal pride and being judgmental of others?

    What would be even more humorous is if Shechtman himself is an Atheist, if it’s an Atheist scientist you’re praising. He could just be a cultural Jew. How the heck would you know? I’ve searched and searched the internet, and I cannot find any mention of whether or not he believes in god. Now I’d agree Pauling was an Atheist who behaved like a real jerk in this one case, but aside from that, do tell us how he managed to win the Nobel and make invaluable contributions to chemistry if Atheists make the worst scientists? Or all the other accomplished Atheist scientists for that matter. Do tell.

    And ya, belief in god is unscientific because you don’t have any science to support that belief. If/when you do, Atheists like me will change our minds because WE ARE OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY of god’s existence. Even Richard Dawkins says this! So much for your pathetic attempt to portray Atheist scientists as claiming there cannot be a god.

    Yes, science has been wrong about things. Science is very likely wrong about some things right now. WE KNOW THIS! And science will keep changing and improving. That is science’s strength, not its weakness. Better luck next time with your blogging.

    • oooooooooOOOOHHHWEEEE! Atheists just all up in arms over this article and my other article, “Why Atheists Make the Worst Scientists. They just hate these assertions and never speak to them. The usual response is to call me a dirty name. The second most popular thing to is attack my intelligence. A close runner is to attack my education. The last option is to talk about stuff not in my article. Sarcasm is the usual syrup on their stinking ice cream sunday…

      Joe, the science community HAD to give him the prize or look verrrrry stupid and arrogant.

      The point of this article was to show the ARROGANCE of a supposedly great atheist mind. This is the NUMBER ONE reason atheist scientists are not ‘good’ scientists- their massive, unbending egos stand in their way of true knowledge. My point is this: an intelligent mind is made BETTER when it is open to all possibilities- especially when there is so much evidence toward that possibility (which there IS for God). Atheism is a belief in the NEGATIVE and hence, weak.

      As for there being no proof of God, you are ridiculously wrong, my friend. The evidence even lies within YOU and you know it. That is why there are no real atheists. They KNOW God exists and it makes them madder-n-hell. Because they don’t WANT to bow down and they don’t WANT to follow any rules not of their making. Plain & simple.

      The scientific and anthropological evidence of God is compelling to say the very least. To ignore this evidence is to limit yourself from the obvious- making you into a bad thinker all around, let alone a bad science thinker..Good luck with that, Joe. But someday, you will have to answer to God for your pert statements and for calling the Living God ‘a god’. God killed the Assyrian king for the same thing..If I was you, I would tread very lightly- but its not my life at stake…

  2. Ok, I’ll go you one better than quasicrystals. Several in fact. I have a theory to calculate chemicals by maths alone, and I have already calculated several new molecules within fifteen minutes.
    The “theory” that you have that atheists make bad scientists is hereby disproven by Einstein, Hawking, and other talented scientists.

    • First, Einstein wasn’t stupid enough to believe science negates God. He never said he was an atheist. His mind was curious and open to all possibilities. As for Hawking & ‘other scientists’, they would be even better if their minds were truly open to the Truth. Being born with intelligence does not make you a good scientist. Knowing that everything you do is WRONG does. Pursuing knowlege without constraints or opinions which will sway your research or conclusions does. These men, when they claim that God can not exist are, by definition, limiting their own search for the truth. It’s too bad. Who knows what they would have done?

      Further, I highly doubt that Albert Einstein would have just handed over his research on Nuclear weapons had he been truly guided by God. In many ways, he is the father of ultimate destruction.

      Lastly, Andrew. When I write an article, I welcome comments that actually address my article. Comments that are name calling, hate oriented or off topic (as your bragging about what YOU can do is), then they are banned from my site. These are the stated rules of this blog.

  3. Found to be lying (an unChristian act) about Pauling? Call it nitpicking.
    Find someone with a superior intellect to you (not difficult)? Call them a troll; spit out your dummy; threaten them with hell (so YOU decide now?); ban them.

    This blog obviously has pretensions of being intelligent, yet is the immensely closed minded, and reallu quite sad.

    • He was an arrogant man. As his pontificating about quasicrystals demonstrates so well. Is that all you have to say? Or to point out? Did you miss the whole part where I mock your atheist god for his arrogance? Didn’t that little part bother you? How about the fact that Pauling was completely wrong? How about the whole eggs on his corpse face thing? None of THAT bothered you, but my statement that he was proud of being hailed as one of the greatest atheists of all time does? Nit picking is the last refuge of the trapped, Phosphiend.

      You second sentence is just filled with anger and bile- a common ailment among atheists, I’ve noted. They are trolls- just as you are. Trolls are defined as people who won’t address the article and wish to sidetrack from it. They are also people filled with nastiness and devoid of politeness. And guess what? As it is my blog, I guess I get to define who the trolls are. Go Republic! Go Freedom! I know that bothers you trolls, but there it is. You can burn your flags, I can troll people. Write your own blog.

      I certainly don’t decide on who goes to hell- the Bible is pretty clear about mocking God, though. Just repeating what I read. Does it bother you? Yes, atheists will go to hell. As, no doubt, Linus Pauling did. Unless he repented on his death bed. God is that generous.

      Of course I can ban people! I love doing it too. It rids my readership of their nonsense.

      • You go girl. I find liberals in general are the most pretentious and completely closed minded to anyone or anything that contradicts their PC mindset. They only tolerate diversity if it is far out and left wing fringe.

        Blessings on you and yours

      • Hi John,

        How are you doing these day? Hope you can send an email update when you get the chance. Conservatives need to get our message out- loud & clear. The liberal voice is so shrill, though. It is how they hope to drown out reason. These wall street protests (now headed up by organized labor (surprise!)) will be the death of this nation if we conservatives do not fight the good fight.

  4. “Pauling took pride in being one of the 50 Greatest Atheist Minds of all time.”

    He did? That’s a good trick, considering he died in 1994, and the list you link to was created about a year ago and includes Mark Zuckerberg, who was ten years old in 1994.

    • I’m with you on this one. This article is just so ridiculous I’m not sure if I should laugh or feel sorry for her due to her complete lack of critical thinking skills.

  5. This article is so absurd and so full of logical fallacies that I had trouble deciding where to begin. First of all, Linus Pauling was a great scientist despite being wrong about quasi crystals. Being an atheist did not make him a bad scientist as this article claims. Secondly, it is bible believers who have historically stood against scientific inquiry (i.e. the Catholic church against Galileo, Kepler etc.) not atheists. Thirdly, it is bible believers who claim they already know the truth without the benefit of any scientific discovery. Scientists, be they atheist, agnostic or otherwise are always open to being shown their opinions and beliefs to be false.

    There are so many more holes I can poke in your absurd article but I won’t bother.

    • Nissim, oh, go ahead and try, won’t you? I mean, poking holes in my article. Don’t be shy. I know it is so easy for atheists to sling their hash, but they never have any time to justify it! It is just so hard to take anyone seriously who comes to my site, criticizes and then doesn’t have the time or the inclination to ‘bother’ to poke thier holes. ummm, hummm.

      Nissim, Brian, since you can not address the ARTICLE or any part of it, then you are officially trolled. See, no freedom of speech here! Doesn’t that just sizzle you? But not as much as you will sizzle if you don’t find your way back to God, that is. Good luck with that!

  6. Yes atheistic scientists are not the only arrogant scientists, the libs are as well rejecting any scientific refuation of CO2 caused global warming.

    Sister Kenney stood the whole medical community on its ear when she dared to suggest that the medical treatment for polio was all wrong back in the fifties. She was a lone wolf enduring the medical community’s collective scorn until she was proven right.

    Blessings on you and yours
    John Wilder

%d bloggers like this: