First of all I would like to say that religion is an important part of society. We have much to thank religion for, almost all religions, and I have no desire to attack most religions out there. My primary criticism of religion is concerned with the boundaries they sometimes represent between people -- such as in the division of Israel, Ireland, India, and so on.

I was not always an atheist. For the formative years of my life up until the age of 19, I believed in God, and perhaps for a few years I was able to commune with something inside me that I thought might not be me, but God. I am not out for revenge -- not anymore. I would like to stress that belief in God has made me a better person. It has imbued me with a strong sense of moderation and discipline that helps me in my everyday life.

I think a better way for me to describe myself is a secular humanist. What that means is that I am in love with the human race. I want to see it prosper. But I do not believe in God, therefore I cannot accept that religion is the proper means to that end. Somewhere along the line, all religions fail because all teach "truths" that fail. It may be disheartening, but we have a difficult time grasping the nature of the universe. Truth is not in the eye of the beholder. Science acknowledges that our understanding of the Cosmos will never be absolute, but science is still the most reliable system available to us today. Therefore I advocate that mankind unite under science. I only wish that this did not place me at odds with religion.

I love nature. I can remember being interested in studying nature from the age of three. One of the things that strikes me about my transformation from theist to atheist is the way I saw the biological world on Earth. As a theist studying evolution, I was often impressed by the mechanical workings of the tiny organisms we studied. We studied all sorts of animals, from the single-celled amoeba up to the human machine. But some of that wonder was limited by the casual dismissal that "God made it," and therefore the wondrous machine was actually easier to take for granted. And taking evolution and biology as a whole for granted is something I think is really sad. Most people have far less desire to pay attention to it than I do. Sometimes I wonder if belief and curiosity are mutually exclusive. Why have we warned our children that "curiosity killed the cat"? Though with the good we take the bad, curiosity is perhaps the most beautiful part of our intellect.

When I look at the people I know closely who are religious, I know two different kinds of people. One is the kind that has studied science and biology in particular and accepts parts of evolution only, while maintaining a steadfast belief in God -- pointing to the gaps in scientific proof as evidence enough. The other kind has little interest in science, and relies on faith alone. The former is active in their personal growth and education, they are self reliant and I often find them charismatic. The latter is less practical, relying on faith to pull them through tough times and their religious code to solve their interpersonal struggles. Many are simply followers, delegating the power and control they have over their lives to the hands of a power that does not even exist. What I have to say here applies to both groups of religious people.

For thousands of years mankind has used science and religion interchangeably. It has gotten to the point where it is difficult to understand why they absolutely, positively do not share the same essence. Unresearched explanations for the world were the first ones used. Our origins were far too deep and complex for early man to understand immediately. But as our minds are geared to understand everything in terms of cause and effect, it was necessary for us -- as beings aware of our own mortality -- to answer some of the most pressing questions. Early man probably realized that he was not able to get all the right answers, but he chose answers that would serve his descendants well until they could better ascertain the truth. But these answers were treated as absolutes.
Since then, science has uncovered alternate answers to many questions that early man had answered incompletely. We have overturned many absolute truths. We have an excellent theory for the origin of life on Earth, one that is probably almost entirely correct. Evolution cannot deny the possibility of life on other planets. The Earth is not flat. Stars are enourmous, distant balls of fire. Stars move in orbits and along gravitational lines, not on spheres as was once thought. They are many times bigger than Earth. The Earth is not the center of the universe.

With these statements already accepted by practically anyone who consults the evidence, we ought to wonder why the religions based on absolute truths have been not overturned. The most religion-friendly answer I can accept is that God didn't offer some of the answers to the questions early man happened to be looking for. So early man had to ad-lib them. More likely is that early man ad libbed all of them.

Could man really have invented God? I think so, and I have good reasons why. There is a lot more to this than I'm afraid I can convincingly squeeze into a paragraph. My recommendation is to read "The 'God' Part of the Brain" by Matthew Alper.

Science has rejected God. Where is God in all of science, when no proof can be offered other than the intangible idea of faith? Even that "gut feeling" that God exists has been attributed to a chemical reaction that helps soothe the ego and calm the senses. In reading a chapter entitled "The City of Grief" in Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World" I came upon a very telling sentiment. Sagan posts a letter in which the writer exclaims that science has been able to discount 99% of all alien abduction reports, "but can it ever be 100%?" I think this is a common, very easy way to misunderstand science. Since science cannot claim to have absolute truth, there is no way for it to make a real statement on fantasies that evade all scientific testing. But if the data shows that 99% of all claims are false, and the rest have insufficient evidence, science can reliably point to the preponderance of evidence as the most practical solution. As it applies to aliens sexually molesting us for no good reason, so does it apply to a God that cannot prove His own existence. If we claim something exists but not a shred of evidence exists, it might as well not exist, right?

And now some more about Me

On the internet my alias is Solaar. I'm a nice guy in real life, a mild mannered blonde who loves to think and draw. I am quiet and shy with strangers, but easygoing with friends. I spent two and a half years studying at NYU, and majored in media and communications. I haven't taken a job in the field of sell-outs, though, instead I am an entrepeneur. I plan to start a video game company. On the way is a game called "The Bard's Legacy" 
I enjoy drawing, watching movies, spending time on the computer, and role playing games. I read and write in my leisure, mostly science-related nonfiction as well as science fiction (yes, reading andwriting in both of these fields). 
If you would like to know more about me, you are best off introducing yourself to me in an email. Right now, admittedly, there are no throngs of fans eagerly sending me feedback, but don't be shy. Chances are if you are visiting this site, I personally invited you. I don't do anything to make my site found on the net, it matters naught to me. If you do decide to email me, send me feedback. What I want to know is which images you found unappealing or lacking in design flavor. Let me know what your favorite page heading graphic is, and which is your least favorite. And of course comments on the site, whatever you feel like pointing out. 
On the right is a self-portrait that I tend to use a lot to represent myself. It is a solaar, a type of Aasimon from which I take my name, carrying a mithril clabbard. On his forehead is the Promethean spark, the symbol of scientific discovery. It is a symbol I feel a great closeness to. I believe that humankind is ready to begin working together instead of against one another. With unity we can begin a new era of prosperity and unity. Businesses can be a force for good, and life can expand beyond the Earth. We can make it possible, we just have to start looking outward.