Direct answer: Early on, many biologists treated sugars on proteins and lipids as “decorations” because they were hard to map, hard to sequence, and hard to connect to a clear function. The core problem was technical and conceptual: glycans are structurally diverse, branched, and not template-encoded as DNA and proteins are, so the field felt messy and slow-moving. (ACS Publications)

No, not all atheists accept the evidence for evolution but since the two are closely tied in public discourse, here are some arguments!

“If you study science deep enough and long enough it will force you to believe in God” Lord William Kelvin So, Lord Kelvin, clearly a great scientist, believed in God and thought that science confirmed his belief. That’s something that gets trotted out from time to time. It’s one of many arguments that are often used by creationists to promote the idea that science and god are compatible. It’s also not an argument.

Hello, everyone, Dr. Mason. I came across a video titled "10 Hidden Laws of Game Theory That Control Your Life," which had 187,202 views on January 14, 2026. The channel is titled Your Brain on Glitch: The Secrets of Human Psychology. It starts off by saying…

Why Evolution in an Atheist Publication Right off the bat, you don’t need to accept the evidence for evolution to be an atheist and there are many religions who do accept evolution, most famously the Catholic church which believes that evolution is the mechanism God uses to create diversity in life.

What exactly is Botox, and what does it really do? Botox has become a household name, but there’s still plenty of confusion around how it works and what patients should realistically expect.

Today, let us strip away the "textbook" idealism and focus on the raw facts of the matter regarding how science actually functions in the real world, which reveals a much more grounded and sometimes grittier reality. Here is the truth about the scientific establishment, written to focus on the human and systemic mechanics that drive it.

I spent 30 days identifying birds using only sound, without relying on sight. At first, bird calls blended together and highlighted how dependent they were on visual cues. Over time, patterns like rhythm, pitch, and repetition became clearer, improving listening skills and confidence (with plenty of mistakes along the way). By the end, birds felt more present in daily life, teaching that careful listening can deepen birding skills, appreciation for common species, and overall connection to nature. 🐦

What Does Science Really Want: Truth or Useful Models? Before we talk about what science has found, we should know what it is trying to do. The standard definition of science is the methodical study of the natural world via observation and experimentation. That definition seems solid and well-known. But as we look into a lot of fields nowadays, especially those that look at deep time, complex systems, or indirect evidence, the border between observation and interpretation is not as clear. So, as we move into studying cosmology, origins research, artificial intelligence, and certain areas of theoretical physics, primarily rely on models that structure data rather than on experiments that can be replicated in controlled environments. This leads to a more fundamental inquiry: is the principal aim of research to uncover the true nature of reality, or to build models that sufficiently predict and control our observations?

I explore how the definition of science keeps changing. Traditional views call it the systematic study of the physical world through observation and experiment. Modern work often crosses those borders. We build models that predict well but may not capture the absolute truth. AI generates hypotheses from data. Large simulations replace some experiments. Funding and societal needs guide priorities.

Design Biology Forensic Evaluation Protocol (DB-FEP) Meanings and Principles Reference Sheet Version 1.0 – Work in progress January 2026

Design Biology Audit of Abiogenesis: When Lab Chemistry Isn’t the Same as Early Earth Hello everyone, Dr. Mason here. I will be reviewing a video I watched called "How did life begin? Abiogenesis. The origin of life from nonliving matter by Arvin Ash. What the video is aiming to show I hear one significant assertion in this video. Chemistry can make the parts, but life might start without magic. Then, over time and with a lot of testing, those sections can move toward the first living system. The video also conveys something that matters. Evolution is not the same as abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is about the beginning of life. Evolution is about how things change after life has already started. That difference is correct and valuable.

Yet another imperfect analogy for evolution In this article, I will be trying to explain why one of the common arguments against evolution isn’t valid, and maybe give a better analogy than the common one. The argument is that random chance can’t create something — the answer is that evolution via natural selection isn’t random chance, instead, it is a rules-based system that uses random mutation for a seed condition.

This is an essay on how humans can be arrogant when it comes to world issues as a whole. It also touches on how the Earth's resources are not as infinite as we think.

This discussion explores the ethical and moral justification for human genetic modification. By slowing down to reflect on responsibility, autonomy, and long-term consequences, it argues that using genetic technology to prevent suffering, enhance well-being, and promote fairness is both morally defensible and ethically necessary. Careful oversight, transparency, and informed choice ensure that scientific progress aligns with justice and accountability, demonstrating that deliberate action guided by reasoned judgment can improve the human condition while honoring ethical responsibility.

Molecule to Mandate: The Greatest Scam of the Ages Hello everyone. My name is Dr. Dan Mason. For those who know me, I have been writing about life, politics and science. I can't seem to find my niche. I want to talk about everything. However, I did not begin this article as a writer. I started it as a man who spent decades working inside systems that claim authority over other people’s lives. I have worn many different uniforms. I have helped enforce local, state, federal and international statutes.

Dearest Vel, I have been asking you the most straightforward question, yet you still fail to answer me. My question is… Can abiogenesis and biological evolution be investigated and evaluated using the scientific method, and if so, to what extent? If you are unable to answer the question clearly, you resort to attacking me instead. When you do, your statement collapses under its own assumptions.

Atheism as a Civilizational Operating System A system's exposure of belief, control, and survival logic I am not examining atheism as a private opinion or a casual worldview. I am analyzing it as a civilizational operating system that governs how a society defines origin, authority, morality, meaning, and destiny. This is a structural exposure of atheism as a belief-governance architecture. I am not using narrative framing or cultural commentary. This is an analysis of control logic, survival dependencies, and systemic failure points. uity. It exists to keep humanity sovereign over its own definitions of truth, authority, and destiny.

What is the driving question concerning abiogenesis? When will abiogenesis fail to support itself? The more scientific research, the more complicated life becomes. At what point does the information become an abiogenesis trap when it collapses in on itself? Explain to me what will break abiogenesis in the eyes of its believers. How long can secular science and humanism hold on to abiogenesis?

Abiogenesis: The Trap of Atheism So how does atheism fit into our world, or more accurately, into our worldview? Atheists often proclaim that their lack of belief in a god is simply a harmless view, and therefore, they do not make a truth claim. Yet is that really the case? Let us now take a look at how atheism really operates as a civilizational operating system, how it governs beliefs without a transcendent Creator. Join me as I conduct this analysis to expose its structure, control points, and survival flaws. So let's set the stage; we will focus on logic alone.