Atheist book summary:-Atheists who declare God is dead, because science says so, MUST be answered. Atheists can not be debated at the level of theology or from the Bible. They laugh at religion and make fun of the Bible. One must use the same science they use and show that there is more than one way to interpret the experimental results and conclusions. My scientific background as a trained physician allows me to do this. -Among the current neo-atheists, a chief culprit is Richard Dawkins whose raucous fun-making goes beyond the bounds of decency and logic. Putting him in his place is a major subject of this book, but more importantly, I show science alone can be used to prove there must be a God.-In this book I barely mention religion or biblical stories, but instead as a trained scientist I have presented scientific findings in a manner that proves the existence of God beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the furthest any of us can go, since absolute proof can never be possible. I use and refute many quotes from Richard Dawkins' books, debates and interviews and I use the same science as he does, but by highlighting not only the flaws in his reasoning but also the huge gaps in his knowledge (or perhaps his deliberate exclusion of the facts that do not suit his case). The book is also a definitive reference source for a religious leader who wishes to combat atheism in homilies or sermons, or in the classroom. -Chapter summaries will give you a glimpse of what is in store for the reader:-Chapter One establishes the argument that there must be a First Cause, an eternal beginning point. We cannot get something from absolutely nothing. That defies reason, a point made by most philosophers.-Chapter Two discusses the characteristics of our universe and its origin in the Big Bang, which is a definite beginning, with all the appearances of a creation. It is strikingly fine-tuned to create life, as is our planet Earth.-Chapter Three describes the sixty years of futile research into a possible mechanism for the origin of life, which appeared rather quickly after the Earth was formed and cooled down. All science has learned so far is what does not work. -Chapter Four outlines the very complex workings of DNA, chemistry so complicated it makes nonsense of the suggestion that it all developed by chance mutations. It is a digital code, far in advance of any developed so far by the human mind. There are only 20,000 + human genes to code for protein, but most of the six-foot long molecule (when stretched out) is filled with modifiers to make us as complex as we are. -Chapter Five attacks directly the step-by-step gradualism of evolution as theorized by Darwin. The main topic is the Cambrian Explosion, the appearance 540 million years ago of all the ancestors of today's 35 existing animal phyla (families). Evolution suddenly jumps from the very simplest organisms to highly complex forms in one swift step. There are NO transitional fossils. - Chapter Six presents the development of humans as very special, creating a marked difference in kind rather than degree from apes, because of the uniqueness of our intellect and consciousness, and in our very different upright posture. We may superficially resemble other primates in body form but our intellectual capacities are vastly different. -Chapter Seven looks into the experiences of near-to-dying patients. whose brains are clinically dead but who are then resuscitated. The findings strongly suggest that consciousness and hence personal identity can survive death, and hence enter an after-life.- Chapter Eight is an excursion into the amazing instinctive arrangements that life can make: cooperative ventures between animals or between plants and animals, migrations over thousands of miles, and extremely complex life cycles. Again the various mechanisms involve such intricate engineering, that it seems well nigh absurd to attribute their origins to the chance mutations proposed by Darwin's theory, bearing in mind that Natural Selection can only work on existing organs and organisms.-The final chapter summarizes the preceding arguments. No particular religion is discussed. The reader is invited to shake off any pre-existing ideas and simply to reason with me. The weight of evidence for God's existence from science is overwhelming, but I would not wish to impose any one concept of God on the reader, because that is where faith must take over from science.