I find this article rather confused in its progression from one random statement to another. First of all, real science is based on observation of phenomenon, not on random wacko beliefs. Nor is real science addicted to the latest misleading analogy. Secondly, the notion that atheists "don't believe in anything" is equally naive. Atheists doubtless believe in lots of things, such as the need to pay the mortgage, the superiority of reason over brute force, and all manner of other philosophical musings. The fact that atheists don't believe in childish invisible magical creatures is hardly equivalent to "not believeing in anything." Lastly, it's difficult to understand what the author is trying to convey, as the whole piece reads like a precocious five-year-old's first essay on existentialism: the fundamental concepts aren't clear, the train of reasoning is fragile at best, and the overall argument non-existent. Perhaps a rewrite, with a lot more thought going into it, would result in a less incoherent ramble.

Anyone who enjoys my articles here on Medium may be interested in my books Why Democracy Failed and The Praying Ape, both available from Amazon.