"After searching a bit about Mano Singham, I have just found out he is a militant atheist and an atheist zealot, sadly. But yet, his article about falseability is quite good. Despite I strongly disagree with his books and writings about atheist. I seriously think and support that scientists shouldn’t be atheists at all, but rather they should be agnostic, just like Marcelo Gleiser, or still have their religious/spiritual beliefs, just like Reinaldo José Lopes, Guy Consolmagno, Ascending Luminosity (Jonathan Riley), or just like most scientists of the areas of spiritual sciences, or even like other religious/spiritual scientists out there. And also, I strongly disagree with the whole “freethought” thing, if you have read my other comments and texts doing criticism of freethought you will understand me. I mean, yes, everyone, including scientists, should have the right to choose between be religious/spiritual, agnostic or atheist. And yes, Mano Singham, as well as so many others out there, are wrong when it is about “scientists should be atheists” or some more extremists who say “all scientists should be militant atheists” and such things, I mean, yeah, some scientists are atheists, but it doesn’t mean they are anti-religious or anti-spiritual, the impression that people like Mano Singham, as well as so many others out there, give is that science is equal to atheism and that everyone should be forced into being an atheist, and it is nonsense, for do not say it is militant atheism, atheist fanaticism, atheist fundamentalism and atheist extremism. The problem is that mass media and the Internet give a lot of voice to those people, and it is really bad. I say that scientists should be whatever they want, and not necessary be atheists, and more, scientists should counter militant atheism and antitheism, and not join it or support it, because militant atheism (which includes atheist fanaticism, atheist fundamentalism, totalitarian atheism, state atheism, and atheist extremism) and antitheism are just like religious fundamentalism and like what the Taliban is doing in the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan or just like what ISIS did and still do with the Middle East, militant atheism and antitheism are just like that, but rather in psychological, emotional and “scientific” terms rather than physical terms. And yes, falseability might be a completely myth, as Mano Singham said, but I strongly disagree with Mano Singham when it is about “scientists should be atheists”. And I seriously think that the views/opinions/statements of Marcelo Gleiser, Reinaldo José Lopes, Guy Consolmagno, and Ascending Luminosity (Jonathan Riley) about religion and science are more worthy, valid and better than militant atheist nonsense, fanatical atheist nonsense, atheist fundamentalist nonsense or atheist extremist nonsense things said by people like Mano Singham, Daniel Foschetti Gontijo, Dave Farina, Bibi Bailas and such people who support militant atheist nonsense, fanatical atheist nonsense, atheist fundamentalist nonsense or atheist extremist nonsense things. And that is one of the reasons I am a harsh antiatheist and a harsh critic of atheism, and people should be encouraged to become antiatheists and critics of atheism, as well as to become critical antiscience and critics of science, but that is my own opinion/view/statement, and you all are free to disagree with me on that, as well as with others."

-