Although science has, all the time, dissuaded us from believing that any entity recognized as “God” may exist or may have existed since it is a “physically imperceptible entity”; this argument has become null and void after the discovery of the existence of “dark matter” and “dark energy” since both of these things happen to be physically imperceptible things.

The fact is, much in the same way as the astronomers have proved the existence of dark matter and dark energy, industrial engineers who may have specialized in Management Information Systems, can prove that following type of physically imperceptible superhuman entities should have existed on Earth.

I am of the view that, though we may not regard such superhuman entities as “God”, we may regard the entity which should have created such entities as “God”.

The way we may prove the existence of such superhuman entities, which should have developed the following types of botanical information systems

Though the roots of all trees and plants suck the same ingredients from the soil, is it not true that same type of plant or tree grows from such ingredients, to which the seed sown in the soil may have belonged?

Does it not imply that each seed may be having embedded in it some invisible module that may be transferring the knowledge of “the type of leaves to be grown”, “the type of flowers to be grown” and “the type of fruits or vegetables to be grown” to the ingredients of the soil sucked by the roots of the tree or the plant from the soil that may grow from the seed which may have been sown because the roots of all trees and plants suck same ingredients from the soil?

JUST THINK, “IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ANY HUMAN BOTANIST TO DEVELOP SUCH MODULES?”

Sure enough, nobody may ever be able to develop such modules.

Such modules, obviously, could have been developed only by some superhuman entities having a brain thousands of times more proficient than the human brain.

DOES IT NOT IMPLY THAT SUCH SUPERHUMAN ENTITIES SHOULD HAVE EXISTED ON THE EARTH WHEN SUCH PLANTS AND TREES HAD NOT YET GROWN ON THE EARTH?

The way we may prove the existence of such superhuman entities, which should have developed the following types of oological information systems

Just look at the following diagram, which shows the cross-section of the egg of a chicken.

Although it shows the visible structure of an egg, it does not show where the “invisible information module of the egg” that tells each cell of the egg what it has to do in which sequence from day one onward during the entire period of incubation, sits.

Rubbish!

Neither the oological creatures could have, themselves, calculated what should be the composition of the yokes and the albumins, nor how much yoke, how much albumen, how much fat and air should be encapsulated in their eggs.

But don’t you think, some entity should have evolved some module lying somewhere in each egg that may be telling in which sequence, which cells of the eggs have to get converted into what type of tissues from the day they get laid till the oological creature to which the egg may belong, fully grows up inside the egg?

CAN ANY HUMAN OOLOGIST MAY EVER BE ABLE TO DEVELOP SUCH MODULES?

OBVIOUSLY NOT!

Any doubt, only some “superhuman entities” that may have had a brain thousands of times more capable than the human brain alone could have developed such modules?

The way we may prove the existence of such superhuman entities, which should have developed the following types of biological information systems  

Although geneticists have been able to ascertain how the zygotes grow day by day during the entire period of gestation, it has not occurred to them that in the same way as a newborn baby does not know even the name of the country in which it was born or even who may be its parents, the cells created by the zygotes are also not expected to know such things as

       (a) How many cells of which type have to be grown by them?

(b) How do they have to grow such cells?

(c) Where do such cells have to be eventually tugged?

Just imagine the caliber of the entity that should have embedded somewhere in the womb, that may be making such information available to as many as 30-40 trillion cells of as many as 200–220 distinct types, the fully grown human fetus consists of.

Don’t you think that some module must be providing such information to them?

A question arises, “If so, what should have been the caliber of the entities which should have developed such information modules for each type of mammal?”

Is it possible for any human geneticist to develop such a complex and elaborate module and install it somewhere in the womb of a pregnant woman?

No chance!

ONLY SOME SUCH ENTITIES, WHICH SHOULD HAVE HAD A BRAIN THOUSANDS OF TIMES MORE CAPABLE THAN THE HUMAN BRAIN ALONE, COULD HAVE DEVELOPED SO COMPLICATED MODULES.

The fact is, much in the same way as although our eyes have not been designed to see ultraviolet and infrared rays, such rays exist  and even though our ears have not been designed to sense the subsonic and supersonic sound waves, such waves also exist —  we should believe that such entities should have also existed even though our brain has not been designed to know how such entities should have come into existence.

But because it is estimated that there may be approximately 50 sextillion (5 times 10^22) potentially habitable planets in the observable universe, we can’t call all of such entities “GOD”.

BUT NOTHING SEEMS TO BE WRONG IN REGARDING THE ENTITY WHICH SHOULD HAVE CREATED SUCH ENTITIES AS “GOD”.

What is true about the existence of the superhuman entities is also true about the existence of the entity which should have created such superhuman entities.  

Our brain has not been designed to know how the entity which should have created such superhuman entities, may have come into existence.

Though there is no such word as “Swayambhoo” in  English, this word exists in the Sanskrit language, which started developing approximately 3500 to 4000 years ago (around 1500-2000 BCE) and translates into “self-born entity,” “self-manifested entity” or “the entity existing by its own accord“.     

Obviously, it should have been used for the entity known as “God” only  Since if science uses the same word “God” for the type of entity described by me as “God”, people would think that science has acknowledged the existence of the entity regarded as “God” by various religions, I suggest that science may use the word “Göd” instead of searching for a new word for the entity defined by me as “God“.