No one here denies the contribution of Catholics to science . . . .

According to Duhem and the OP, they did more than just contribute to it. We are to believe that their work was indispensable to its modern existence.

Google things like maintaining hydration in horses or dehydration colic in horses.

I did.

Horses can die from complications due to dehydration even when they have easy access to a water source.

They're in a pathological state when that happens. I was thinking of horses in a normal state of health.

Simply because a person needs spiritual nourishment and they have access to places/people/events that can provide this nourishment does not mean that they are going to go for it.

As far as I can tell, spiritual starvation is an imaginary malady. Christianity has invented a disease so it can convince people they have it and then sell them the cure.

Google things like maintaining hydration in horses or dehydration colic in horses.

I did.

Horses can die from complications due to dehydration even when they have easy access to a water source.

They're in a pathological state when that happens. I was thinking of horses in a normal state of health.

Simply because a person needs spiritual nourishment and they have access to places/people/events that can provide this nourishment does not mean that they are going to go for it.

As far as I can tell, spiritual starvation is an imaginary malady. Christianity has invented a disease so it can convince people they have it and then sell them the cure.

Thanks for your thoughts Doug. After reading through your reply, I don't think there is much left to say besides we agree to disagree on a number of things. I've explained multiple times what I mean about the atmosphere within the sciences, and I believe a number of your replies further confirm my beliefs.

In regards to your comment about a horse will drink once it's thirsty... you are incorrect... Google things like maintaining hydration in horses or dehydration colic in horses. Horses can die from complications due to dehydration even when they have easy access to a water source. Regardless, it is an analogy, and one that I believe is appropriate. Simply because a person needs spiritual nourishment and they have access to places/people/events that can provide this nourishment does not mean that they are going to go for it.

Take care,
James

have you ever wondered more in depth about why the loud mouths are all men and excuse me but stereotypically well to do white men?

No, I haven't wondered much about that, because I don't think the main problem with loudmouths is who they are. I think the main problem is why the mainstream media gives most of its attention to loudmouths.

but if things aren't all going well for you i wonder what the appeal is of a bunch of guys basically telling your a "dummy red neck" if you believe in sky fairies - just comes as very insulting to ALOT of ppl.

Yes, it's insulting, and gratuitously so, in my judgment. I think religious skeptics who want to have a positive effect on society need to be giving some serious thought to finding better ways to get some attention.

And some of us are trying. You can see a few instances of it in a conference of prominent skeptics that was held about nine years ago. You can watch it at http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-science-religion-reason-and-survival.

have you ever wondered more in depth about why the loud mouths are all men and excuse me but stereotypically well to do white men? besides that tyson guy it's all sort of frat boy -esque rich white dudes who imho kind of can afford to reject traditional religion bc they're all super educated intelligent and basically rich...i get the appeal if you're also rich secular and white in a big city but if things aren't all going well for you i wonder what the appeal is of a bunch of guys basically telling your a "dummy red neck" if you believe in sky fairies - just comes as very insulting to ALOT of ppl.

Atheism is not a world view, and it is not supposed to account for anything.

what's the point of it then?

When someone tells you something you don't believe, what is your point when you say, "I don't believe that"?

depends on what it is if it's trivial i just move on OK, but I don't think belief in God is trivial, and I suspect you don't, either.

but you folks don't just "move on" right? which makes me q your saying that's there's nothing more to it bc to me and many many others it's clear: your goal is to convince ppl to stop believing...which i think is cruel and immoral but again that's a whole other topic.

The "more to it" is not in atheism itself. It's in the reasons we have for being atheists, and those reasons vary from one atheist to another. Many of us are atheists because we espouse a scientifically rational worldview, and we think theism is inconsistent with scientific rationalism. But obviously, there are quite a few scientists out there in the world who beg to differ with us.

btw atheism would have a MUCH more positive image if it started BUILDING UP rather than trying to tear down and everyone knows it…

In atheism per se, there is nothing to build on. In science and reason, though, I think there is all we need to build a better world than the one we're living in now.

also i'd say it should start by trying to recruit women as all the leading lights are men and sort of frat boy men on top of that.

Plenty of atheists are working very hard to change that, but the atheist community is just as human as any other community. People who say they are committed to science and reason don't always act as if they really were, and atheist advocates for social justice are no exception.

Hi Doug, sorry I haven't replied yet. Super busy with work and haven't had the time to read through everything and devote some time to what u have said. I will get back to u though.

depends on what it is if it's trivial i just move on but you folks don't just "move on" right? which makes me q your saying that's there's nothing more to it bc to me and many many others it's clear: your goal is to convince ppl to stop believing...which i think is cruel and immoral but again that's a whole other topic.

btw atheism would have a MUCH more positive image if it started BUILDING UP rather than trying to tear down and everyone knows it...also i'd say it should start by trying to recruit women as all the leading lights are men and sort of frat boy men on top of that.