The reason I would like to converse with you without shouting insults at me is that I believe you have a bit more understanding of science that many of the posters here in this sub-forum on science related topics.
I am no smarter than anyone here, and any understanding I have of any topic is simply from the desire to learn more about it.
However, whenever you enter a room, you begin shouting and ingore topics by redirecting attention by throwing errant insults.
I don't "shout". I do not capitalize all texts or embolden everything I say, although I am now emboldening quotes because it's simpler for format smaller chunks that way.
Feel free to point out some posts with redirection. I usually concentrate on specific points. If I refer to something outside the statements as a parallel or common associate to what has been stated, that is not redirection, but if you've got examples then I can look over them and see where I can adjust my clarity.
Please explain your "Here's two more words. Cognitive dissonance" statement, as IT requires context in order to pick a meaning.
Mystic scientists. The concept is an example of cognitive dissonance. Mysticism, religion, faith - none of these are evidence based.
Science is the pursuit of knowledge through the collection and analysis of evidence related to the subject of study.
Cognitive dissonance is the individual's compartmentalizing of two opposing concepts so that they can both be believed at the same time.
Eg. Francis Collins, the leader of the human genome project becoming a born-again Christian. The man's life has been dedicated to scientific evidence, and discarding that for which the evidence did not support. On the other hand he has embraced god, which he has no evidentiary proof, and admits its a strange thing to many people. That is cognitive dissonance.
Mysticism is not science. Hence, cognitive dissonance.
You also ignored my query regarding the religion of evolution.
Was that on purpose?
Yes. Contrary to the old saying, there are indeed stupid questions.
Religion is dogmatic faith.
Evolution is "change over time". It is neither dogmatic nor faith based. It (edit: Evolution) has been (edit: change), can be, and will be as long as there is change.
And why do I ignore some points or (intentionally) badly phrased questions? Because that question, like many of the religious statements that you say I'm rude in answering were already addressed and I'm not a babysitter for the intellectually lazy.
"I don't much care for spam, which many of your posts are."
I believe this to be a subjective, undefined, purely insultious claim.
Okay, let's define it:
spam: Stupid Pointless Annoying Messages.
Yup, it's subjective. Yup, it's "insultious".
But guess what? It got you to stop talking like a badly programmed copy of Eliza for 5 minutes.
"You started thread after thread of garbage until people asked you to stop."
False
Someone finally was polite enough to ask me to explain.
Oddly enough you still don't bother to.
One person even expressed concern that you might have a physical illness because they said another user had talked like you before dying.
If you believe Mystical Scientist to be an oxymoron, please insert your own favorite flavor of scientist from your real world.
Flavor? Are we supposed to be tasting them?
Are you looking for any specific discipline of science here? I don't have a favorite. The fact that the religious have a special fear of biological sciences killing their god, and therefore a phobia of it means having to constantly address biology, but some also spout complete nonsense about thermodynamics.
Please try to communicate here, rather than just attempting to redirect attention by spamming anyone that attempts to rationally discuss anything with you with flaming internet insults.
I am a Spiritual, not religious person, and I don't give a flying fuck how you classify yourself, because whatever it is, so long as you keep it out of my throat, I don't give a damn.
You feel free to swallow whatever you want. And when you start your own mystical forum you can kick my ass off of it.
Someone's getting angry now, and talking in full sentences. I see a trend here.
It is you, Mr. Morgentaler, who has repeatedly stated that your purpose here is to deconvert Christians so they will begin to vote like you do.
Show me saying anything about getting anyone to vote like me? You don't even know my political affiliation or if I have one.
No, I have never stated that my purpose is to deconvert Christians.
My purpose is to get people to provide evidence for the claims they provide, or use critical thinking skills to demand and analyze that evidence. That I have stated.
Whatever happens after they start looking at things with a critical eye is up to them.