The selfless gene "probably made also him more social or something" and on this rock of an argument you edit Darwin's theory of natural selection? Darwin didn't need to include any guesses "probably's" or "maybe's" to explain how the Galapagos finches received their unique beak shapes. By...
A species where ALL members self-sacrifice in order to save the group has obvious advantages over a cutthroat society. That I will not debate against. However, it doesn't seem like you consider how a species could reach such a point if morality, altruism, and self-sacrifice are emergent...
I am not and have never argued here against evolution, so all but your last paragraph is completely irrelevant to me as I do deny the ability of self-sacrifice to evolve.
I don't think you're bringing anything new to the table for me.
No, I did not make a fearful assumption about atheism in general. This is about your specific case of atheism. I have read your words so extensively that I could conclusively prove, with your testimony as evidence alone, that your worldview has either very recently changed from anti-theism to...
I've watched you spend endless paragraphs making claims about your expertise in history while at the same time treating historical evidence you don't like as if you were a hostile counsel in a court of law. I've watched you do the same for your claims of expertise in espionage and then...
If I have offered nothing, you offer less than nothing, what with your evidently fake credentials (Are you an historian today? Or perhaps today you are an expert on ancient espionage? :p), your denials that one can have a human brother without being human himself, your refusals to understand...
I feel I have good reason to doubt that you have anything beyond a vague idea of what fundamentalism entails. Coming from a place of relative ignorance, you seem to reason that fundamentalism necessarily must associate with religiosity, making your denial that such a thing as a fundamentalist...
I don't think you deal with any arguments well. I believe you are so blind I could break down any argument you are having into its hypocritical components with ease. I think every accusation you ever levy is something you are just as if not more guilty of. Pointing out a single example of you...
In this one as well as multiple other threads on this forum, you are blaming religion for negative traits while simultaneously putting those negative traits you pay lip service to deriding on full display yourself. You proudly claimed religion cripples its adherent's ability to reason in cases...
"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" is a proverb about the folly of judging others by standards by standards you, yourself cannot be bothered with adhering to... a basic warning against hypocrisy.
No one, to my knowledge, is suggesting that we close off religion to criticism. Everyone here is suggesting to you that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Collection of things? Really? Bereft of all support, you've equivocated into unfalsifiable language which says nothing concrete. I see no point to continuing our debate.
Then by all means in lieu of your memory, PLEASE DO USE THE WORK OF OTHERS WHO DO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. You have the resources of the entire internet at your disposal! Hell, LegionOnomaMoi is a neuroscientist. Why not ask him or google what the chemical composition of empathy is...