Atheism

[SteveII]

For any of this to be valid, you would have to show that science has disproved/called into question religious experiences. It has not come even close, not a little, at all. You are repeating a theory that you backed into: religious experiences are not true, therefore their must be a scientific reason for them, therefore there is a scientific reason for them. This is question begging.

I wasn't asking anything at all. I was pointing out Mathilda's mis-step as she relies on her underlying scientism/logical positivism philosophy sprinkled with a healthy dose of circular reasoning.

No. You were deflecting from the original point that people's religious experiences mirror the culture that they are immersed in and that rather than rely on a single brain that interprets reality, it's better to rely on hundreds of thousands of brains spread across different cultures with a method to reliably investigate reality in an impartial way.

Two points, 

1. We have hundreds of millions of brains relating their experiences for 2000 years. 
2. What do you think that "hundreds of thousands of brains spread across different cultures with a method to reliably investigate reality in an impartial way" has indicated? It seems you are just asserting some observation that disproves people's religious experiences. How is that NOT: religious experiences are not true, therefore their must be a scientific reason for them, therefore there is a scientific reason for them. If you are not going to put up some recognized proof, you are asserting your conclusion, you are question begging.