Angry Atheists and Anti-Theists

[Belacqua]

I saw you mention my favorite scientist and couldn't help myself

I find Dawkins painful to watch, but I'd also be ultra-skeptical about Ben Stein and others who think they can stump him on evolution. Their gotcha questions nearly always betray an ignorance of the subject. 

British philosopher John Gray has a new book called Seven Types of Atheism. His first type is the New Atheist group, and I agree with him that they are, for the most part, entertainers. No doubt they give encouragement to lonely doubters in fundamentalist families, but thinking people will outgrow them right away. 

Pessimisim is my middle name. Karl Pessimist Popper. 

Popper, on the other hand, is someone to take seriously. I have found his Three Worlds structure to be very useful. 

I know iv been aggressive to begin with here but i've been fair. 

Web sites like this one, just like high school, have unwritten rules that everyone must abide by or face sustained attack. These are not official rules concerning the moderators, but behavioral things even more strongly enforced "from below" -- just as wearing the wrong kind of jeans in high school can invite an astonishing level of attack, you must behave here according to the norms. 

How much you obey these mores is up to you. If you want to focus on the topic rather than the presentation you have to play along. 

They cannot explain the most basic of questions without blowing a fuse and trying to mock you for questioning

A lot of people get pleasure from mockery. Again, it's up to you how much you want to put up with. On a site like this you learn pretty quickly who to avoid. 

But genuine questioning is good, and patient responses from you will eventually draw out some considered opinions. 

There is a long list of hoaxes and frauds that have been fabricated by theoretical science to push their theory. 
They tech it in school as though it was undisputable proof, turning them into little atheist social justice warriors full of entitlement. Special snowflakes. Unique

Well, sometimes people don't like to admit it, but scientists are human, too. And we live in a society in which science cannot be done purely -- it is structured through universities in which success involves measures other than the discovery of truth -- tenure, increased funding, etc. Or else it's supported by corporations, in which case the goal is not truth but profit. In the US, a hell of a lot of "pure" research is commissioned by the Pentagon, which, you can imagine, is not exactly pure of heart. 

Challenging anyone's pet theory will get an emotional reaction. The goal is to work around that, and not get irrational yourself.