Do mimsy atheists gyre and gimble in the wabe?

[Ryft]

Do you read base scientific papers on everything you have an opinion on?

I am not sure why "scientific papers" are especially relevant. Nevertheless, if I suspect that some school of thought fails to answer a specific criticism, then I will certainly avail myself of whatever reputable publications it has produced that apparently contradicts such a suspicion—especially if someone alludes to the fact that such contradicting evidence exists. Does this somehow mean reading every base paper on everything in that field? Of course not. That simply does not follow. It means reading relevant publications specific to my suspicion or objection or what have you. I hold that the validity of an opinion is a function of the degree to which it is an informed one, and the quality of that which it informs it.

That I have not read the original articles on some theological issues DOES NOT make my POV on some of these things any less valid, especially considering I have dealt with them ad nauseum by proxy.

So if you had a quick look at some article published by some person on the internet hosted by who knows what entity that some average Joe referenced in an informal discussion, you feel this contributes substantively to the validity of your point of view, then? Particularly if this was done multiple times? Hmm. Well, all right then.