If there was a loving God, would you accept him?

[ns1452]

So, god of the gaps fallacy.

We cannot describe human emotion in numbers yet, so you claim it is outside of the realm of empirical science. (You conveniently neglect to address the scholarly article I linked to earlier describing the inroads science is actually making towards empirically understanding emotions like courage and beauty.)

It is simply ridiculous to define things outside of our ability to experience them, then claim experience isn't the way to measure them.

The problem with your article and your comment is what is beauty, courage, right, wrong, good, and evil apart from God? If your paradigm is that all experience is simply chemical reactions than in your system these concepts don't exist. People are simply responding to stimuli. That is not a concept of beauty. These concepts only having meaning in world that has more meaning than simply chemical neurological reactions. Therefore, your article has little merit because it asserts philosophical ideas that has no basis within your paradigms. Arguably, these ideas have been borrowed from a theist world view. This is why I have not dealt with your article.