Atheism is unreasonable

[Esquilax]

I guess Einstein "was" an uneducated man too, as some point in his life.

The important difference being that Einstein didn't decide to educate himself in order to argue from authority against an established scientific theory that he'd made up his mind on before studying the evidence, as a result of religious dogma. It's a distinction you seem to have missed, but the, missing the point seems to be all you do around here.

Whats wrong with that?

What's wrong with deciding your position on a topic before studying the evidence, and in fact, in spite of it, because your religion says so? It's very telling that you don't see it yourself.

What?

"Shermer has done X bad thing, therefore his arguments are invalid" is an example of the genetic fallacy. If that's what you were going for, you've hit upon yet another fallacy. If it's not, what is the point of asking me if I'm a fan of Shermer?

The same traction it would have if you went into a pet store and asked for a dog and you were brought out a hamster. You wouldn't have any problem deciphering the difference in "kind" then, would you?

But I wouldn't be objecting on the basis of kinds. I would be objecting on the basis of species, like a normal person. Are kinds just the same as species? If not, then if you asked for a dog and the guy brought out a wolf, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference, right? I mean, you just said earlier that wolves were a part of the dog kind, so how would you be able to complain at being given a wolf?

I doubt hyenas are of the dog kind...I don't know about foxes, and raccoons are certainly not.

So how are you making these determinations at all?