Atheist vs Pantheist

[Alex K]

I am new to the forum and decided to challenge the wisdom of the most educated and sincere atheist,

Well then...

I am a pantheist, which mean everything is deity.

Well... ok... you have very low standards.

I am schizophrenic, which will stop many right here due to stigma, but keep in mind,

Naah, not here it won't.

All of us have multidimensional senses.

Yes, that's a trivial observation.

A true form of spiritual science, or real science, that includes more dimensional possibilities than 3d. More in line with physics, actually.

I strongly doubt that your subjective interpretation of your senses as multidimensional, or the trivial fact that our senses have more than three independent sensors which could be counted as dimensions of perception, has anything but a superficial similarity to the speculative ideas about higher dimensions as they appear in theoretical physics.

I fully support and believe in evolution, using it against me is a waste of time.

Umm... ok... I don't know what you mean by that

The main meat of my position is that there is a ton of science out there that supports theism, especially non dual pantheism such as I use to define myself.

If you, as you do above, define deity so broadly that a pebble qualifies, then yes, there is scientific evidence for theism. You just don't learn much new from changing the meaning of words.

It is not found in the hard sciences much, with mathematics and weights and measures, however it can be found over and over again in psychology and philosophy. Particularly, I find atheism an unscientific philosophy, if it does not include the science of countless documented mystical experiences and spiritual emergencies that have happened for millions of years and have formulated the worlds most poetic religious renditions of the divine, from cave art up until modern cannon.

It does include the science of these mystical experiences. It's just that they're in peoples' heads and belong into the realm of neurology and psychology, not physics.

So, I find this basic logical argument applies to atheists: the burden of proof is upon you to show your philosophy has merit.

No.

Oh, and ps, I actually do believe we are all eaten by a flying "spagetti monster" called a black hole eventually, due to the scientific process of spaghettification.

That's droll.