Damien, I want to read some discussions or debate you’ve been through.

“Damien, I want to read some discussions or debate you’ve been through.” – Challenger Damien Marie AtHope, ok, no problem, I have lots of different mediums, which would you like I will give you 7 types. (1)A formal debate video of my taking on one of Canada’s most annoying street preacher; Artur Pawlowski but this was my only so-called formal debate actually the first for both of us I was sick of him after my first question but I still I think I did relatively good, (2) to a written discussion turning what is a hater telling me “fuck you” to one acknowledging me respectfully, (3) including an informal debate with 7 different theists one after another for 3 hours showing them up, (4) to me helping a new agnostic/atheist with questions which I help make into a much stronger ignostic atheist, (5) to me challenging someone trying to avoid responsibility for their bad actions claiming NIHILISM (as an Axiological (value theory) Atheist myself; Nihilism (anti-value theory) my opposition) I help them reason, (6) to me in a street debate where I dominate a street preacher just by my asking them: “what is a god?” and holding them to offer a good ontology, and (7) to me talking with another atheist about Outreach q & a about doing debates/discussions.   (1) American Atheist Challenges Calgary Street Church https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6K3uTuVEpI&t=11s   (2) Turning a Theist Attack into a Chance for Their New Learning: “an open dialog.” http://damienmarieathope.com/2016/02/turning-a-theist-attack-into-a-chance-for-their-new-learning-an-open-dialog/   (3) Axiological Atheism: A Conversation with Atheist Damien AtHope (Apologetics Academy) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wELnWRbnrn4&t=3684s   (4) Talking with a newish atheist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1x883roRsM&t=2899s   (5) Atheist...

What Do YOU mean you don’t Trust SCIENCE?

What Do YOU mean you don’t Trust SCIENCE?   If you say you doubt science, I will likely address the problem you now are burdened with backup such an assumption or assertion first concerning that you have a valid and reliable method of organizing, theorizing, and knowing any proposition about or tied to something about or in the world accurately?   Because not until you do this can I trust what you are talking about? Never stop your thirst for reason and truth, I hope you are inspired to always think critically, ethically and emotively.   Religion and Science are Completely Different Epistemologies (Epistemology: from Greek epistēmē, meaning ‘knowledge’, and logos, meaning ‘logical discourse’) Some try to say that science and religion ear not that different saying they both use faith. This is utter nonsense, not only does science not use faith as a method for anything, religion and science are completely different epistemologies. Scientists reason differently than most nonscientists because of a standardized focus on scientific based reasoning and scientific epistemology. My basic outline of scientific epistemology: Science: Hypotheses (Rationalism/Deductive, Inductive, or Abductive Reasoning etc.) + Testing (Empiricism/Systematic Observation) – Checking for errors (Skepticism/Fallibilism) + Interpret/Draw a Conclusion (Rationalism/Deductive, Inductive, or Abductive Reasoning etc.) *if valid* = Scientific Laws (describes observed phenomena) or Scientific Theory (substantiated and repeatedly tested explanation of phenomena) = Justified True Belief = Scientific Knowledge = Epistemic Certainty supportive of correctability *being epistemic certainty is believing a truth has the highest epistemic status, often with warranted psychological certainty but it may not, neither is it a requirement* My basic outline of religious epistemology: Religion:...