The article dumps. I'm dumping back.

(Contrary to what the article contends about atheist bloggers, I'm busy with other things, so I shall have to dump in a series.)

You might need an antacid, but, for what it's worth, here's the link. It was written by Charlotte Allen who is author of "The Human Christ: The Search for the Historical Jesus". She's in for a long search, in my opinion. Still, I bet that she thinks that she's found incontrovertible evidence.

(Heck, there is no corroborating evidence for the omnipotent, omnipresent "Creator" of the universe, so why would she require the writings of independent, contemporaneous witnesses and physical evidence for Jesus? I have not read her book, and shall not read her book, so I admit that I am guessing about the contents. If any of you read it, please let me know if she actually found the guy.)

On to the article, which constitutes half of what I have read of her predictable opinions. (Here's a synopsis of her "argument".) I should point out that I am not in the least insulted by any of her ad hominems. I am irritated by the rest of her fallacious argument against atheism, but that is because illogic irritates me. Her article will, however, convince the right wing types who read the LA Times.

I can't stand atheists -- but it's not because they don't believe in God. It's because they're crashing bores.

Funny thing. I could honestly say exactly the same thing in reverse. I can't stand religionists, but it's not because they believe in God. It's because they are worse than crashing bores.

By "religionist", I do not mean all believers. Rather, I mean those people who are aggressively obsessed about their delusions. This category includes fundamentalists of any religious persuasion and Boring Again Christians.

Worse than crashing bores? Religionists are illogical bores, which I find truly irritating. Worse than that, my experience has been many of them are quite unpleasant. Let's put it this way, "You are going to burn in HELL!" is not guaranteed to win friends and influence rational people.

Speaking of rationality, Charlotte is clearly offended by all the evidence that indicates that, as a group, atheists have more education and higher IQ scores than theists. Of course, as the numbers of atheists gradually swell, this discrepancy will ultimately diminish. Initially, of course, the decampers from religion usually abandon delusion because of rational examination of mythical claims. On the rationality-neutral side, some deconvert because of their emotional reaction to the predictable failure of religion to honour its promises in this lifetime. (It won't honour the after death promises either, but we cannot test this fact – beyond having falsified dualism.)

I'll get back to that later, but in the meantime, here's an article that Charlotte wrote decrying the "emotionality" of some women. Actually, the article is a thinly disguised attack on Democratic political candidates. Charlotte, if you really wished to examine the stupidity of some women, then you could have had a field day with Sarah Palin.

Here's a tidbit:

So I don't understand why more women don't relax, enjoy the innate abilities most of us possess (as well as the ones fewer of us possess) and revel in the things most important to life at which nearly all of us excel: tenderness toward children and men and the weak and the ability to make a house a home.

I think that by "the ones fewer of us possess" she was hinting at her own superior powers of insight and erudition. The final line should convince all women that they ought to be barefoot and pregnant while comparing fabric swatches in the kitchen.

Uh-huh!

She concludes by trying to dispell the impression that she is bragging about rising above giddy females:

Then we could shriek and swoon and gossip and read chick lit to our hearts' content and not mind the fact that way down deep, we are . . . kind of dim.

Speak for yourself, honey! I could be kind of dim, but I don't shriek, or swoon, or gossip any more than the average gal or guy. (Social anthropologists have found that, in casual conversation, both males and females spend most of their time talking about other people. Let's face it, people are a more varied topic than the weather.)

Perhaps I do not need to write a series:

Sites Elsewhere: Charlotte Allen really is angry at us on Pharyngula (always worth reading, which is why it's so immensely popular) . even more scathing, The Unholy Wars and Flagrant Bigotry at the LA Times . some irony (not intended to criticise Jews) Jews: No Jesus, No Reason, Just Whining; They’re Motivated by Anger and Boohoo Victimhood . Sandwalk Charlotte Allen whines that Atheists exist . Charlotte Allen whines that Atheists exist . God botherer bothered . Sam Harris [Harris’ Note: This is, without a doubt, one of the most embarrassingly stupid attacks on the “new atheists” to be published in a major newspaper.] . Atheists: No God, no reason, just whining .