What I am taking issue with is the idea behind the 'refuse to use' phrase.  You appear to be saying that there is some act of volition in using this 'sense' you postulate.  Yet in NORMAL action all our other senses are not consciously 'used'.  You sem to endorse this view by referring to the God-sense as being like a receiver.  I realise that your wording implying volition is aimed at disparaging atheists and other boogeymen who 'deny God', but by doing so you invite questions about spirtual relativity - why do muslims and buddhists and jews all 'tune in' to different stations?  Why do primitive peoples 'refuse to use' their receivers?

A description, characterisation, set of observations of the God-sense would obviously help to clear up these questions....  but you haven't yet provided any.  I presume that you take the RF point of view 'its self-evident, so why shoud I investigate it'?

BTW where is RF?  Did my final challenges blow him away? Is he pining for barney? Or is he with the happy-backslappy crew on CARM on NPB?

BTW2  I don't agree that the likes of baldar or even JIMP and zuk should be banned permanently.  They may all be irritatingly self-opiniated (aren't we all?) and in some cases abusive and evil... but that is a facet of human nature that exists and should be represented here.

But different from hate, I presume.

What you commented on: The chemicals and electronic impulses are also recognizably different for each. has nothing to do with Psychology...your comment is based on physical evidence...and since I was discussing a scan used to evaluate physical properties of the brain observed while evaluating "love"...it stands to reason that is what you were referring to....it is obvious now you weren't.....so, as it stands, your use of "Psychology" to counter It is relevant....because it is roughly the same pattern for anything else you love...there is no "specific" brain wave for the love of Mom...it looks like love for Dad...love for sister...love for a friend and love for jelly donuts. remains irrelevant.


Don't bother....artificially reproducing a true experience is afterall....artificial....it says nothing about the nature of the original experience.....having someone with chronic central nervous/nueraxial pain and then illiciting pain by poking them with a needle tells us nothing about the true nature of the original pain.

you know very little about psychology, neuroscience (which is what that statement is about) is a part of psychology.

Now if we will return to the topic of Theism(s).



The silliness of all other religions is obvious for most, but not of their own religion. Christians understand the obsurdity of the Cult of Athena and Hinduis see the sillyness of Islam...




All religion must be taken on faith, silly or not.