Hello,

Just an introduction of myself.  Probably nothing that you could cut and paste to help you wow Christians

I got involved with fundamentalist Christianity back in 1989, primarily through a work buddy.   I've always loved debating and arguing, so I naturally gravitated toward Christian apologetics, and so was an "apologist" of sorts from 1992 through 1998.

The straw that broke the camel's back was an article by skeptic Farrell Till, "The Biblical way to treat women with dignity."  http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/981front.html

Mr. Till pointed out something I'd never seen in the bible, since as a Christian I was more concerned about the New Testament than the Old Testament.  Basically, God says a woman accused of adultery shall be forced to drink deliberately poisoned water.  If her lower female parts waste away, she's guilty.  If they don't, she was innocent.

I was shocked that such a stupid thing coud be any part of God's word.   Didn't take long to become an agnostic, then later, full atheist.

I've been an atheist since 1998, and have been debating apologists online and in person ever since.  The most recent apologist I debated was Robert Bowman, former senior apologetics researcher for Christian Research Institute, and author of several published scholarly books on various Christian issues.

Currently writing one book on the Bush Crime Family's guilt in orchestrating the attacks of 911, and one more book on the irrationality of fundamentalism.

I'm a rational empiricist.  Any Christian who would try to refute that position logically must stimulate one of my 5 physical senses in order to convey their information to me, at which point they sort of slice their own throat.  They should rather therefore be more consistent and try to refute me using mental telepathy, and not make use of the things they are trying to negate

Duane Gish and Henry Morris have both admitted that creationism is NOT scientific.   This is a huge wound in Creationism, whose majority of advocates try to pass creationism off as scientifically valid.   Intelligent Design could also never work as science in a school classroom because students would continue asking how things happened, and the teaching would have to say "God" (religion forbidden) or else restrain the desire to investigate the issue that far (which is the very antithesis of science)

See ya 'round.

dave