False Copernican
Foundation /
Non-Moving Earth
Marshall Hall

Graphic Rule

Is this some kind of marketing ploy?

If not, please state your case. My role here is to discuss philosophical and moral issues as they relate to theism. I'd especially like to know what an "evangelical atheist" is, considering that evangelism refers specifically to the propagation of the so-called Good News of Jesus Christ -- though I know better than to think that that particular message has done much good to the human species. Considering that everyone starts life without a god-belief, then every theist is a former atheist.

If this is simply a marketing ploy, SPAM or otherwise, please honor our posted request for no commercial solicitations. (Or at least give a tease as to the gist of the book! We will consider posting any reviews of this book, or any other book, which are sent to us.)

-- Cliff Walker

P.S., Does "FEF" stand for, perhaps, the Flat Earth Foundation?  d;^)

Graphic Rule

Graphic Rule

Oh.

Are you a Discordian, then?

-- Cliff

Graphic Rule

Graphic Rule

Being opposed to any form of fundamentalism, I agree with Robert Anton Wilson when he pokes fun at what he calls "Fundamentalist Materialists" such as James Randi and the humorless, albeit useful, Martin Gardiner.

Gora considered Materialism to be a form of Theism when the Materialist resigns or "surrenders" to the fate of the elements.

In this sense, a human can put on the appearance of being a rational thinker in that she or he spouts all the correct rhetoric. But what's going on inside more closely resembles the thinking style of a Fundamentalist Theist than that of a rational thinker -- even though he or she spouts all the "correct" jargon and holds the "correct" viewpoints that would normally identify one as being a rational thinker.

This fellow's error is in failing to realize that rational thinking is a method -- a process for determining truth -- rather than the set of tenets that many theists falsely represent it as being. That he calls himself "a former evangelical atheist" should be your first clue: he was never a rational thinker, but was most likely very "evangelical" in the way he unthinkingly parroted atheistic and rationalistic rhetoric that he probably picked up from books and atheist meetings and the like. That such an atheist would suddenly convert to non-Copernicanism does not surprise me in the least.

-- Cliff

Graphic Rule

Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.