I told you the basic reasons, which were physical and mental. Means, I experienced somethings such both physically and mentally, which cannot be explained by our present scientific understanding of reality.
In other words, even putting mental experiences aside, I physically experienced such things many times, which no one from this world can do to me, no matter how much means he may have. Thus, I concluded that there must be some such live forms for sure, which live beyond our normal reach. That confirmed again and again.
If the human DNA isn’t important to you, you are even more retarded than the average religious suck up.
What, do you have faith that your god will guide your pathetic species to salvation? That evolution cannot go backwards? Do you believe homo sapien so far removed from nature one need not worry about their genetic path? That your actions, beliefs, attitudes, are somehow unconnected to your physical body?
I wrote in the passed a lot of people are so self-persuaded in their reality that they think “super natural” events are physically explained, or an illusion, or non existent. I’d say there exists many new energies we have not or cannot normally access. Like 10x as much as the physical would yeild. A lot of banign forces and life-forms. Because reality is super-abundant. It generates and does more than it appears to.
If you look carefully, you will see that I avoided the them supernatural. I used beyond normal reach instead. Supernatural is merely a metaphor. If anything exists, no matter how and where, it has to be natural by definition.
Like many of these polls, the questions are both contentious and lack mutual exclusivity.
What is an antithesis? Some regard that as a class of theist, but hates god; others a class of atheist who thinks belief in god is harmful and dangerous.
If you are not a theist, you have to be an atheist, there is no middle ground here. An agnostic is most usually a sub-set of atheism, but i’ve known one or two along the way that claim to be theistic agnostics. I’d hate to live in their minds.
If anti-theist is an atheist that thinks theism is harmful, rather than the other definition of anti-theist, then 'syntheist" is completely redundant, as all anti-theists in my view are also a sub-set of atheists, and might even be agnostics too.
So what’s the point?
Just another chance for theists to pretend they are in the same camp? And jolly themselves up that they are winning an argument through weight of numbers? Well they can convince themselves of that, because convincing themselves of falsehoods is their stock in trade. That’s who delusion works.