i suppose it could be read that way, although i took the slant based on the title. like, a "look who's irrational now" playing on the fact that atheists like to point at theists and say that they're irrational, but based on this information they also believe in irrational things.
Well, yes. That is the point of the article. Atheists say that Christians are obviously irrational, and Christians argue that atheists are more irrational about some things than Christians are. I wonder what the average atheist would make of this information, but I'm not surprised that most of the people writing about it are theists.
again, what i was saying in my initial post was that all humans are irrational to some degree, which is why this boils down to a giant ad hom. just because a person is irrational does not mean that arguments or ideas that come from that person are necessarily irrational.
when did i ever say that was the point? all i'm saying is that the tone of this article is retaliatory, not explanatory or even-handed.
it cleanly sets up the argument that atheists believe in nutty things, so their belief in atheism is also nutty too. christians don't believe in nutty things therefore their belief in religion isn't nutty either. etc.. this is because the 'negative' focus is on the atheists, with only positive focus on the theists.
