I'm talking about statistics and long-term prospects.

I was more replying to Prof.Intolerans.

about the civilizational implications of human biodiversity

ah, right

That's interesting.

My small gang of fashy goys successfully redpilled another one last night. <:cathokike:291522267890974721>

Drinking in aesthetic venues is truly a joy.

Thank you Based Chav, very cool!

Yeah, he was a good kid, but we seem to have beaten that rather Americanized view of "race" out of him.

It was pretty fascinating, this is why I choose to hang around with classicists.

Neat.

Youre of London?

Does debating with atheists actually do anything?

Should we even do it at all?

Yes, we should.

They don't listen, though.

Maybe not most of them. But there are a few who will listen. If we don't talk, how do we separate the two?

Usually the ones that identity as "skeptics" or "anti-theists" are the ones that won't. The ones that do are usually the ones that don't even identify as atheists to begin with.

Normies, basically

Who don't really identify as anything.

Yeah

Those are the kinds. Defacto, they are atheists, but they don't see themselves as such.

I'm willing to argue with atheists, so I keep improving my skills at defending the Faith. And if we don't give them the chance to realize they're wrong, then they never will realize they're wrong.

All we can do is plant the seed, because it's hard to immediately see what kind of soil their heart is.

I guess, but giving them the benefit of the doubt all the time is arguably what led us to this point in the first place

What got us here is not defending our values.

It's practically impossible to "defend our values" with words alone.

Our enemies never listen to 'words alone', is the thing.

The mass majority of the reason the Enlightenment won out was because it just flat-out ignored everyone who was against it.

My father was irreligious, even though he had seen dæmons before

His Christian friend in high school invited him, the English debate team captain and science club president, to take part in a debate event at church

And assigned him to argue against the existence of God

My father read Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, et al.

But of course he also had to read the Bible

And he read all of it

The word of God changed him, and by the time the debate began he already believed Jesus of Nazareth was the Lord of the worlds

He still won the debate, but only with what he knew were sophistical arguments without a true logical basis

This is why I have never been impressed with atheists who have the impression that only stupid people are Christian

My father went on to Caltech for undergrad and Berkeley for PhD

I will thank God if I can be as godly as he is, or more

It's through this convert to the true faith that I know the Lord today