congratulations [#2691]

[pianodwarf]

Hi There

I stumbled across your website and don't know how.

I read with interest the various proofs and articles and was just amazed at the amount of
thought and effort put into them.

I've been looking at these issues (and more) but can only find people of both determinations
with the same flaw.  I've even followed your example and given it an accroymn..."CBIT"
"conclusion before investigative thinking". 

Take the simple question of why won't Go heal amputees.  You make two big assumptions
and then several smaller ones when you broach the subject.  The big assumptions are

1) God didn't intend someone to be an amputee - not saying he did but hey you don't know
either

2) God changes his mind.  If God made an amputee or even just allowed and amputee to be
then clearly it's either His will or He's indifferent.  Either way you assume the bible says pray
and God will change His mind.

The simple answer to why God doesn't heal amputees is ... it's not in His will.  Don't know
why... would like to know why. Don't understand why... would like to undertand why.

In honesty I have difficulty reconcilling a loving God with this issue but I can't see a problem
with Him not answering prayers.

The bible makes it pretty clear to me that God only hears or acts upon certain prayers. He
made some pretty clear rules about it.  Then along come some dudes and start testing if
prayer works.  It's like testing if a microwave can cook chickens and then not even plugging it
in!  Conclusion microwaves are crap at cooking!

I did go on your forums to have a look around and came across a diatribe of non-Christian
CBIT followed sometimes with Christian CBIT responses.  There's no doubting the passion of
some of your subscribers or for that matter your own contributions.  It's a shame it isn't open
progress thinking rather than missional "come to my way of thinking" evangelism.

Perhaps in the end you should take Richard Dawkins own advice.. "Blastpheme God once a
day"..... then ask yourself why?

[Aaron123]

It's funny you say "conclusion before investigative thinking". 

Your conclusion of "it's not in his will" doesn't address one question: how does this differs from a situtation where god doesn't exist?

Once again; your god is useless.

[Emily]

The bible makes it pretty clear to me that God only hears or acts upon certain prayers. He
made some pretty clear rules about it.

And the prayers that 'god acts upon' would've happened without prayer.

Say I pray to god to be healed of cancer, while at the same time I am going to chemo. I get healed! Thank you god! Thank you medical science!

God, give me a million bucks. A month goes by and nothing in my back account. He must have gotten the routing number wrong or something. 

God, I pray you give me this job i just applied for. I get it! Thank you god! Thank you Masters Degree!

See. Prayer is completely pointless.

[jetson]

You completely missed the point.  First things first, there is no god answering any prayers at all, which is why there is complete ambiguity in what happens as a result of prayer.  There is no difference in healing rates of anything, with or without prayer.

Yet Christians are constantly claiming he does heal certain physical diseases and ailments.  If he does cure any human ailment through prayer, then it stands to reason that an occasional amputee would be on the list.

You can't have it both ways.  A god that does answer prayers and heals any human physically, should have healed at least a few amputees by now.

All of your apologetic logic fails, on every level.  You have literally no idea what you are talking about.

Then again, you could join the forum and make a better point, if you feel up to it.

[Nam]

To the OP[1],

All I read was: blah, blah, blah. No, really, I did.

-Nam

1.	don't want Jetson assuming I'm speaking about his comment.

[Nick]

So when someone gets cancer God intended for them to get cancer.  But then some people who get cured say it was God's doing.  Strange isn't it?  I guess the old saying is true...God hates amputees.

[Nam]

Yep, Nick. So, true.

-Nam

[ParkingPlaces]

So you've been told what to think and you think that's a thought.

I've been waiting for a christian to answer a question. On the assumption that you think all other gods (hindu, etc) are false, you know perfectly well that those other gods have believers because their followers have faith that they exist, even though you know that those gods do not exist. On the other hand, your god, which you think does exist, requires faith just as the non-gods do. Why is this? Why is he copying the methods of non-existent gods?

Coincidence? i don't think so.

[Nam]

^Stop using logic, they won't understand.

-Nam

[dzzer]

Thank you all for proving my point so well. CBIT is true.  I must admit I was quite surprised by the passionate and dismissive responses which were almost on a par with the religious lot.  Ironic?   Your responses caused two simultaneous thoughts... 1) wow what they scared of?  2) maybe I'd be better talking to the religious forums

To Aaron123...  "in his will" was not my conclusion but rather a statement of a Christians viewpoint  on the question at hand.  It answers the question of the amputee directly and simply.   This answer could be a good example of CBIT and you might well believe it is. It could also be the answer discerned after lots of thought and discussion and many Christians would argue thus.  Even if we believe them wrong it would then not be CBIT but rather mental gymnastics or denial.

To Emily... Christians aren't in agreement about the effectiveness of prayer.   Perhaps I'm alone on this forum in allowing the possibility of God to exit but I think if He did then He would be all seeing and knowing and have a plan.  In that context would our prayers surprise or change his plan? I don't think so. Having said that God could still answer prayers without changing his plan if the prayers were part of that plan.

To Jetson.. Great CBIT buddy. "There is no God"... start with your conclusion and then move onto the effect of your conclusion.   I start from a different point.... "if there is a God could he work like this or like that"  It means I'm able to hold an open discussion with you without vitriol or insult.  Shame you're not like minded but are so sure of yourself that you feel you can comment on knowing what I talking about as if you are an expert.  Perhaps you are an expert.   I certainly didn't miss the point, I just played back a Christians response to your question.  You couldn't fault the logic that if there were a God and he made an amputee he probably wouldn't listen or act upon a prayer to heal said amputee (assuming he made amputee for a purpose other than to demonstrate healing powers).  Conversely I do think you missed my point.

As for God having healed an amputee... God might have healed thousands for all you or I know.  Have you really been around the world and met 7 billion people to say he hasn't.  In fact  I did meet a man ten years ago who claimed his wifes mother was so healed.  I wasn't minded then and I'm not now to put too much effort into discerning the validity of the claim because I'm on my own journey.  My question to you would be... if we found an amputee healed would you admit God or throw yourself into mental gymnastics trying to explain away.  I suspect the later.  I think I might be the former but fear I'd fall into the later with you. One thing I know for sure is... if I was healed of an amputation I doubt I'd bother trying to convince passionate God haters about it.

To Nam... You are to open discussion what Simon Cowell is to sophisticated discerning television.

To Nick...  The amputee falls into two categories.. born with and became. I was referring to the born with. Your example of cancer assumes we're born with cancer or it doesn't relate. Now I'm sure we could get into a long argument about whether someone was born with cancer or whether it's a disease caused by life style, environment or whatever.  Personally I think the later and believe most medical evidence agrees with me.  If that's right your cancer example doesn't flow.

Sorry guys but I will now be leaving this forum mainly because there's no evidence of an open mind anywhere. I will continue my journey elsewhere and seek journeymen with less passionate conviction to their viewpoint.  Look at this way... you can all have your forum back to having just having like minded people and not be challenged.

Whilst typing (and eating diner) parkingplaces asked a question.  It sounds like an open question with interesting possibilities. I don't know how to respond without Nam, et al verbalizing their prejudiced judgments.

[ParkingPlaces]

In case you're still eating your beans, we have a "Shelter" section where only nice laid back atheists will talk with you. Everyone can read, only a few can participate.

[jetson]

Sorry guys but I will now be leaving this forum mainly because there's no evidence of an open mind anywhere. I will continue my journey elsewhere and seek journeymen with less passionate conviction to their viewpoint.  Look at this way... you can all have your forum back to having just having like minded people and not be challenged.

Whilst typing (and eating diner) parkingplaces asked a question.  It sounds like an open question with interesting possibilities. I don't know how to respond without Nam, et al verbalizing their prejudiced judgments.

I'm surprised you bothered at all.  If you cannot handle the responses, don't come back.  If you're as good as you think you are, then stay, and the rest od us will back off - assuming you can make a good argument.  Your little acronym is weak.

[Brakeman]

1) God didn't intend someone to be an amputee - not saying he did but hey you don't know
either

2) God changes his mind.  If God made an amputee or even just allowed and amputee to be
then clearly it's either His will or He's indifferent.  Either way you assume the bible says pray
and God will change His mind.

The simple answer to why God doesn't heal amputees is ... it's not in His will.  Don't know
why... would like to know why. Don't understand why... would like to understand why.

In honesty I have difficulty reconciling a loving God with this issue but I can't see a problem
with Him not answering prayers.

I'll let the other give the normal explanation why this is philosophy is wrong. I want you point out a different angle on these.

1. God's intent to have amputees - Please read the story of Uzzah in the old testament.  1 Chronicles 13: 7-10  Now tell me if god intended for Uzzah to die and go to hell because he tried to save the holy arc of the covenant from smashing onto rocks.
God knew it was going to happen, he knew where the pothole or rock was. He knew Uzzah was a righteous and holy man of god. So why did he kill him? Now, answer why god made amputees if he could avoid it.

2. God Changes his mind. How can god change his mind? Was he wrong and imperfect before he changed directions?

[Ivellios]

2) God changes his mind.  If God made an amputee or even just allowed and amputee to be
then clearly it's either His will or He's indifferent.  Either way you assume the bible says pray
and God will change His mind.

Malachi 3:6 "For I am the LORD, I do not change; Therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob.
 
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
 
James 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.

Sounds like to me, someone that never changes his mind.

Don't christians pray because they think they know better than a perfect, all-knowing, all-loving God, that they thought about something that God overlooked, so they prey to change god's mind and cure someone or let them into heaven though they're already dead? If a christian accepted that everything happens according to his will, why pray? He's going to do what he wants, regardless to you praying, fasting, flogging yourself, or how many good deeds you do.

[screwtape]

The simple answer to why God doesn't heal amputees is ... it's not in His will.  Don't know
why... would like to know why. Don't understand why... would like to undertand why.

Bold mine.  That makes "it's not his will" irrelevant.  Rather than say "it's not his will, but I don't know why" you could just say "I don't know why".  There is no need to slip in the will of any gods.  So your simple answer is not really an answer.

In honesty I have difficulty reconcilling a loving God with this issue but I can't see a problem
with Him not answering prayers.

That's the point of the question.  There is a certian type of xian who attempts to justify his or her god beliefs by claiming that people are miraculously healed of various afflictions by divine intervention.  The afflictions may include cancer, diabetes, coma, heart conditions, tooth decay, halitosis, spastic colon, etc.  We frequently hear anecdotes about how some church group prayed for some guy and the next day he was completely healed. 

But there is a whole class of ailments that are never, ever cured by prayer or naturally.  People never regrow lost limbs.  Lost eyes never regrow in the empty sockets.  Retarded people never gain normal mental capacity. Alzheimers and Dementia sufferers never recover.  Old people never rejuvenate.  This has clear implications about a god that supposedly heals people.  It leaves you only a few conclusions about such a god.

You see one of those conclusions: perhaps god is not all that loving afterall.  So you do understand the point of the question.  You just did not realize it.

[Hatter23]

Hi There

I stumbled across your website and don't know how.

I read with interest the various proofs and articles and was just amazed at the amount of
thought and effort put into them.

I've been looking at these issues (and more) but can only find people of both determinations
with the same flaw.  I've even followed your example and given it an accroymn..."CBIT"
"conclusion before investigative thinking". 

Alright, tell me how your assumption of "God," specifically the Bible god, existing isn't a CBIT. Because, frankly you are using circular reasoning and appeals to ignorance.

Start off with the concept, "Do people Lie, hallucinate, and Ex agerate?"

They do.

Therefore, should we immediately take any book at face value...we can't. Why give the Bible some sort of special pass you don't give to say the Iliad, or the Koran, or The Egyptian Books of the dead? To do so would be to commit a CBIT Each of these tomes do have some things that have been verified by archeology, but some things that have been proven false by archeology. They also contain events that do not match observable reality; magic, deities, ghosts, risen dead, and so forth. They are all unreliable documents.

So we have a claim, say the God Mars will favor warriors who worship him. If that was true, the most successful kingdoms would be those that worshipped Mars, it does happen in the stories told within the book. In fact, they would win wars and not be conquered. This is not true. Conclusions: "Mars chooses whom he favors" or "Mars does not have power/does not exist" Since we do not have evidence for the god Mars beyond these tales, there is no reason to assume he exists, using Occam's razor, to do elsewise would be a CBIT

Now lets apply the same logic to the god of the Bible, Yahweh. There are claims that he heals people unambiguously, it does happen in the stories told within the book. In fact, there would be a statistical correlation between health and worship of Yahweh. This is not true. Conclusions: "Yahweh chooses whom he favors" or "Yahweh does not have power/does not exist" Since we do not have evidence for the god Yahweh beyond these tales, there is no reason to assume he exists, using Occam's razor, to do elsewise would be a CBIT

So you were saying how are conclusion are done without investigative thinking? I say to you sir, we aren't guilty of that, not one iota. You are.

[Dante]

   Perhaps I'm alone on this forum in allowing the possibility of God to exit but I think if He did then He would be all seeing and knowing and have a plan.  In that context would our prayers surprise or change his plan? I don't think so. Having said that God could still answer prayers without changing his plan if the prayers were part of that plan.

So you don't believe in free will then? Interesting.

[Hatter23]

Sorry guys but I will now be leaving this forum mainly because there's no evidence of an open mind anywhere. I will continue my journey elsewhere and seek journeymen with less passionate conviction to their viewpoint.  Look at this way... you can all have your forum back to having just having like minded people and not be challenged.

'Open minded' seems to be held in great regard. It used to mean "abandon your preconceptions and accept the evidence" however you are using the more modern definition which seems to be "abandond the evidence and accept my preconceptions".  You are leaving the forum, not because we are "rabid god'haters," you are leaving the forum because you cannot support your faulty logic, your CBIT.

You are welcome to prove me wrong. I would love for you to prove me wrong, every time I am proven wrong, despite the momentary chagrin it might cause me, only leads me to a greater understanding of what is reality.

However I sincerely doubt you can prove me wrong, for you are too cowardly to face up to the exceedingly likely fact that there is no logical reason to believe in Yahweh.
 

[Nam]

Thank you all for proving my point so well.

Your mind was made up beforehand. Stop projecting as if you actually had a point you already didn't have your own personal answer to, and would stand firm on.

I must admit I was quite surprised by the passionate and dismissive responses which were almost on a par with the religious lot.  Ironic?   Your responses caused two simultaneous thoughts... 1) wow what they scared of?  2) maybe I'd be better talking to the religious forums

"passionate", and "dismissive"? Passionate perhaps in our viewpoint(s), but, aren't you in your own? Dismissive only in what isn't the truth. Not a "truth" one wishes to be true but one that can be validated by evidence from unbiased sources.

To Emily... Christians aren't in agreement about the effectiveness of prayer.   Perhaps I'm alone on this forum in allowing the possibility of God to exit but I think if He did then He would be all seeing and knowing and have a plan.  In that context would our prayers surprise or change his plan? I don't think so. Having said that God could still answer prayers without changing his plan if the prayers were part of that plan.

Why would a Christian question any effectiveness of what's stated in the Bible? It's "God's Word", therefore it's true, to them. But, it seems most miss the part where it says that Biblegod will only hear the prayers of those who pray in private[1]: most Christians seem to pray with hundreds to thousands of other people. No wonder Biblegod doesn't answer prayers, its followers can't follow instructions.

To Jetson.. Great CBIT buddy. "There is no God"... start with your conclusion and then move onto the effect of your conclusion.   I start from a different point.... "if there is a God could he work like this or like that"  It means I'm able to hold an open discussion with you without vitriol or insult.  Shame you're not like minded but are so sure of yourself that you feel you can comment on knowing what I talking about as if you are an expert.  Perhaps you are an expert.   I certainly didn't miss the point, I just played back a Christians response to your question.  You couldn't fault the logic that if there were a God and he made an amputee he probably wouldn't listen or act upon a prayer to heal said amputee (assuming he made amputee for a purpose other than to demonstrate healing powers).  Conversely I do think you missed my point.

As for God having healed an amputee... God might have healed thousands for all you or I know.  Have you really been around the world and met 7 billion people to say he hasn't.  In fact  I did meet a man ten years ago who claimed his wifes mother was so healed.  I wasn't minded then and I'm not now to put too much effort into discerning the validity of the claim because I'm on my own journey.  My question to you would be... if we found an amputee healed would you admit God or throw yourself into mental gymnastics trying to explain away.  I suspect the later.  I think I might be the former but fear I'd fall into the later with you. One thing I know for sure is... if I was healed of an amputation I doubt I'd bother trying to convince passionate God haters about it.

Opinion, hearsay, and the like is not unbiased (see above) evidence of Biblegod healing amputees. If, such a thing happened, why would people keep such a thing quiet? Most Christians are vocal about finding Jesus in their food but quiet about limbs regrowing. It's 'cause it doesn't happen. Christians would shout it from the rooftops: I GOT PROOF, not keep it to themselves. Some might keep it to themselves but most wouldn't.

To Nam... You are to open discussion what Simon Cowell is to sophisticated discerning television.

I thought vitriol was beneath you? I guess you've proven you wrong.

To Nick...  The amputee falls into two categories.. born with and became. I was referring to the born with. Your example of cancer assumes we're born with cancer or it doesn't relate. Now I'm sure we could get into a long argument about whether someone was born with cancer or whether it's a disease caused by life style, environment or whatever.  Personally I think the later and believe most medical evidence agrees with me.  If that's right your cancer example doesn't flow.

if you're not specific enough, one has to assume "in general". However, that doesn't make his comments any less valid based on your error.

Sorry guys but I will now be leaving this forum mainly because there's no evidence of an open mind anywhere. I will continue my journey elsewhere and seek journeymen with less passionate conviction to their viewpoint.  Look at this way... you can all have your forum back to having just having like minded people and not be challenged.

Look in the mirror and see that what you say we are spewing is the same things you are. Your reply to each of us shows this.

Whilst typing (and eating diner) parkingplaces asked a question.  It sounds like an open question with interesting possibilities. I don't know how to respond without Nam, et al verbalizing their prejudiced judgments.

Again, spewing the same thing you feel we are. This proves "my point".

-Nam

1.	I believe Jesus says that somewhere in Matthew, and Biblegod says that somewhere in Genesis

[shnozzola]

   So, CBIT, dzzer, or deserter, I guess. You should stay and argue your point if it is important enough.  Conclusion Before Investigative Thinking.   You know if you've read a lot of the forum before responding that many of us were Christians a long time before coming to the realization that there are no gods of any kind.  Oh it's "safe" to profess to be a deist, but overall, it becomes pretty clear that you have to really water down a definition of god to maybe be possible - like a positive charge or something .

   Do you not try to understand how much investigative thinking we've done?  Studied the old testament, read and reread the gospels, tried to make sense of the 4 horsemen, etc. in revelations.   I am an atheist who believes that a man that we now called Jesus may have lived about 2000 years ago, contrary to others here, and I accept that I may be wrong. I still think there are good lessons to be learned from something like the sermon on the mount.   And if I grew up in, say Syria, I would most likely believe Mohammed had many good answers, but investigative thinking again should have led me to understand that other's beliefs could also be valid.  We all just do not know.

   But with Muslims and Jews and Christians at each other's throats even now, when civilization should be moving on, this demands an end to the religious craziness that may doom us all.  Do you not see that?  With evangelical Christians absolutely convinced they must teach other cultures about Christianity, while extreme Muslims are absolutely convinced that Christianity and the west are wrong, and willing to kill because of it, with the added strife just between the Sunni and the Shia, and not much time since the Protestants and Catholics were willing to go to war in Great Britain over their interpretation of christianity - don't you see that all our interpretations of these things are not helping society?

   The world is getting much too small for the extremism that persists.  We have Muslim cultures that refuse to educate females at the same time we have countries with female leaders.  We have health care paving the way toward, say, cloning an extra kidney for someone, while people who believe abortion is so wrong that they will kill a doctor that continues to help a woman with no choice. We have educators learning how punishment can affect a child's brain for life at the same time in Pakistan a brave little girl fights for her life because she dared to question people's beliefs.   Do you not see these things?

   I really do not care if you believe in god, dzzer.  Just please be willing to accept that others do not believe as you do, and be OK with that, even welcoming the differences in cultures as a celebration of how life is lived on our little planet. 

[ParkingPlaces]

He's gone. He came back and presumably read a few follow up posts before volunteering for the Witness Protection Program or whatever it is those guys hide behind.

His CBIT crap is cute, but what process is he imagining we used? Does he really think that a bunch of people who voluntarily type their collective hearts out on the subject of atheism have doneno investigating, no thinking? Just because we don't march lockstep with him past a review stand filled with the Falwells and Grahams and Robertsons doesn't mean that we are incapable of giving thought to the whole concept. It only means that we looked at those various parts of reality that seemed relevant and reached different conclusions that him. If we are wrong, blatant accusations are not likely to be the start of a meaningful dialog or of change.

Too many christians show up here presuming that we'll be really really nice and only argue over the details of bible and that we atheists will be nice enough not to bring up anything inconvenient or awkward, like facts and stuff. Because of that, they just don't last long. Their expectations, of enlightening us with their darkness and causing a mass exodus from our obviously faulty thoughts, seem a bit optimistic, to say the least.  The next one that shows up will get this response from me.

"Hi, welcome and all that jazz.  You will not be around long because you don't appear to have the gumption or the courage to go along with your temerity and gall. Your righteousness has its time limits, in that the first time you realize that we aren't all groveling at your feet and begging for more unenlightenment, you will bug out. So, not only welcome, but goodbye."

I do hope we get some more christian newbies that do stick around. Obviously some do. But I don't think any of those that start out the way this guy did will do it. When they use religion to replace their courage, and the bible to replace their thoughts, they got nuthin'.

Edit: god made me make a mistake, but the devil showed me where I was wrong. Fixed it.

[Emily]

To Emily... Christians aren't in agreement about the effectiveness of prayer.   Perhaps I'm alone on this forum in allowing the possibility of God to exit but I think if He did then He would be all seeing and knowing and have a plan.  In that context would our prayers surprise or change his plan? I don't think so. Having said that God could still answer prayers without changing his plan if the prayers were part of that plan.

::Insert George Carlin clip here::[1] Note: The video is NSFW



To sum my bold up: Why the fuck bother with praying? If he has a plan, why bother praying?

If it's part of His plan, then there's no use in praying because whatever is being prayed for will happen anyways.

1.	Also, the members here realized the same things that Carlin did

[Nam]

You missed these mistakes

He's gone. He came back and presumably read a few follow up posts before volunteering for the Witness Protection Program or whatever it is those guys hide behind.

His CBIT crap is cute, but what process is he imagining we used? Does he really think that a bunch of people who voluntarily type their collective hearts out on the subject of atheism have doneno investigating, no thinking? Just because we don't march lockstep with him past a review stand filled with the Falwells and Grahams and Robertsons doesn't mean that we are incapable of giving thought to the whole concept. It only means that we looked at those various parts of reality that seemed relevant and reached different conclusions that him. If we are wrong, blatant accusations are not likely to be the start of a meaningful dialog or of change.

Too many christians show up here presuming that we'll be really really nice and only argue over the details of bible[1] and that we atheists will be nice enough not to bring up anything inconvenient or awkward, like facts and stuff. Because of that, they just don't last long. Their expectations, of enlightening us with their darkness and causing a mass exodus from our obviously faulty thoughts, seem a bit optimistic, to say the least.  The next one that shows up will get this response from me.

"Hi, welcome and all that jazz.  You will not be around long because you don't appear to have the gumption or the courage to go along with your temerity and gall. Your righteousness has its time limits, in that the first time you realize that we aren't all groveling at your feet and begging for more unenlightenment, you will bug out. So, not only welcome, but goodbye."

I do hope we get some more christian newbies that do stick around. Obviously some do. But I don't think any of those that start out the way this guy did will do it. When they use religion to replace their courage, and the bible to replace their thoughts, they got nuthin'.

Edit: god made me make a mistake, but the devil showed me where I was wrong. Fixed it.

1.	unless a British thing, if you're British. You know: "She's going to hospital" not "...the hospital".

-Nam

[jaimehlers]

There's a mistake of reasoning with the "conclusion before investigative thinking" argument.  Namely, why is the presumption that the person has not done any investigative thinking in the past to back up their conclusion?  Most people state their conclusions without going through the reasoning, it's true, but you shouldn't assume that no investigation went into that conclusion just because of that.

Also, I'm guessing this guy hasn't read any of kcrady's posts.

[Hatter23]

There's a mistake of reasoning with the "conclusion before investigative thinking" argument.  Namely, why is the presumption that the person has not done any investigative thinking in the past to back up their conclusion?  Most people state their conclusions without going through the reasoning, it's true, but you shouldn't assume that no investigation went into that conclusion just because of that.

Also, I'm guessing this guy hasn't read any of kcrady's posts.

Or the simple fact his CBIT really means circular thinking, or appeal to ignorance. There's already a name for it, no new acronym needed. To further the irony he's accusing us of something we aren't doing, but he is.