And I am a nullifidian: one who, by definition, has no faith or religious belief. As a nullifidian I care little for the distinctions between agnosticism (lacking knowledge of a deity) and atheism (lacking belief in a deity). We sometimes lose the point when arguing over these subtleties, when all the time the elephant in the room is organized religion and the mental illness that is religious faith.

It is not just religion, the whole human thought process is FUBAR. Maybe transhumanism will help, computers do not have egos, so cannot be offended, don't give a fuck what you call them, and make some pretty good logical decisions . . . . when a meld occurs between humans and computers, humans are going to go through some serious changes in their thought processes.

Yes, I'm an atheist. But I have ONE religious belief. And that is: Little green people are stealing our luggage. I'm certain of it.

I'm with you. I wish this site were called atheist.com, I wouldn't have to hear their bullshit.

Most of mankind has attempted tripping one way or another from the beginning.

That’s a factor yeh. We can feel free to transcend all that now. Let’s go

Your first two sentences make sense. The following sentences do not.

Why the need for external chemicals? Psychosis can be a naturally occurring phenomenon; especially under high stress.

I think the book of Revelations was written by someone who had ingested a psychoactive substance but the old testament in particular is fascinating mythology with a little bit of history mixed in and shouldn't be dismissed so lightly.

Psychoactive substances may have been part of the mixture in many cases, but they would be by no means needed to kick start religion. Humans are perfectly able to make mistakes, see things that are not there and invent things to deceive others, without chemical help. We are only of very limited intelligence, prone to error, and it was needful to invent and construct slowly over many years elaborate structures, such as philosophy and science, just to get us to begin reasoning even a little bit.

You may find it interesting to research, "false positive errors", and Richard Dawkin's "memes theory".

I have enjoyed mescaline- didn't see god myself.

You posted your post twice. You can delete one of them.

You say,"...religions ancient and present are human made fallacies and absurd thinking. "

Defined as historically certified for almost 2000 years and contained in text holding modern accomplish for being in most copied text of it's kind to be evidence of well established definition: Religion - to help widows and orphans in need and avoiding worldly corruption. James 1:27

Not disputing "human made", but can you explain the fallacy and absurdity of thinking to help widows and orphans in need and avoiding worldly corruption?

You may have mistaken art for a science substitute. Science needs to make sense to the conscious, rational mind. Art needs to make sense to the unconscious and intuitive mind. Expecting art to make rational sense is like trying to use the sky to unlock your house. It’s not the sky’s fault that the plan doesn’t work.