“No - you are trying to evade and frame a different argument.”
Same argument, other side of the coin.
“And, in fact, Universities do this...”
Universities are not television shows about science. If ‘Cosmos’ is showing a bias against religion, science classes in Universities show an extreme bias as it’s not even discussed at all, unless to show previously held views proven incorrect.
“World views should be a side note to science.”
Science is a world view. It’s a methodology, a way of thinking and solving problems.
“Science today has been hijacked by atheism - anyone who loves science should not sit idly and allow this to happen.”
Super-natural questions are simply not a part of science, by design and necessity.
“An agnostic stance would not be an issue but science should not distort data to make it fit an atheistic narrative and then pretend that atheism is immune to criticism.”
This simply is not happening, science has no ability to test the super-natural so can not make predictions on it. This absence is not hostility. The conflicts arise when religion has made claims on which science has cast doubt.
“We can see how this bias has made people avoid the show by looking at the posts on this thread. This does not advance science.”
To allow untestable, unprovable and often times contradictory narratives equal footing with science would not advance science either.
“Now let’s see if you can actually answer a question. Do you believe that your mind was ultimately formed by mindlessness - lacking any intelligence?”
Believe? No. It’s not a matter of what I believe to be true, but what there is evidence for.
Do you believe that your mind was ultimately formed by mindlessness - lacking any intelligence?”