That was the point I was trying(failing) to make - the cetre point of the surface of a sphere is wherever you choose to place it, or perhaps better still, a meaningless and arbitrary concept.
Even this needs explaining; all I’m saying is that you can contrive to peel an orange in such a way that any point you have chosen is in the centre of the skin that you remove.
LOL: Just wondering how comfortable Atheists would be using religious metaphors like crosses to bear… although it would be deliciously ironic.
This also is a very good point; why have fundamentalists ever assumed that God does dish out scientific knowledge for free?
The Bible seems to say right the way through that Man’s job involves a lot of hard work, even in the (supposedly perfect) beginning state, he had the job of gardening (my assumption, admittedly), is there any reason why the sweat of his brow shouldn’t arise from mental effort?
I can’t think of any passage in the Bible where God says “Hey Moses, let me tell you all about the wave/particle duality of visible light; it’s a scream”…
…so is it reasonable to say that the Bible as the Word Of GodTM dispenses scientific knowledge when there’s no account of him doing so verbally??
Do I get a prize for posting so many questions one after the other?, or will I get punished?
Tracer:
Here is the direct link for the quoted gem, which you can get to from the link I gave you by clicking “American Atheists” from the menu on the left.
Libertarian: Unfortunately, Jack Chick is our cross to bear, much like the atheists must bear the cross of American Atheists
Gee, Lib, I can only wish that Jack Chick would disseminate no more lies and sectarian antagonism than American Atheists does! 
Mangetout, sure, many atheists do use religion-derived idioms as part of the common language (although some avoid them on principle). It’s not really any more ironic than the persistent use by many Christians of idioms derived from paganism and/or polytheism (“ye gods”, “the fates have ordained”, etc. etc. etc.).
Libertarian wrote:
Ah, I see now. The “americanatheist.org” website is the home of The American Atheist magazine, while the “atheists.org” website is the home of American Atheists, the organization that publishes the magazine.
Dang, I never did care for Descartian Dualism. 
On a kind of side issue; how would the real* flat-earthers explain the visible curvature of the earth?, which may be observed from any high vantage point (not just space) - It’s discernible from the top of a high mountain and even more so from a jet plane.
Most of the flat-earth stuff I’ve seen seems to hinge on the creaky idea that the water would run off the edges of anything other than a flat earth, but if you stand at the top of a tall mountain where the sea is visible as part of the horizon, you can clearly see that the horizon isn’t a straight line (you can verify it by holding up a straight edge at arms length). - how do they get around that?
*I describe them as ‘real’ flat earthers because there are a number of ‘flat earth’ societies which are no more serious than social clubs.
Mt, the abovementioned Robert Schadewald is probably the current expert on modern flat-earthism (a dubious honor if ever I heard one, eh? :)). A web search on his name should be able to answer your question. At least one serious flat-earth society is described and extensively quoted at talk.origins.
Correction: Robert Schadewald was the expert on modern flat-earthism. He died in April of last year. 
Heck, what am I talking about? if he’s not going to be convinced by making a telephone call to someone in another timezone, or measuring the distance between the tops and bottoms of the pylons of a large suspension bridge (at the same time as measuring them to be exactly vertical), then he’s not going to believe his eyes either, is he?