Honest Debate: how do you read?

When I read new material I read for understanding.When I do research I look for bits and pieces of evidence, generally in books or articles I have already read or at least scanned. (Yes, I have a very large research library.) But if the evidence doesn't support my idea, that idea must be dropped, or at least put aside until evidence which does support it can be found.And, as Heinlein noted:

Belief gets in the way of learning.

​

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Ah, if it is posts here you are talking about reading...I tend not to read the extremely long ones at all. If there are twenty or so quotes and responses I just pass right on by. That is way too long for this format.I might pick a single point, or maybe two, to discuss, but that's about all.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Working with the key points in an overall argument is fine, but far too many of these posts attempt to respond to all arguments, consequential or not. Often at some length. The responses to those posts can be even worse.This is not the best format for such a debate style.I prefer to stick to the main points and ignore the side trails where possible.This may seem like selecting "gotcha" points but it is actually being more selective and focused.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.