Saleh

Also what started with burning books went to burning humans in short time.

If you were to protest the Iranian regime, you should use a flag of the current regime. Burning Quran to protest one specific Muslim country is like burning Torah to protest Israel. The symbol is specific to the entire religion and not some country or administration or so. So it is always an attack on the religion as a whole.

Also Islam and (afaik) Judaism don't have a central religious authority like the catholic church does. So attacking the religion to criticize a certain institution works even less.

I believe the US is a white supremacist empire, founded on a settler colonial genocide, which is part of why it now supports another settler colonial genocide.

There will be no change to that in the current political system. It requires a fundamental political change, probably revolution, but certainly the dismantling of the current political parties to change that.

Maybe Trump will speed up the genocide of Palestinians, but the Democrats are equally committed to it, as they have thrown away every chance to end it, while taking every chance to perpetuate it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Agnosticism is the view or belief that the existence of God, the divine, or the supernatural is either unknowable in principle or unknown in fact. It can also mean an apathy towards such religious belief and refer to personal limitations rather than a worldview. Another definition is the view that "human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that God exists or the belief that God does not exist."

Aside from that, whether you accept and believe scientific discoveries remains a subjective choice. In social sciences like history or economics it often happens that two contradictory views are equally legitimate. And again the look in the past is valuable. Many scientists were ridiculed, sometimes even persecuted for their ideas to be outside the consensus of their time.

Assuming that what you consider the accepted truth because it is the accepted opinion of our day and age could proof equally fallible like the ancient Greeks and Romans ridiculing the now accepted germ theory, for which we have ample evidence thanks to the development of microscopes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease#Greece_and_Rome

So your original ridicule is perfectly viable. It just not only applies to the statements of Tucker Carlson, who i probably despise equally as you do.

But has reminded Israel to uphold international law and demanded Israel look into these things. Also Israel has a right to defend itself from Palestinians existing in their own houses on land coveted by Israel.

Puerto Rico still excluded from voting in the presidential elections i see.

We demanded for almost a year that the Democrats need to stop supporting genocide. Instead Biden, Harris and the other party elites would rather hand the US to Trump than to stop more Arabs being murdered. Maybe she proves us wrong and actually puts Israel in check. But everything action so far has been the opposite of that.

Who is current vice-president?

Her entire campaign was based on the fact that she is the continuation of Biden. Having proper primaries after Biden dropped out was argued against, saying she is already on the ticket. Her team is largely Bidens team. Distancing her from the administration she currently serves in and saying she is the continuation of that doesn't work.

Frankly if she was opposed to genocide the only decent thing would have been to resign from her position in the current administration. You cannot be against genocide while serving a genocidal president.

"Hey, i have murdered some 40.000 people, most women and children. Can you send me more weapons?"

"Well sure, here ya go. Need any more troops deployed with it, so no one in the region can try to stop you?"

More clear of an endorsement isn't possible aside from going there personally to murder the women and children herself.

Sending weapons to the army committing the genocide is a very clear endorsement of it. Judge politicians by their actions, not by their promises.

And not only was sending those weapons a clear endorsement of the genocide, it is illegal by US law. The whole administration and majority of congress should be under investigation and in jail.

Atheism is a belief system. It is the belief that there is no deity.

The scientific approach is agnosticism. In the absence of evidence, or what one considers evidence, the scientific answer is "i don't know".

Personal experience and evidence are two different things.

And a lot of what we consider to be scientifically proven, are theories, which are subject to constant change. The best example probably being atomic models and how rapidly they developed in the early 20th century. However that Bohrs atom model of circular movement of electrons around the atoms core was succeeded by more detailed models and the circles being disproved, doesn't mean Bohr was any less of a scientist or evidence based researcher.

Meanwhile except for very few physics experts we all just accept that orbitals are the best approximation we have right now, because we read it in some book.