However, if your intention is to enlighten someone and possibly change their point of view, you might want to dial back on the rhetoric. You can’t change someone’s mind unless you can really communicate with them. Attacking and ridiculing their point of view gets you nowhere.

I tell you, ever since I got involved in the skeptics groups I am seeing woo *everywhere*. It mostly slipped below radar before. That flaky shit is pervasive!

I wonder though, if the goal should be to engage with theists on their terms in order to deconvert them, or rather should it be to address the more general differences in thinking. You said in an earlier post that if you look at logical, philosophical, and empirical arguments, atheism comes out on top. If someone can be shown exactly what critical thinking is, and convinced that it’s the best way to derive truth in general, then it’s trivial to argue against supernatural religion, and they’ve received a kind of innocculation against all sorts of loony ideas to boot.