...because he supports a worldview that you also support, and it's one that applauds the scientific method while insisting that method not be applied to any phenomena that may invalidate that worldview if any validity to it can be established. Atheists of the school that you and Dante belong to show a strong bias towards even the thought of applying research to any phenomenon that can be remotely attributed to religion. Your applauding of a post as "excellent" that is dismissive rather than subjecting a certain pervasively reported phenomena to actual scrutiny with scientific methodology says more about your willingness to latch on to that bias than anything else. All Dante really did in that post was throw sarcastic ad hominems at me, use dirty pool tactics to claim I was making sweeping statements that I actually wasn't, and citing the works of scientists who agree with him to "prove" that those who disagree with him are invalid when neither have proven or disproven the validity of the theory beyond a shadow of a doubt (which would only have merit if I ever claimed that all physicists disagree with him, which I never did). This shows you approve of his taking potshots at me for challenging your worldview rather than "proving" anything or giving any major food for thought on his part, and the emotional "high" this gave you will weaken the emotional "high" it gave you will weaken when I rebuke his statements. Note how so few people are reacting to what Dante says save for a certain person who agrees with the underlying ideology behind his statements implicitly, because they are most likely interested in gradually dissecting the merits of both arguments before automatically throwing in support for one or the other (and you didn't feel the need to do any thinking, since your mind on the subject is fully made up already).

An ideology based on a knee-jerk hatred of religion rather than an objective deconstruction of what it asks about the universe is not going to be either scientific or rational.