It's mostly crap, as all arguments over atheism vs. something else are. What I find interesting is the debate about materialism vs. non-materialism in regard to mental states and memories. It is taken as a given in most neuroscience circles that for you or I to think X, that there is something like a neural configuration (typically called a 'neural representation') of X in our brains. The problem is that there is no evidence that this is the case, and no one has ever really even defined what a 'neural representation' even is. I've never heard a theist speak on this, so I was kind of caught off guard by it, but in a good way. The theist at least recognizes that he's a dualist; the materialist does not. That's the part I was struck by. But for that, I wouldn't have posted it.