Stacy Trascanos hit the nail on the head in her post "What If I Denied the Existence of Science".
Another frustration presented in a similar manner might go something like this:
I ask a mathematician, "Teach me how to solve differential equations."
Mathematician gives me a long lesson and while demonstrating how to solve a problem I interrupt, "No that's wrong. I don't believe 1+1=2, I think it is zero."
The mathematician says, "No, calculus is based on fundamental arithmetic and standard decimal arithmetic includes the understanding that 1+1=2."
I say, "No, I say it doesn't. So, explain how to solve that differential equation with the obvious understanding that 1+1=0."
She responds, "If you don't believe 1+1=2 and won't just accept that as a given fact for the sake of my explaining how to solve this problem I can't help you understand Calculus."
I say, "Oh sure, that's how all you mathematicians are. You won't explain things to us non-mathematicians without using your rules and terminology. That just proves your system is a bunch of made-up stuff."
Yep, substitute some dogma or doctrine of faith for Calculus and God for the base assumption of 1+1=2 and you have a lot of conversations I have with atheists.
Look, I don't mind talking to an atheist. We can have meaningful exchanges about the existence or non-existence of God. We may even be able to slide into a discussion of the nature of God. But, if you want to talk dogma, doctrine, Tradition, practice and other elements of faith that are contingent on the existence of God and you won't just concede that point for the sake of discussion, it's as fruitless as teaching Calculus to someone that insists 1+1=0.
