PDA

View Full Version : Religious people are less intelligent ...apparently.



Rheghead
13-Aug-13, 22:29
"A new review of 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/religious-people-are-less-intelligent-than-atheists-according-to-analysis-of-scores-of-scientific-studies-stretching-back-over-decades-8758046.html

So there you have it. Stick in at school, question everything and you will be more immune to the persuasion tactics of religion.

Tangerine-Dream
13-Aug-13, 22:34
Anybody who carries a bible is a neanderthal..... we don't need a "scientific study" to figure that one out mate. Religion is the root of all evil.

Alrock
13-Aug-13, 22:58
Anybody who carries a bible is a neanderthal..... we don't need a "scientific study" to figure that one out mate. Religion is the root of all evil.

Come on now, don't insult the Neanderthals....

golach
13-Aug-13, 23:30
"A new review of 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/religious-people-are-less-intelligent-than-atheists-according-to-analysis-of-scores-of-scientific-studies-stretching-back-over-decades-8758046.html

So there you have it. Stick in at school, question everything and you will be more immune to the persuasion tactics of religion.

Cannot agree Rheg, one of the most intelligent friends I have is a Kirk o' Scotland minister, and you know her well.

RecQuery
14-Aug-13, 09:11
Cannot agree Rheg, one of the most intelligent friends I have is a Kirk o' Scotland minister, and you know her well.

Wait, let's get this straight. You can't agree with a scientific meta study spanning multiple years and using numerous source studies because your personal experience/anecdotal evidence of one person makes you disagree...

http://i.imgur.com/6PpPlik.jpg

Also ignoring the fact that the Bible says in numerous places that a women shouldn't teach religion to anyone, shouldn't even attempt to teach men or hold authority over them.

RecQuery
14-Aug-13, 11:11
LOL, calm down hear, don't get your jimmies rustled

http://i.imgur.com/X6Vy613.png
http://i.imgur.com/X6Vy613.png

Saveman
14-Aug-13, 11:28
Wow Science has discovered something that the Bible has said all along LOL....

Matt 11:25 "At that time Jesus said, “Thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because You hid these things from the wise and from those who have much learning.
You have shown them to little children."

Jesus at times referred to his disciples as "little children."

RecQuery
14-Aug-13, 16:05
Wow Science has discovered something that the Bible has said all along LOL....

Matt 11:25 "At that time Jesus said, “Thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because You hid these things from the wise and from those who have much learning.
You have shown them to little children."

Jesus at times referred to his disciples as "little children."

I... just... what... I'm not qualified to deal with this level of stupidity. I reiterate my picture above.

Saveman
14-Aug-13, 16:12
With humans higher intelligence doesn't always equate with wisdom, justice or even love.

Which person would you rather spend time with? A highly intelligent scientist who looks down on you because you don't have the same IQ as him or the same level of education? Or a humble person of humble means who enjoys conversation and is kind and generous?

ducati
14-Aug-13, 18:39
With humans higher intelligence doesn't always equate with wisdom, justice or even love.

Which person would you rather spend time with? A highly intelligent scientist who looks down on you because you don't have the same IQ as him or the same level of education? Or a humble person of humble means who enjoys conversation and is kind and generous?

The second one for me, especially if the first one is a nerd.:lol:

Alrock
14-Aug-13, 18:57
The second one for me, especially if the first one is a nerd.:lol:

Both are far preferable to a religious bigot who thinks I'll burn in hell for all eternity just because I don't believe in whichever book they happen to believe in.

squidge
14-Aug-13, 19:49
People are just people. Some are religious and clever and some who are atheists are stupid. Move the slider either way along as you choose. All this serves to do is give some people an excuse to feel superior to others. I have no idea why it matters to some what other people believe or dont believe. As long as people are not forcing their beliefs onto someone else why does it matter if they believe in God, nothing or the flying spaghetti monster, its their business. Why on earth would we want to make assumptions about their intellect based on their beliefs? Seems to me that the people who do that are the ones lacking in intelligence.

Alrock
14-Aug-13, 20:03
People are just people. Some are religious and clever and some who are atheists are stupid. Move the slider either way along as you choose. All this serves to do is give some people an excuse to feel superior to others. I have no idea why it matters to some what other people believe or dont believe. As long as people are not forcing their beliefs onto someone else why does it matter if they believe in God, nothing or the flying spaghetti monster, its their business. Why on earth would we want to make assumptions about their intellect based on their beliefs? Seems to me that the people who do that are the ones lacking in intelligence.

& that is why religion & politics should not mix, but unfortunately they do.

joxville
14-Aug-13, 20:14
People are just people. Some are religious and clever and some who are atheists are stupid. Move the slider either way along as you choose. All this serves to do is give some people an excuse to feel superior to others. I have no idea why it matters to some what other people believe or dont believe. As long as people are not forcing their beliefs onto someone else why does it matter if they believe in God, nothing or the flying spaghetti monster, its their business. Why on earth would we want to make assumptions about their intellect based on their beliefs? Seems to me that the people who do that are the ones lacking in intelligence.Is that a flying monster made of spaghetti or one that throws spaghetti? It's important, I need to know whether to carry a large knife and fork or a wear a wet suit :-/

Rheghead
14-Aug-13, 20:54
Which person would you rather spend time with? A highly intelligent scientist who looks down on you because you don't have the same IQ as him or the same level of education? Or a humble person of humble means who enjoys conversation and is kind and generous?

Oh the irony...


Jesus at times referred to his disciples as "little children."

squidge
14-Aug-13, 21:32
Is that a flying monster made of spaghetti or one that throws spaghetti? It's important, I need to know whether to carry a large knife and fork or a wear a wet suit :-/

Lol Joxville - here you go

http://www.venganza.org/

apparently followers of this "religion" are called pastafariens!!!!!!

Green_not_greed
14-Aug-13, 22:13
Both are far preferable to a religious bigot who thinks I'll burn in hell for all eternity just because I don't believe in whichever book they happen to believe in.

Spot on - totally agree.

George Brims
14-Aug-13, 22:25
With humans higher intelligence doesn't always equate with wisdom, justice or even love.

Which person would you rather spend time with? A highly intelligent scientist who looks down on you because you don't have the same IQ as him or the same level of education? Or a humble person of humble means who enjoys conversation and is kind and generous?
Which one has beer?

squidge
14-Aug-13, 22:32
Does it matter if they think you will burn in hell if you dont believe that hell exists? How many of us have been berated or targetted or pushed or preached at by a religious zealot?

I have always found that a polite "I'm not interested thank you" does the trick.

Indeed there are very few if any threads on this board which are started to tell us unbelievers that we are damned or to demand that we all repent and bend our knee before some great deity. There have however been plenty of threads to point out how stupid those of us who believe in God or follow a religion are...........

Green_not_greed
14-Aug-13, 23:07
Indeed there are very few if any threads on this board which are started to tell us unbelievers that we are damned or to demand that we all repent and bend our knee before some great deity. .

Apart from the ones telling us all to repent and bend our knees before the wind turbines !

I don't believe that religious people are any less intelligent than anyone else. But I do believe that their general view (no matter what religion) that everyone should believe the same things as they do rather limits their outlook and acceptability of others who may hold alternative views. So not less intelligent but certainly less accepting and from that less able to integrate into a multicultural society.

Alrock
14-Aug-13, 23:11
I have always found that a polite "I'm not interested thank you" does the trick.

Very true, it's the animal rights/donkey sanctuary etc ones that are the most pushy....

Having said that though, with the religious ones it's the poor sheepish children that they drag along with them that I feel sorry for.

squidge
14-Aug-13, 23:46
I dont think any sort of strict religious upbringing is good for children or indeed very healthy. I think it stifles their development but I dont think a bit of religion is a bad thing for kids. They like the mysticism and they enjoy the stories and the idea of love thy neighbour is not a bad one. I prefer that they know that Christmas is Christmas because of celebrating the birth of the baby Jesus and that it is important to some people if not to others, as opposed to thinking it is just about an iPad or My Little Ponies. Heaven is a nice way of reassuring little ones when someone they love dies and they can choose for themselves if they want to take it with them as they grow. I suppose I sort of have the same sort of approach to religion and my children as I have to Santa Claus. Maybe thats wrong but it seems to have worked for the older ones.

I suppose that might be cos I grew up with the Church of England - everything in our village revolved around the Church. The school was a church school, the brownies, guides, youth club, drama group were all linked to the church. I dont ever recall being "made" to believe or asked to "take Jesus into my heart". But then I sort of think that CofE is the sort of religion that doesnt ask anything of you. You can sort of beleive if you want and not if you dont - please yourself.

Kenn
14-Aug-13, 23:47
What bothers me is that there are so many differing religions in the world which would seem to indicate that all believers are either right or they are all wrong. If millions believe does that make it any better than if a few believe?

Alrock
15-Aug-13, 00:24
Heaven is a nice way of reassuring little ones when someone they love dies

Heaven can be just borrowing something from religion as a way of comforting & reassuring children that everything will be alright. There doesn't even need to be an Almighty God in this heaven, just needs to be a nice place.

squidge
15-Aug-13, 00:32
Well I have had occasion to hope there is a heaven AND hope its a nice place many times over the years so maybe not just for comforting and reassuring children - sigh.......

RecQuery
15-Aug-13, 07:56
With humans higher intelligence doesn't always equate with wisdom, justice or even love.

Which person would you rather spend time with? A highly intelligent scientist who looks down on you because you don't have the same IQ as him or the same level of education? Or a humble person of humble means who enjoys conversation and is kind and generous?

You seem to equate intelligence with arrogance, your prejudice is showing. I've known plenty of 'humble people' who use their lack of intelligence as a badge of honour. Some go even further than that but that's a different discussion.

So kindly don't spout your cereal box philosophy and wisdom at me, best to save that for children's TV.

maverick
15-Aug-13, 08:52
I wonder how many of you would agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe? How many of you would agree with me that because we cannot see something with our eyes, does not mean that it does not exist?

RagnarRocks
15-Aug-13, 09:44
Intelligent design is merely the modern way of getting past the world wasn't created as per genesis ( although phil Collins may disagree) ! I'd rather if you're going to follow a religion be honest about it observe your religious doctrines and stop rewriting things when science disagrees or disproves. I really don't have the time or energy to deal with multiple religions, believe if you wish but belief has very little to do with IQ you don't have to be a genius or a moron to believe. I wonder how many Christians, Jews ,Muslims etc feel comfortable knowing most of their religious views are remarkably similar to Zoroastrianism which predates all the abrahamic religions. Religion seems to me more man exerting control over others, if you look at the world today there's more war than ever and sitting right in there with it Religion. Question worth asking is does religion kill more people than its worth !If I want to be religious which religion should I follow South America - Roman Catholic, Middle East - Muslim, Europe- Christian, India- Hindu , so it seems my religion is more likely to be decided by geo political forces as opposed to so e mystical being imbuing me with an ephinany ! How odd is that an all powerful force of which there is apparently only one or to some many but no on ever sees them hears from them has any credible evidence they exist but still it would appear god/gods cannot sort out one small planet let alone multiple universes galaxies .

rob1
15-Aug-13, 09:58
How many of you would agree with me that because we cannot see something with our eyes, does not mean that it does not exist?

And that is the biggest copout of them all. You can supply folk with all the data and evidence explaining evolution, gravity, northern lights or whatever natural phenomena you want, none of which support any involvement of a supreme being and all the religious folk need to do is disregard all that evidence and say "you can't prove that god didn't exist".

For someone to disregard the overwhelming reproducible and quantifiable evidence that explains these phenomena without the need for a god, takes a huge amount of stupidity or brainwashing.

maverick
15-Aug-13, 10:34
And that is the biggest copout of them all. You can supply folk with all the data and evidence explaining evolution, gravity, northern lights or whatever natural phenomena you want, none of which support any involvement of a supreme being and all the religious folk need to do is disregard all that evidence and say "you can't prove that god didn't exist".

For someone to disregard the overwhelming reproducible and quantifiable evidence that explains these phenomena without the need for a god, takes a huge amount of stupidity or brainwashing. Rob, I understand gravity and magnetism, I also understand that there is air, I have never seen any of these things, what I have seen is the effect of their cause and because of the effect I can believe, you have a mind rob1 your mind is something exclusive to you, I have never seen your mind and therefore because I have not seen your mind should I dismiss it's existence?

Tangerine-Dream
15-Aug-13, 11:07
Praying on the streets is becomming a big problem in some countries, there are traffic jams in New York every day whilst the faithful pray in the middle of the road.

20567

maverick
15-Aug-13, 11:38
"A new review of 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/religious-people-are-less-intelligent-than-atheists-according-to-analysis-of-scores-of-scientific-studies-stretching-back-over-decades-8758046.html

So there you have it. Stick in at school, question everything and you will be more immune to the persuasion tactics of religion.Well Rheghead there lies another prime example of science getting it wrong, so perhaps I might be allowed to question everything, If we are to believe everything that scientists claim as fact, then evolution should be true. If evolution and all the science that goes with it is correct then it should be able to stand up to scrutiny on it's own merits. Many claim "fossils" are the supreme evidence of evolution, yet I'm not aware of any transitional life form fossils, which show a transition from ape to man or chimp to man, or any other monkey to man. I believe it's merely wishful thinking. While beneficial mutations are theoretically possible, what might some examples of this be? I'm still trying to figure out how "male" and "female" pairs just happened to spring up by mutation over millions of years into separate, viable, fully functional anatomy, which just happened to have the ability to take in the nourishment it needed, to expel waste and to reproduce itself, all the while having everything it needed to survive in the environment in which it suddenly found itself. And yet people claim you need no faith to believe this.

golach
15-Aug-13, 11:44
Praying on the streets is becomming a big problem in some countries, there are traffic jams in New York every day whilst the faithful pray in the middle of the road.

20567

And what is wrong with that?

rob1
15-Aug-13, 12:48
Well Rheghead there lies another prime example of science getting it wrong, so perhaps I might be allowed to question everything, If we are to believe everything that scientists claim as fact, then evolution should be true. If evolution and all the science that goes with it is correct then it should be able to stand up to scrutiny on it's own merits. Many claim "fossils" are the supreme evidence of evolution, yet I'm not aware of any transitional life form fossils, which show a transition from ape to man or chimp to man, or any other monkey to man. I believe it's merely wishful thinking. While beneficial mutations are theoretically possible, what might some examples of this be? I'm still trying to figure out how "male" and "female" pairs just happened to spring up by mutation over millions of years into separate, viable, fully functional anatomy, which just happened to have the ability to take in the nourishment it needed, to expel waste and to reproduce itself, all the while having everything it needed to survive in the environment in which it suddenly found itself. And yet people claim you need no faith to believe this.

Oh for the love of Darwin! I bet you have not read the research paper that sparked this thread. You, like most of us have merely looked at a news article which will only highlight the main findings rather than explain, in detail the methods and analysis used.

Don't believe everything a scientist claims as fact. If you just believe without question then you are nothing more sheep aimlessly following the leader. Read the evidence and ask questions, understand why research was done, how it was done and what the findings represent and also the limitations.

Why would you expect to see a transitional fossil from ape to man? No scientist claims that man evolved from ape. That is why there is no transitional fossils! Man and ape evolved from a common ancestor, hence why they are often referred to as our cousins. There are plenty of transitional forms that have been identified, the problem is that when one is identified, creationist will then say "ah but there is not transitional fossils between this new one and man and the common ancestor". There is overwhelming evidence for evolution and if just one of the fossils found on the planet was found in the wrong place (for example a T-Rex fossil found above a mammoth) then just about everything we treat as fact regarding evolution would have to be reassessed. You know what - it's never happened.

George Brims
15-Aug-13, 17:28
I wonder how many of you would agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe? How many of you would agree with me that because we cannot see something with our eyes, does not mean that it does not exist?
Cite me any evidence of "intelligent design".

George Brims
15-Aug-13, 17:31
Praying on the streets is becomming a big problem in some countries, there are traffic jams in New York every day whilst the faithful pray in the middle of the road.

20567
If you believe that's a picture from New York, I have a fine bridge in that same city I would be willing to sell you real cheap. Ditto for your belief that anyone spends any time in the middle of the road in NYC - a fast way to die, given the way they drive there!

George Brims
15-Aug-13, 17:36
Well Rheghead there lies another prime example of science getting it wrong, so perhaps I might be allowed to question everything, If we are to believe everything that scientists claim as fact, then evolution should be true. If evolution and all the science that goes with it is correct then it should be able to stand up to scrutiny on it's own merits. Many claim "fossils" are the supreme evidence of evolution, yet I'm not aware of any transitional life form fossils, which show a transition from ape to man or chimp to man, or any other monkey to man. I believe it's merely wishful thinking. While beneficial mutations are theoretically possible, what might some examples of this be? I'm still trying to figure out how "male" and "female" pairs just happened to spring up by mutation over millions of years into separate, viable, fully functional anatomy, which just happened to have the ability to take in the nourishment it needed, to expel waste and to reproduce itself, all the while having everything it needed to survive in the environment in which it suddenly found itself. And yet people claim you need no faith to believe this.
Setting aside for a moment the argument over whether religious people are less intelligent, let me just protest as a person with a long career in the physical sciences the characterization of this social studies claptrap as "science".
Meanwhile Maverick, just because you aren't aware of any transitional stages in the evolution of hominids doesn't mean they don't exist. They do, and not only do we have most of the transitional species we even have several dead ends that didn't evolve into any modern species.

maverick
15-Aug-13, 17:49
Cite me any evidence of "intelligent design". Perhaps George the next time you switch on your pc/ laptop, mobile phone etc. I'm sure the designers of said gadgets had a degree of intelligence.

maverick
15-Aug-13, 18:01
Setting aside for a moment the argument over whether religious people are less intelligent, let me just protest as a person with a long career in the physical sciences the characterization of this social studies claptrap as "science".
Meanwhile Maverick, just because you aren't aware of any transitional stages in the evolution of hominids doesn't mean they don't exist. They do, and not only do we have most of the transitional species we even have several dead ends that didn't evolve into any modern species. Many species died George, that's why they became extinct. All you have in a fossil George is a dead subject, there is no proof that the fossilised remains had any offspring. There is no record of what may be classed nowadays as endangered species, evolution is not an observable science, I for one have never seen primordial soup, that's if it ever existed at all, then there is the geological column that supposedly dates back millions of years but fossilised trees have been found vertically in the column, perhaps you with your scientific background could give an explanation?

maverick
15-Aug-13, 18:09
Oh for the love of Darwin! I bet you have not read the research paper that sparked this thread. You, like most of us have merely looked at a news article which will only highlight the main findings rather than explain, in detail the methods and analysis used.

Don't believe everything a scientist claims as fact. If you just believe without question then you are nothing more sheep aimlessly following the leader. Read the evidence and ask questions, understand why research was done, how it was done and what the findings represent and also the limitations.

Why would you expect to see a transitional fossil from ape to man? No scientist claims that man evolved from ape. That is why there is no transitional fossils! Man and ape evolved from a common ancestor, hence why they are often referred to as our cousins. There are plenty of transitional forms that have been identified, the problem is that when one is identified, creationist will then say "ah but there is not transitional fossils between this new one and man and the common ancestor". There is overwhelming evidence for evolution and if just one of the fossils found on the planet was found in the wrong place (for example a T-Rex fossil found above a mammoth) then just about everything we treat as fact regarding evolution would have to be reassessed. You know what - it's never happened. I believe you are wrong rob1 it would appear that fossils are appearing in the wrong place all the time, yet science ignores this, there is no chance of a scientific reassessment on evolution, there has been heavy amounts of brainwashing and stupidity invested in evolution, oh and a dose of pious ignorance.

George Brims
16-Aug-13, 18:56
Many species died George, that's why they became extinct. All you have in a fossil George is a dead subject, there is no proof that the fossilised remains had any offspring. There is no record of what may be classed nowadays as endangered species, evolution is not an observable science, I for one have never seen primordial soup, that's if it ever existed at all, then there is the geological column that supposedly dates back millions of years but fossilised trees have been found vertically in the column, perhaps you with your scientific background could give an explanation?
The fossilized trees are no great puzzle. Trees grow straight up and down (mostly). Sometimes trees get buried in mud/sand during catastrophic floods. The mud/sand solidifies, and the trees become fossilized. What's the issue? Do you imagine the geologic column only has tiny thin layers for each year? Sometimes they do, but sometimes (in the case of big flood events or volcanic eruptions) one short period of time can be represented by feet upon feet of deposited material.
As for "evolution is not an observable science" I will state what I think which is that evolution is not even a theory. Evolution is an observable fact, and the only theory required is the refinement of the explanation of its mechanisms.

maverick
17-Aug-13, 23:50
The fossilized trees are no great puzzle. Trees grow straight up and down (mostly). Sometimes trees get buried in mud/sand during catastrophic floods. The mud/sand solidifies, and the trees become fossilized. What's the issue? Do you imagine the geologic column only has tiny thin layers for each year? Sometimes they do, but sometimes (in the case of big flood events or volcanic eruptions) one short period of time can be represented by feet upon feet of deposited material.
As for "evolution is not an observable science" I will state what I think which is that evolution is not even a theory. Evolution is an observable fact, and the only theory required is the refinement of the explanation of its mechanisms. Then perhaps you should get started refining the explanation of it's mechanisms.

Rheghead
17-Aug-13, 23:52
Then perhaps you should get started refining the explanation of it's mechanisms.

Is that because you've never had it explained before? :eek:

RagnarRocks
18-Aug-13, 07:32
I think you'll find if you do a wee bit of serious scientific reading you're confusion over fossil deposits will be easily remedied, if you start reading up on evolution with all the surrounding data with cross discipline referencing and instead of just constantly challenging other people's views,then,just then,maybe you can hold a rational coherent discussion on the subject. I mean I'm quite happy to discuss and have done with theologians it's not hard to disagree and remain on good terms but the bottom line is you need to have sufficient depth of knowledge to debate and discuss rather than just blind faith. Personally I've read the Bible, Torah and Quran they are nice books some good parts some dubious as a guide to living they aren't all bad but very much works of their time and to be read as such. When I read a scientific paper I judge the article on how it's written whether or not its been reviewed and all the surrounding data, when I read the bible it isn't so easy I'm asked to suspend belief and when the book is questioned there is a tendency to brush over the glaring errors or to try reinterpret it with modern thinking ie 7 days not actually 7 but some amount which is changed to suit the argument hardly good eh !It would appear if the authors of the religious texts had actually written there books clearly then most of the confusion would of been cleared up centuries ago.Before asking for explanations I suggest you read the vast pool of peer reviewed scientific evidence on all these subjects then enter the debate enlightened .

cptdodger
18-Aug-13, 12:32
I certainly would not say that religious people are less intelligent, my late sister in law was an ordained minister, also she was the only woman professor of theology at a Scottish University (Edinburgh), and the first woman professor of theology at New College in its 160 year history. What does bother me though is reading this on the BBC News website - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23734584. Whether that is lack of intelligence or blind faith, I have no idea, but these people are dangerous, and really should be stopped.

theone
19-Aug-13, 21:50
I certainly would not say that religious people are less intelligent, my late sister in law was an ordained minister, also she was the only woman professor of theology at a Scottish University (Edinburgh), and the first woman professor of theology at New College in its 160 year history..

The headline on the article confuses the conclusion of the study. It did not show that religious people are necessarily less intelligent, it showed that intelligent people are less likely to be religious.

There's a big difference.

"Dead people are likely to be run over by buses" is not the same as "People run over by buses are most likely dead".

I'm sure your sister in law was very intelligent, but theology is not a science. I believe intelligence in a modern scientific sense is based more on reason, evidence gathering and analysis. Belief in what cannot be proved and blind faith, where there is no need for proof, is not in line with this. Hence why religious people do not fit the mould of what many see as "intelligent".

cptdodger
19-Aug-13, 22:51
Sorry, I probably was'nt making myself very clear ! The point I was making about blind faith was referring to the article from the BBC. Pentecostal ministers telling people that water would cure HIV, so they stopped taking their medicine and told to rely on their faith in god - that is what I find disturbing, and dangerous to be honest. I'm not religious and never have been, and I grew up around religious people of different faiths in my family, it just never made any sense to me !

maverick
20-Aug-13, 01:24
I think you'll find if you do a wee bit of serious scientific reading you're confusion over fossil deposits will be easily remedied, if you start reading up on evolution with all the surrounding data with cross discipline referencing and instead of just constantly challenging other people's views,then,just then,maybe you can hold a rational coherent discussion on the subject. I mean I'm quite happy to discuss and have done with theologians it's not hard to disagree and remain on good terms but the bottom line is you need to have sufficient depth of knowledge to debate and discuss rather than just blind faith. Personally I've read the Bible, Torah and Quran they are nice books some good parts some dubious as a guide to living they aren't all bad but very much works of their time and to be read as such. When I read a scientific paper I judge the article on how it's written whether or not its been reviewed and all the surrounding data, when I read the bible it isn't so easy I'm asked to suspend belief and when the book is questioned there is a tendency to brush over the glaring errors or to try reinterpret it with modern thinking ie 7 days not actually 7 but some amount which is changed to suit the argument hardly good eh !It would appear if the authors of the religious texts had actually written there books clearly then most of the confusion would of been cleared up centuries ago.Before asking for explanations I suggest you read the vast pool of peer reviewed scientific evidence on all these subjects then enter the debate enlightened .Okay RagnarRocks this is my position regarding evolution. Adaptation is not molecules- to - man evolution. Adaptation can not be extrapolated to claim that dinosaurs turned into birds, or that apes descended into humans. The problem with evolution starting in the current and extrapolating to the past, is that it has to be done with suppositions and assumptions. To then declare it as fact is not science, let alone honest. When evolutionists say "we know that it evolved". I say "no you don't know that", because no one was there to watch it and there is no factual evidence for it. All you know are the speculations and assumptions, none of which can be proven. The fossil record gives no dates, has no dating tags on the fossils, and all dating methods are based on unprovable speculations. When I say evolution is not factual, what I mean is that there is no evidence for anything in regards to evolution. To take adaptation and claim that it can be extrapolated to molecules-to-man evolution is 100% speculation and assumption. There are no facts to support it, you can give me all the links in the world, but you will not find one with a fact about evolution. You will find only speculations, assertions and assumptions about what happened. I will concede that observed mutations seen in nature can indeed result in significant changes. However, observed mutations seen in nature do not create new genetic information that did not previously exist. New information requires a Designer. Natural selection can only select from what already exists.

maverick
20-Aug-13, 01:28
Is that because you've never had it explained before? :eek: Did you use both your brain cells to come up with that answer Richardhead?

rob1
20-Aug-13, 10:07
Okay RagnarRocks this is my position regarding evolution. Adaptation is not molecules- to - man evolution. Adaptation can not be extrapolated to claim that dinosaurs turned into birds, or that apes descended into humans. The problem with evolution starting in the current and extrapolating to the past, is that it has to be done with suppositions and assumptions. To then declare it as fact is not science, let alone honest. When evolutionists say "we know that it evolved". I say "no you don't know that", because no one was there to watch it and there is no factual evidence for it. All you know are the speculations and assumptions, none of which can be proven. The fossil record gives no dates, has no dating tags on the fossils, and all dating methods are based on unprovable speculations. When I say evolution is not factual, what I mean is that there is no evidence for anything in regards to evolution. To take adaptation and claim that it can be extrapolated to molecules-to-man evolution is 100% speculation and assumption. There are no facts to support it, you can give me all the links in the world, but you will not find one with a fact about evolution. You will find only speculations, assertions and assumptions about what happened. I will concede that observed mutations seen in nature can indeed result in significant changes. However, observed mutations seen in nature do not create new genetic information that did not previously exist. New information requires a Designer. Natural selection can only select from what already exists.

What I find hard to understand is that there are and have been many men and women who have devoted their working lives trying to understand the origin and progression of life on this planet, they have conducted experiments, gathered evidence, writen paper, presented lectures and gained the respect of their peers, but you're prepared to ignore all of this because you just don't think that it is possible.

rob1
20-Aug-13, 10:13
Did you use both your brain cells to come up with that answer Richardhead?

Rheghead's comment was perfectly resonable. You do give the impresson from your comments that no one has actually explaned evolution to you or more likely they have but you just did not want to listen. Instead of answering the question like adult, you chose to be petty and rude.

maverick
20-Aug-13, 16:36
What I find hard to understand is that there are and have been many men and women who have devoted their working lives trying to understand the origin and progression of life on this planet, they have conducted experiments, gathered evidence, writen paper, presented lectures and gained the respect of their peers, but you're prepared to ignore all of this because you just don't think that it is possible.I would fully agree with what you state here rob1, many of those who you describe are also Creationist scientists, I do not ignore any of this, there are several Creation models which have been accepted as possible. Science does not have all the answers for all the questions, I suppose there is the concept that if I can show it on paper then it is assumed to be more fact than fiction, however, I could on paper draw a picture of a man carrying an adult elephant.

maverick
20-Aug-13, 16:42
Rheghead's comment was perfectly resonable. You do give the impresson from your comments that no one has actually explaned evolution to you or more likely they have but you just did not want to listen. Instead of answering the question like adult, you chose to be petty and rude.Petty no, rude yes, but then when the originator of the thread claims that being a theist allegedly makes you less intelligent than an atheist, just goes to show the level of ignorance of that person.

cptdodger
20-Aug-13, 16:57
Petty no, rude yes, but then when the originator of the thread claims that being a theist allegedly makes you less intelligent than an atheist, just goes to show the level of ignorance of that person.

As it was pointed out to me maverick, by theone - "The headline on the article confuses the conclusion of the study. It did not show that religious people are necessarily less intelligent, it showed that intelligent people are less likely to be religious." - Now, that's probably my fault because I did'nt read the article. And to be honest, I am not sure I agree with that statement either, because I have met a lot of people whom I consider to be more intelligent than me that do believe in god. I do'nt, and I am certainly no genius !

ducati
20-Aug-13, 19:47
Petty no, rude yes, but then when the originator of the thread claims that being a theist allegedly makes you less intelligent than an atheist, just goes to show the level of ignorance of that person.

With every post you make the headline more believable. :roll:

maverick
20-Aug-13, 20:13
With every post you make the headline more believable. :roll:In your own words ducati, it wasn't that long ago you were calling someone a tosser, well everybody has the freedom and right to be a tosser but you really shouldn't abuse the privilege.

Rheghead
20-Aug-13, 21:07
Being religious definitely shows that a person is lacking the ability to think critically about their surroundings. Now if they are unable to think critically does that mean they lack some mental ability or just not interested in finding a different explanation?

Dadie
20-Aug-13, 22:46
OK I know the lifeforms on Earth evolved over time.
But who would tell someone on their deathbed there isnt a heaven?
If its their only thing to look forward to, is, their next life after they gasp their last....as a comfort to them and their loved ones.
Even very intelligent people like to think there is something after death....when faced by the grim reaper waiting in the wings with very little sand left in their timer and no chance of the timer getting flipped over.
And by that I dont just mean a box buried or ashes scattered...I mean souls going to heaven or reincarnation etc whatever their religion dictates...

golach
20-Aug-13, 22:51
Being religious definitely shows that a person is lacking the ability to think critically about their surroundings. Now if they are unable to think critically does that mean they lack some mental ability or just not interested in finding a different explanation?

Are you inferring that because I am an Agnostic by choice that I must be intelligent? Sorry I cannot see how that works.

Rheghead
20-Aug-13, 22:56
Are you inferring that because I am an Agnostic by choice that I must be intelligent? Sorry I cannot see how that works.

I'll probably claim that you have the ability and the desire to think critically about your surroundings. Your choice was was an intelligent one.

ducati
20-Aug-13, 23:09
In your own words ducati, it wasn't that long ago you were calling someone a tosser, well everybody has the freedom and right to be a tosser but you really shouldn't abuse the privilege.

I'm a tosser because I think you are an idiot? Ho hum

Alrock
20-Aug-13, 23:31
OK I know the lifeforms on Earth evolved over time.
But who would tell someone on their deathbed there isnt a heaven?
If its their only thing to look forward to, is, their next life after they gasp their last....as a comfort to them and their loved ones.
Even very intelligent people like to think there is something after death....when faced by the grim reaper waiting in the wings with very little sand left in their timer and no chance of the timer getting flipped over.
And by that I dont just mean a box buried or ashes scattered...I mean souls going to heaven or reincarnation etc whatever their religion dictates...

Just because something may be comforting doesn't make it true....

If I found comfort in the thought that the world was flat (as many once did) does that mean that the world is actually flat?

Rheghead
20-Aug-13, 23:33
OK I know the lifeforms on Earth evolved over time.
But who would tell someone on their deathbed there isnt a heaven?
If its their only thing to look forward to, is, their next life after they gasp their last....as a comfort to them and their loved ones.
Even very intelligent people like to think there is something after death....when faced by the grim reaper waiting in the wings with very little sand left in their timer and no chance of the timer getting flipped over.
And by that I dont just mean a box buried or ashes scattered...I mean souls going to heaven or reincarnation etc whatever their religion dictates...

I think that anyone who has no regrets about the choices that they have made and have lived life to their idea of a full life will accept death when it comes. Even in the case when a young person like a child, a soldier or whatever. When the unfortunate end comes, if they think that their life has had a purpose to yourself or meant something to someone else, and I'm talking love here, then they will have no need to exist in a supernatural afterlife.

I think anyone who tries to push their religious views on to someone who is on their deathbed who does have regrets is trying to exploit a very vulnerable person for the purpose of pushing their own agenda.

But I live and let live, it is their choice afterall.

Dadie
20-Aug-13, 23:56
no...I just wondered with all the anti religion debate going on if any of you would take a step back and placate your gran...(any relative..friend... etc )that yes there is a life after death if it would make them easier in their passing even if its not in your own belief.
Its not your beliefs im questioning ...its, if you have enough respect to take note of their beliefs...and not ram down their throats there is no life after death.
The same as if you were dying and didnt believe in an afterlife you wouldnt want to know and wouldnt be placated by it...and wouldnt want to be brainwashed into it.....your friends/relatives would respect your beliefs (or lack of) and treat your last moments as you wish.

squidge
21-Aug-13, 00:09
I was once dying - lying in an intensive care bed in the small hours of the morning listening to two doctors talking about how long it was before I had heart failure. I was 36, I was loved, I loved too,I knew my life had had a purpose but I wasnt ready to go. I couldnt move and I could hardly speak but I prayed, in my head over and over and over again. I just prayed, and I didnt have and dont have a strong faith but I needed to pray. I prayed all night and over and over again and I prayed that if He did decide I was dying that he would let me into heaven wherever and whatever it is. I dont care if that makes people think I was stupid, or thick or naive. I dont care if im smarter than the average christian or stupider than the average atheist. It helped. It helped me get through a dreadful time and it helped me DO something other than just lie there and wait and see if I was going to die. What is so terrible about that, what is so stupid about that? We all sometimes need something surely. Sometimes, in the dark, in the face of something terrible there is only half remembered faith from childhood which can help..... where is the stupidity in that?

maverick
21-Aug-13, 05:52
I'm a tosser because I think you are an idiot? Ho humwhatever dude.

maverick
21-Aug-13, 06:08
I was once dying - lying in an intensive care bed in the small hours of the morning listening to two doctors talking about how long it was before I had heart failure. I was 36, I was loved, I loved too,I knew my life had had a purpose but I wasnt ready to go. I couldnt move and I could hardly speak but I prayed, in my head over and over and over again. I just prayed, and I didnt have and dont have a strong faith but I needed to pray. I prayed all night and over and over again and I prayed that if He did decide I was dying that he would let me into heaven wherever and whatever it is. I dont care if that makes people think I was stupid, or thick or naive. I dont care if im smarter than the average christian or stupider than the average atheist. It helped. It helped me get through a dreadful time and it helped me DO something other than just lie there and wait and see if I was going to die. What is so terrible about that, what is so stupid about that? We all sometimes need something surely. Sometimes, in the dark, in the face of something terrible there is only half remembered faith from childhood which can help..... where is the stupidity in that?Well Squidge, I'm glad to see that you got through your ordeal. The researchers at the University of Rochester, where this study was compiled have managed to tell us that some people are just not as bright as others, are they? I wonder if God values them any less? Or should we? I think the purpose of this thread was to exalt atheism at the expense of theism to the point of offence. The offensive thing is a society exalting "intelligence" to the denigration of those who have a little less of it. A decent culture wouldn't even accept this study. It takes a sick society to place a higher value on people, or think they should be emulated, merely on the basis of their brain power. I often wonder how many people stop to consider that highly intelligent people can often be wrong ( not to mention immoral, arrogant and hateful etc). If I keep a Scriptural perspective on the world's measure of "intelligence", studies like the one which started this thread, don't merit more than a shrug, and maybe a comment. " It looks like it fits with 1Corinthians, which is what God has said all along.

gaza
21-Aug-13, 22:07
OK I know the lifeforms on Earth evolved over time.
But who would tell someone on their deathbed there isnt a heaven?
If its their only thing to look forward to, is, their next life after they gasp their last....as a comfort to them and their loved ones.
Even very intelligent people like to think there is something after death....when faced by the grim reaper waiting in the wings with very little sand left in their timer and no chance of the timer getting flipped over.
And by that I dont just mean a box buried or ashes scattered...I mean souls going to heaven or reincarnation etc whatever their religion dictates...

Heaven ! Hell ! the afterlife ! Call it what you want but there is a place of comfort, a place where your family, friends, people you respect and people you liked who have already past on, are, you will be with them again wherever and however it is, because they are already there, but i doubt if you will meet one of the many hundreds of GODs that there are supposed to be. Or at least if I do, by the time i'll have finished with him he'll wish he wasn't a GOD, the lying, cheating, sadistic, murdering, creator of evil people and --- i could go on and on

cptdodger
21-Aug-13, 23:25
no...I just wondered with all the anti religion debate going on if any of you would take a step back and placate your gran...(any relative..friend... etc )that yes there is a life after death if it would make them easier in their passing even if its not in your own belief.
Its not your beliefs im questioning ...its, if you have enough respect to take note of their beliefs...and not ram down their throats there is no life after death.
The same as if you were dying and didnt believe in an afterlife you wouldnt want to know and wouldnt be placated by it...and wouldnt want to be brainwashed into it.....your friends/relatives would respect your beliefs (or lack of) and treat your last moments as you wish.

In the same respect Dadie, if I suddenly told a member of my family they were going to heaven, or there is life after death and so on, they would know for a fact I was lying to them. My friends and family know my beliefs, or as you point out - lack of, so would not expect to hear that from me, at all.

theone
21-Aug-13, 23:25
I was once dying - lying in an intensive care bed in the small hours of the morning listening to two doctors talking about how long it was before I had heart failure. I was 36, I was loved, I loved too,I knew my life had had a purpose but I wasnt ready to go. I couldnt move and I could hardly speak but I prayed, in my head over and over and over again. I just prayed, and I didnt have and dont have a strong faith but I needed to pray. I prayed all night and over and over again and I prayed that if He did decide I was dying that he would let me into heaven wherever and whatever it is. I dont care if that makes people think I was stupid, or thick or naive. I dont care if im smarter than the average christian or stupider than the average atheist. It helped. It helped me get through a dreadful time and it helped me DO something other than just lie there and wait and see if I was going to die. What is so terrible about that, what is so stupid about that? We all sometimes need something surely. Sometimes, in the dark, in the face of something terrible there is only half remembered faith from childhood which can help..... where is the stupidity in that?

I know you're not stupid, and I wonder if I was in that situation I wouldn't do the same, but your experience, and what I may experience and might get through, is not an excuse for the irrational time, money, respect etc that religion is granted in our society.

Religion should have no more power/influence/respect than political beliefs. It's a choice.

squidge
22-Aug-13, 01:07
I know you're not stupid, and I wonder if I was in that situation I wouldn't do the same, but your experience, and what I may experience and might get through, is not an excuse for the irrational time, money, respect etc that religion is granted in our society.

Religion should have no more power/influence/respect than political beliefs. It's a choice.

I agree with you

secrets in symmetry
22-Aug-13, 10:26
The headline on the article confuses the conclusion of the study. It did not show that religious people are necessarily less intelligent, it showed that intelligent people are less likely to be religious.

There's a big difference.
Indeed - it's obviously a case of strongly overlapping distributions and all that....

I've printed the paper, but I haven't read it yet.

secrets in symmetry
16-Sep-13, 23:45
I still haven't read this paper. I found it under a pile of other papers on my desk at work today. I still plan to read it and report back in a calm scientific manner. :cool:

canuck
18-Sep-13, 08:37
Bring on the IQ test. I'll take it! And that's me talking before my morning coffee.

But please don't tar me with the brush of insensativity to other's faith or non-faith.

canuck
18-Sep-13, 12:09
I just came across this link. It might make sense of this discussion:

http://www.upworthy.com/a-debate-between-an-atheist-and-a-christian-has-quite-a-surprising-result

C

secrets in symmetry
18-Sep-13, 23:52
I just came across this link. It might make sense of this discussion:

http://www.upworthy.com/a-debate-between-an-atheist-and-a-christian-has-quite-a-surprising-result

CI think this would be better on the thread about the evangelists' bus.

I agree that God wouldn't approve of many of his fan clubs! :cool:

gaza
19-Sep-13, 22:07
I was once dying - lying in an intensive care bed in the small hours of the morning listening to two doctors talking about how long it was before I had heart failure. I was 36, I was loved, I loved too,I knew my life had had a purpose but I wasnt ready to go. I couldnt move and I could hardly speak but I prayed, in my head over and over and over again. I just prayed, and I didnt have and dont have a strong faith but I needed to pray. I prayed all night and over and over again and I prayed that if He did decide I was dying that he would let me into heaven wherever and whatever it is. I dont care if that makes people think I was stupid, or thick or naive. I dont care if im smarter than the average christian or stupider than the average atheist. It helped. It helped me get through a dreadful time and it helped me DO something other than just lie there and wait and see if I was going to die. What is so terrible about that, what is so stupid about that? We all sometimes need something surely. Sometimes, in the dark, in the face of something terrible there is only half remembered faith from childhood which can help..... where is the stupidity in that?

Did the thought not occur to you......... Why is GOD making me suffer like this, Why is GOD letting me hear the doctors debating how long i have to live, Why won't GOD let me move, Why won't GOD let me speak, Why did GOD do this to me, Why is GOD putting my loved ones through this, Seems to me this GOD person is not very nice.

secrets in symmetry
21-Sep-13, 00:33
Having redressed the balance towards the devout on the other thread, I think I need to give the atheists a hand after that little embarrassment....