To Be Irreligious, Stupididy Helps

[JBeukema]

Religion & IQ | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

Atheists score 1.95 IQ points higher than Agnostics, 3.82 points higher than Liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than Dogmatic persuasions. Denominations differ significantly in IQ and income.

 

[del]

Religion & IQ | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

Atheists score 1.95 IQ points higher than Agnostics, 3.82 points higher than Liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than Dogmatic persuasions. Denominations differ significantly in IQ and income.

six points is meaningless

 

[JBeukema]

the views that elevate science to the level of God is flawed

Only you posit any such thing

 

[del]

the views that elevate science to the level of God is flawed

Only you posit any such thing

but it's such a nice strawman.

she uses barley, i believe.

 

[JBeukema]

Religion & IQ | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

Atheists score 1.95 IQ points higher than Agnostics, 3.82 points higher than Liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than Dogmatic persuasions. Denominations differ significantly in IQ and income.

six points is meaningless

Six points debunks the OP

 

[JBeukema]

Does PC believe Mithra and Sekhmet don't exist?

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

a. "Big Bang Theory - What About God?
Any discussion of the Big Bang theory would be incomplete without asking the question, what about God? This is because cosmogony (the study of the origin of the universe) is an area where science and theology meet. Creation was a supernatural event. That is, it took place outside of the natural realm. This fact begs the question: is there anything else which exists outside of the natural realm? Specifically, is there a master Architect out there? We know that this universe had a beginning. Was God the "First Cause"? We won't attempt to answer that question in this short article. We just ask the question... " Big Bang Theory

It would only be 'incomplete without asking the question, what about God?/an area where science and theology meet' if you are already religious.

Sorry, Urby, but most would say, I think, that the hallmark of science is to ask questions, such as the source of the material that became our universe....not to ignore such an obvious quiry...

and sometimes hypothesizing a theory suggests any and/or all possibilities.

Further, the scientific theory protocol then suggests posing an experiment, if possible, i.e., "can matter arrive without any prior matter?"

Then consider the axiom 'matter can neither be created not destroyed...'

Think 'faith' could sneak in there?

Nope. If you were truely neutral why on earth would you suddenly think, "the scientific evidence leads to this point but, at this moment, no further...so let me think...I know, I imagine a magic man who has lived forever decided to magic up the universe! yep, thats it...obvious really". Eh, fraid not pc

 

[JBeukema]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDJxjAuJHjg[/ame]

 

[del]

Religion & IQ | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

six points is meaningless

Six points debunks the OP

the OP is meaningless as well.

 

[JBeukema]

The premise that it takes more brains to belong to a religion is just as flawed as the premise that it takes more brains to be an atheist, Political Chic.

It does take a good deal of willful ignorance and cowardice to belong to a religion. The search for understanding and communion with god is very personal. Dogma is Satan's favourite means of deception.

-The Reverend James Teunis Beukema


Also, ethics do nor emerge from religion,. They emerge from the social contract. Of course, you probably don't understand how ethics are distinct from morality.

 

[JBeukema]

a belief that a god does not exist is an act of faith every bit as much as a belief that a god does exist is. neither position can be proven to be true or false.

*shrug*

*yawn*

*burp*

A lack of belief in the existence of a thing is not the same as a belief in its non-existence

See: gnostism v agnosticism ; theism v atheism

There are four possible positions:
-agnostic theism
-gnostic theism
-agnostic atheism
-gnostic atheism

 

[PoliticalChic]

the views that elevate science to the level of God is flawed

Only you posit any such thing

Quite to the contrary, there are many scientists and entire branches of same, wherein the prerogatives of God have been usurped.

a. The British parliament approved the creation of animal/human hybrids the laboratory, and the decision was praised in the Times (UK) as ‘free scientific inquiry’ over the objections of ‘a religious minority.’ [UK times Mark Henderson, May 20, 2008]

b. An interesting comment is that of Joseph Fletcher, founder of the theory of situational ethics: “What is critical is personal status, not merely human status.” In his view, fetuses and newborns are “sub-personal,” and therefore fail to qualify for the right to life. Joseph Fletcher, “Humanhood: Essays in Biomedical Ethics,” p. ll.

c. “John Harris, the Sir David Alliance professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester, England,… urged that people like Terri [Schiavo]— that is, human non-persons — be harvested or otherwise used as mere instrumentalities. Bioethicist big-wig Tom Beauchamp of Georgetown University has suggested that “because many humans lack properties of personhood or are less than full persons, they…might be aggressively used as human research subjects or sources of organs.” Wesley J. Smith on Terri Schiavo on National Review Online

d. A large segment those known as scientists have been trained in the value-free concepts. The transhumanism movement holds that human life has no value, or dignity, and that it must be perfected through gene modification. Dr. Nick Bostrom finds that human nature, itself, “is a work in progress, a half-baked beginning that we can learn to remold in desirable ways.” Transhumanist Values Their utopia is created through technology.

 

[JBeukema]

Some religious people seem UNABLE to truely understand what the non believers believe.

and, more importantly, what they do not

 

[del]

the views that elevate science to the level of God is flawed

Only you posit any such thing

Quite to the contrary, there are many scientists and entire branches of same, wherein the prerogatives of God have been usurped.

weak attempt at deflection edited

he obviously meant in the current thread.

do try to focus.

god, give me strength.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

Only you posit any such thing

Quite to the contrary, there are many scientists and entire branches of same, wherein the prerogatives of God have been usurped.

weak attempt at deflection edited

he obviously meant in the current thread.

do try to focus.

god, give me strength.....

What are you afraid of?

 

[del]

Quite to the contrary, there are many scientists and entire branches of same, wherein the prerogatives of God have been usurped.

weak attempt at deflection edited

he obviously meant in the current thread.

do try to focus.

god, give me strength.....

What are you afraid of?

stupid people

 

[PoliticalChic]

he obviously meant in the current thread.

do try to focus.

god, give me strength.....

What are you afraid of?

stupid people

Since you couldn't deal with post #152, does the group you mention include you?

 

[JBeukema]

the views that elevate science to the level of God is flawed

Only you posit any such thing

Quite to the contrary, there are many scientists and entire branches of same, wherein the prerogatives of God have been usurped.

'the prerogatives of God'? You mean like controlling floods, ending disease, treating injuries, selective breeding of crops...

I call Poe's law on PC, the ultimate religious conservative

a. The British parliament approved the creation of animal/human hybrids the laboratory, and the decision was praised in the Times (UK) as ‘free scientific inquiry’ over the objections of ‘a religious minority.’ [UK times Mark Henderson, May 20, 2008]

okay... and? Ever heard of mitochondria? Sounds not unlike the idea of animal -> man transplants. Shame that wasn't feasible.

b. An interesting comment is that of Joseph Fletcher, founder of the theory of situational ethics: “What is critical is personal status, not merely human status.”

And? Care to provide context for once? I'd called you on this shit before.

Corpses are still human- LET THEM VOTE!!!!!!!!!111!!

In his view, fetuses and newborns are “sub-personal,” and therefore fail to qualify for the right to life. Joseph Fletcher, “Humanhood: Essays in Biomedical Ethics,” p. ll.

I've heard those arguments. We have threads on those subjects.

c. “John Harris, the Sir David Alliance professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester, England,… urged that people like Terri [Schiavo]— that is, human non-persons — be harvested or otherwise used as mere instrumentalities

So he's talking about pulling the plug on the brain-dead, basically? What about it?

. Bioethicist big-wig Tom Beauchamp of Georgetown University has suggested that “because many humans lack properties of personhood or are less than full persons, they…might be aggressively used as human research subjects or sources of organs.” Wesley J. Smith on Terri Schiavo on National Review Online

And? I'm donating my body for science/medicine. Once I cease to exist, why should my physical body not be used for good if it can be used so? I support organ transplants.

d. A large segment those known as scientists have been trained in the value-free concepts. The transhumanism movement holds that human life has no value, or dignity, and that it must be perfected through gene modification.

No, it doesn't. We hold that it is a good thing for a paralyzed man to experience a fuller life by being able to walk. We hold that medicine should continue to advance and that we should use science to improve the human condition and quality of life. We hold that ensuring no child is ever born with Tay-Sachs would be a good thing.

We see more than people's skin and DNA and want to move past Man's physical, social, and- for want of a better term- 'spiritual' limitations.

Dr. Nick Bostrom finds that human nature, itself, “is a work in progress, a half-baked beginning that we can learn to remold in desirable ways.”

and?T

Their utopia is created through technology.

DAMN THAT INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION! NO MORE IRRIGATION! NO MORE SPEARS OR HAMMERS! NO MORE BUILDING HOMES!

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

For example, the topic of evolution, regularly discussed on the board, is largely based on faith as well...

I just dont see that. Evolution relies on tons of physical fossil evidence, many different types of dating evidence and geological evidence that posits geology in terms of billions of years of age rather than the naive religious date of 6,000 years. there is no 'faith' involved here and faith as a concept is unknown in the scientific realm.

 

[del]

What are you afraid of?

stupid people

Since you couldn't deal with post #152, does the group you mention include you?

i dealt with it very effectively; i ignored it.

since you can't differentiate between a strawman and reality, it most assuredly includes you.

kudos