Professor's Theory of Religion: If you're a thinking man, and really think about religion, you...

[Blackrook]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

 

[BULLDOG]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

 

[Blackrook]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

Based on what I've seen on this forum, and the behavior of outspoken atheists that write books bashing religion, that appears not to be the case.

 

[DGS49]

As a life-long Catholic, here's how I see it.

Christ promised his Disciples that the Holy Spirit would guide the "Church." While the Catholic Church has run off into the weeds on some issues over the centuries - run by humans, and all that - the idea that "we" can just read the Bible and figure it out by ourselves" (the root belief of Protestantism), just doesn't make sense. Individual people, even acting in good faith, have taken parts of the Bible to justify all sorts of atrocities. Either there is one church that is guided by the Holy Spirit, or it's all nonsense. There is no other possibility. A thousand protestant churches all teaching something different is nonsense.

I CHOOSE to believe in God, and the Christian mythology suits my intellect. And I have a lot of good company.

I agree with your father.

 

[Blackrook]

As a life-long Catholic, here's how I see it.

Christ promised his Disciples that the Holy Spirit would guide the "Church." While the Catholic Church has run off into the weeds on some issues over the centuries - run by humans, and all that - the idea that "we" can just read the Bible and figure it out by ourselves" (the root belief of Protestantism), just doesn't make sense. Individual people, even acting in good faith, have taken parts of the Bible to justify all sorts of atrocities. Either there is one church that is guided by the Holy Spirit, or it's all nonsense. There is no other possibility. A thousand protestant churches all teaching something different is nonsense.

I CHOOSE to believe in God, and the Christian mythology suits my intellect. And I have a lot of good company.

I agree with your father.

Thank you, I agree with him too, and I'll give you an example from today.

In my building, I found the diocesan office of the Episcopalian Church. It occurred to me that I might solve some of the problems in my life by leaving the Catholic Church and going over to the Episcopalians.

It seemed like a good choice at first, I could stop worrying about the fact that I am a divorced man with a girlfriend who I might want to marry some day. If I remain Catholic, I would be barred from receiving the Eucharist if I did that, though I would still be welcome to attend Mass. But according to Catholic teachings, I would be in a state of unrepented mortal sin, and would go to hell when I died.

That's pretty hardcore, but it's based on something Jesus explicitly stated and quoted in the Gospels, that divorce and remarriage is the same thing as adultery.

The Episcopalians offer a way out, they will accept me, as I am and if I marry I can still go to Eucharist.

But as I thought things through, I realized that this "get out of jail free" card would not work for me. I simply cannot ignore the explicit teachings of Jesus that divorce and remarriage is tantamount to adultery.

Now, every other Christian church but Catholicism has abandoned Jesus' teachings on divorce. Why?

Are all these churches right and the Catholic Church wrong?

I think the opposite is more likely true. It is easy to abandon a teaching as inconvenient as this one (the Jews abandoned it in Moses' time) but is very difficult to maintain.

So which Church is more likely to be the true one? The Church that maintains an unpopular teaching? Or the many churches that abandon an unpopular teaching.

 

[BULLDOG]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

Based on what I've seen on this forum, and the behavior of outspoken atheists that write books bashing religion, that appears not to be the case.

Did you read the 2nd half of my comment?

 

[Blackrook]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

Based on what I've seen on this forum, and the behavior of outspoken atheists that write books bashing religion, that appears not to be the case.

Did you read the 2nd half of my comment?

So Christians are "forcing their religion" on atheists?

I see.

Is that why atheists are filing all these lawsuits to get rid of cross memorials and Nativity scenes on public property?

I mean, with all the other problems in the world solved, I can see how you might worry about stuff like that.

 

[fncceo]

If someone can write a book, or thread, extolling the virtues of a faith. Why would it be wrong for another person to write a book, or thread, denouncing that belief in favor of another?

Even when someone believes what he's putting out is undeniable, indisputable truth, it is, ultimately, only opinion.

 

[toobfreak]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

 

[BULLDOG]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

The nerve of that guy. Now, don't hold back. Give him both barrels, and tell that silly guy all the reasons you have to believe there is a God. Don't bother with telling him about the FEELING you have that God exists, or how it's what you have been taught all your life, cause that won't convince him anyway, You come right out and give him the PROOF that he can't deny. I'll watch.

 

[toobfreak]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

The nerve of that guy. Now, don't hold back. Give him both barrels, and tell that silly guy all the reasons you have to believe there is a God. Don't bother with telling him about the FEELING you have that God exists, or how it's what you have been taught all your life, cause that won't convince him anyway, You come right out and give him the PROOF that he can't deny. I'll watch.

...and yet still not one shred of proof to back up the claim that nearly six billion people on the Earth are wrong.

 

[Taz]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

So he's a doofus who believes in magic.

 

[BULLDOG]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

The nerve of that guy. Now, don't hold back. Give him both barrels, and tell that silly guy all the reasons you have to believe there is a God. Don't bother with telling him about the FEELING you have that God exists, or how it's what you have been taught all your life, cause that won't convince him anyway, You come right out and give him the PROOF that he can't deny. I'll watch.

...and yet still not one shred of proof to back up the claim that nearly six billion people on the Earth are wrong.

Tell me about those 6 billion people. Who are they? You really think they all agree with you?

 

[toobfreak]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

The nerve of that guy. Now, don't hold back. Give him both barrels, and tell that silly guy all the reasons you have to believe there is a God. Don't bother with telling him about the FEELING you have that God exists, or how it's what you have been taught all your life, cause that won't convince him anyway, You come right out and give him the PROOF that he can't deny. I'll watch.

...and yet still not one shred of proof to back up the claim that nearly six billion people on the Earth are wrong.

Tell me about those 6 billion people. Who are they? You really think they all agree with you?

Already did. Try reading the link I provided on the subject.

 

[BULLDOG]

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

The nerve of that guy. Now, don't hold back. Give him both barrels, and tell that silly guy all the reasons you have to believe there is a God. Don't bother with telling him about the FEELING you have that God exists, or how it's what you have been taught all your life, cause that won't convince him anyway, You come right out and give him the PROOF that he can't deny. I'll watch.

...and yet still not one shred of proof to back up the claim that nearly six billion people on the Earth are wrong.

Tell me about those 6 billion people. Who are they? You really think they all agree with you?

Already did. Try reading the link I provided on the subject.

I count 3 posts from you in this thread. The first complains about what some Otto guy said, but there are no posts in this thread by anyone with that name. The next is where you mention 6 billion people, and then this one I am responding to. No link in any of the three. Are you confused?

 

[Blackrook]

If one accepts the notion that it is possible for God to violate the laws of physics (which he created) then one can believe in the Catholic religion.

The problem with atheists is their assumption that the laws of physics are impossible to ever break.

That is why, when I mention the Miracle of Fatima, atheists refuse to even look at the evidence.

 

[toobfreak]

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

The nerve of that guy. Now, don't hold back. Give him both barrels, and tell that silly guy all the reasons you have to believe there is a God. Don't bother with telling him about the FEELING you have that God exists, or how it's what you have been taught all your life, cause that won't convince him anyway, You come right out and give him the PROOF that he can't deny. I'll watch.

...and yet still not one shred of proof to back up the claim that nearly six billion people on the Earth are wrong.

Tell me about those 6 billion people. Who are they? You really think they all agree with you?

Already did. Try reading the link I provided on the subject.

I count 3 posts from you in this thread. The first complains about what some Otto guy said, but there are no posts in this thread by anyone with that name. The next is where you mention 6 billion people, and then this one I am responding to. No link in any of the three. Are you confused?

Nope. You are.

 

[diver52]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

I agree agnosticism is the only logical conclusion which can be drawn. As to Catholicism, your father is wrong. It has no more basis than any other religion or sect.

 

[diver52]

If one accepts the notion that it is possible for God to violate the laws of physics (which he created) then one can believe in the Catholic religion.

The problem with atheists is their assumption that the laws of physics are impossible to ever break.

That is why, when I mention the Miracle of Fatima, atheists refuse to even look at the evidence.

And there lies the problem. First, you have to accept. You can use that to support any religion. I do not accept.

 

[BULLDOG]

...only have two choices (1) Roman Catholicism; or (2) Agnosticism.

Does that seem strange to you?

The professor is my father, a devout Catholic with two Ph.d's in mathematics and computer science. He knows everything there is to know about the Catholic religion and he knows almost everything there is to know about science. He sees no contradiction between the Catholic faith and Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

The first thing to rule out is Atheism. A thinking man who thinks about religion can't be an atheist because the atheist belief is that one should only believe in a proposition that can be proven, and yet, atheists believe there is definitely no God. So the atheist, who criticizes faith in Christians, is a man of faith himself.

The Agnostic on the other hand believes there is no proof of God so he takes the stand that without proof either way, he cannot form an intellectual defensible position and therefore refuses to decide. A perfectly legitimate approach to life's biggest question.

My father believes that the Roman Catholic faith can be defended by an intellectual, once it is accepted that the laws of science that usually define our universe can occasionally be broken, for example a man walking on the surface of water. If you accept that miracles are possible, then it is possible to defend the Catholic faith.

Atheists don't care what you believe as long a you don't try to force your beliefs on them.

What a load of CRAP. Every atheist I've seem on this board not only CARES what religious people believe, they actively HATE the fact that you believe in God, actively insult all who are religious as neolithic superstitious throwbacks and do all they can to prove or deny God doesn't exist!

In fact, the Otto beer guy just said earlier flat out that God is a myth (because you know, he has the inside straight on the reality of the universe).

The nerve of that guy. Now, don't hold back. Give him both barrels, and tell that silly guy all the reasons you have to believe there is a God. Don't bother with telling him about the FEELING you have that God exists, or how it's what you have been taught all your life, cause that won't convince him anyway, You come right out and give him the PROOF that he can't deny. I'll watch.

...and yet still not one shred of proof to back up the claim that nearly six billion people on the Earth are wrong.

Did I say you were wrong? No. I said you should show him the proof that you are right. I know you must have convincing proof, cause only an idiot would make such an all encompassing decision without a rational, provable, reason.