12 Oct 06
1 edit
Folks we need to have more confidence in the really high IQ people who don't need religion.
You know. The ones smart enough to destroy the Ozone in the atmosphere so everybody eventually will wish they had dark skin to avoid skin cancer.
You know. The non religious smart people, smart enough to create a hydrogen bomb to destroy all life on the planet.
The good old high IQ non religious types.
12 Oct 06
Originally posted by jaywillI'm a bit confused. Are you saying that these effects were caused by technologies that only atheists worked on? Or are you saying that science = atheism? If the latter, then you need to consider all the good things science has provided as well.
Folks we need to have more confidence in the really high IQ people who don't need religion.
You know. The ones smart enough to destroy the Ozone in the atmosphere so everybody eventually will wish they had dark skin to avoid skin cancer.
You know. The non religious smart people, smart enough to create a hydrogen bomb to destroy all life on the planet.
The good old high IQ non religious types.
12 Oct 06
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungNot saying science = atheism.
I'm a bit confused. Are you saying that these effects were caused by technologies that only atheists worked on? Or are you saying that science = atheism? If the latter, then you need to consider all the good things science has provided as well.
Are you saying religion = low intelligence ?
12 Oct 06
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillNo. I am saying the article says that "people who are more religious tend to be less intelligent." This article's author analyzes data from the General Social Survey to come to that conclusion.
Not saying science = atheism.
Are you saying religion = low intelligence ?
Why do you say that people who "don't need religion" destroy the ozone in the atmosphere and created the H-bomb?
12 Oct 06
2 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungHow could I ever say that science = atheism?
No. I am saying the article says that "people who are more religious tend to be less intelligent."
Why do you say that people who "don't need religion" destroy the ozone in the atmosphere and created the H-bomb?
When they asked Einstien if he believed in God he said that the question was an insult to him.
I don't know exactly what you want to call religion. But Einstien also said that a person who cannot stand under the stars and look up with a sense of wonder and awe at the whole thing, is as good as dead.
Though Einstien did not believe in a personal relationship with God he did believe in a God. Is that a little religious? Perhaps.
Anyway, I believe in God. And I'll go further concerning science. The Bible says that the Lord keeps watch over all knowledge. I think some of the main scientific advancements have been (brace yourself) because of the mercy of God upon researchers.
So I think we don't give the God who keeps watch over man's knowledge, the thanksgiving due Him for allowing us to encrease in knowledge.
It is His natural laws which we are decoding and re-routing to serve our technological purposes. I think technology is one of the sure indications that intelligence has wired the universe as it is. Science decodes and re-routes those laws to cause the created forces to serve our needs.
Of course science has done many good things. And of course both religious and non-religious scientists have made contributions to the advancement.
But without a doubt, with every technological advancement there is the tendency to exploit it for greed or to make a weapon. Today they hack computers. Tomorrow they'll be hacking human genes. It is just a sad fact of life. Man uses his knowledge to carry out evil purposes.
And on the other hand lots of food has been put into hungry stomachs and lots of cloths have been put on naked backs in the name of religion, by all these supposedly duller minds.
If you're willing to look at the matter in a fair and balanced way, I am also.
12 Oct 06
Originally posted by telerionI love it when people state 'correlations' and pretend they didn't have a point when doing so.
I think you offended some people here, ATY. Perhaps you should explain the meaning of "correlation" to them so that these poor believers quit offering up inconsequential anecdotes.
I have a word for them...hypocrites.
12 Oct 06
Originally posted by AThousandYoungA believer could counter that intelligent people are also more likely to be proud, and to reject God for that reason. Hence, the correlation between intelligence and disbelief indicates, not not disbelief is more rational, but that disbelief is more prejudicial.
No. I am saying the article says that "people who are more religious tend to be less intelligent." This article's author analyzes data from the General Social Survey to come to that conclusion.
Why do you say that people who "don't need religion" destroy the ozone in the atmosphere and created the H-bomb?
Is there any evidence for this counterargument? Or is it a convenient and invidious rationalization?
12 Oct 06
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeI'd want to see the study which correlates intelligence with "pride" and how that pride is defined.
A believer could counter that intelligent people are also more likely to be proud, and to reject God for that reason. Hence, the correlation between intelligence and disbelief indicates, not not disbelief is more rational, but that disbelief is more prejudicial.
Is there any evidence for this counterargument? Or is it a convenient and invidious rationalization?
12 Oct 06
Originally posted by jaywillDammit, ATY! Look what you've started. Jaywill, you have a responsibility to go look up the meaning of correlation.
Not saying science = atheism.
Are you saying religion = low intelligence ?
Even my undergrad students know that "correlation does not equal causation."
12 Oct 06
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeCall it small sample bias if you will, but I think this thread more than adequately supports the hypothesis that religious people tend to be dumb.
A believer could counter that intelligent people are also more likely to be proud, and to reject God for that reason. Hence, the correlation between intelligence and disbelief indicates, not not disbelief is more rational, but that disbelief is more prejudicial.
Is there any evidence for this counterargument? Or is it a convenient and invidious rationalization?
13 Oct 06
Originally posted by jaywillBut Einstien also said that a person who cannot stand under the stars and look up with a sense of wonder and awe at the whole thing, is as good as dead.
But Einstien also said that a person who cannot stand under the stars and look up with a sense of wonder and awe at the whole thing, is as good as dead.
I think some of the main scientific advancements have been (brace yourself) because of the mercy of God upon researchers.
I don't require God for this.
I think some of the main scientific advancements have been (brace yourself) because of the mercy of God upon researchers.
This is plain insulting to the millions of research scientists out there who work extremely hard for many years to come up with new knowledge. By your logic though Darwin must have been divinely inspired. You are rejecting God by rejecting evolution.
13 Oct 06
Originally posted by telerionIndeed. One of the professors at Dundee, where I did my undergrad used to delight in telling us this. Indeed, one of his favourite correlations was between the average length of miniskirts and TV ownership in the 1960s. As TV ownership went up, miniskirt length went down. Obviously TVs are the cause of short miniskirts (or vice versa).
Even my undergrad students know that "correlation does not equal causation."
(In hindsight of course, he could be right - increased TV ownership would help to spread pop-culture, which probably was linked to decreased miniskirt length....)
13 Oct 06
Originally posted by telerionthis thread more than adequately supports the hypothesis that religious people tend to be dumb.
Call it small sample bias if you will, but I think this thread more than adequately supports the hypothesis that religious people tend to be dumb.
And, the companion thought to that statement, that anti-theists of all stripes are drawn to dumb.
13 Oct 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAh . . . Freaky, and to think I was going to pay you the compliment of being an outlier.
[b]this thread more than adequately supports the hypothesis that religious people tend to be dumb.
And, the companion thought to that statement, that anti-theists of all stripes are drawn to dumb.[/b]