Smart people don't believe in god...

[Ace]

I can't say if he'd be offended, but I do know Robot Jesus would be offended by your blasphemous prayers.

 

Repent meatbag, before the end!

[Cantousent]

Ah the robot Jesus is just a scam. ...And believe the Vixen is a she, judging by things I've seen in her posts.

[213374U]

Yeah, I believe that, too. This is not like MMORPGs where it really pays to pretend you're female.

[6 Foot Invisible Rabbit]

I don't want to start any blasphemous rumours but I think that God has a sick sense of humour and when I die I expect to see him laughing.

 

Depeche Mode

[metadigital]

I don't want to start any blasphemous rumours but I think that God has a sick sense of humour and when I die I expect to see him laughing.

 

Depeche Mode

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Happy birthday Dave!

[davjo69]

Sir isaac newton was a devout christian. Albert einstein believed in god in a non conventional sense.

 

Islamic scholars took greek maths and advanced it.

 

Its not true that  being religious precludes intelligence.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And the study in question didn't conclude that being religious precludes intelligence. What it does say, however, is that, overall, people who have strong religious beliefs are more likely than not to score lower than people who do not have strong religious beliefs. Doesn't it make sense that a less intelligent person is more likely to accept an idea based on faith as opposed to facts? "And the meek shall inherit the earth." Perhaps meek refers to intelligence rather than income.

[davjo69]

Prove its not.  some people say the sun goes up and down because of the earths rotation, some say god, and the tibetan monks say its because they pray everyday.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If all Tibetan monks stopped praying for one day, I guarantee that the sun would still rise and set in the same manner as any other day.

[davjo69]

this is what I've been saying all along .. you've accepted the given fact 2+2=4 .. nothing wrong with that, because it makes sense, and if it fits into your reality then good! but you can' assume everyone sees, feels or believes this .. I've accepted the fact that Math works as well! and I do believe in science more than religion .. but I believe in it, I don't know it to be true!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Does anyone not believe that 2+2=4 ?

 

You dont need to believe in science. Science is just there. Even if you dont believe in gravity you still cant fly . You may have devices that can overcome it, but it's still a fundamental and provable truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's not how science works .. science never proves anything to be true, I can only prove something wrong .. If I one day fly on my own accord, science will have to incorporate that, and probably will .. Science is fluid, that's it's strenght, it has the ability to adapt, which has made it quite popular .. but it's not solid fact, it's based on observations .. and until the day that we have seen, experianced and know everything .. science is fallible!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Until it's ultimately right. Are you really saying that nothing is certain? If I have one object and I join another of the same object and want to know how many I now have, 2, in case you can't keep up, does your take on the world allow you more or less? Science is about the constant search for truth, regardless of if it ever gets there or not. Mathematics is indisputable, however. 1+1 always equals 2. Please tell me you're only arguing this for the sake of arguing.

[mkreku]

Science may be fallible, but at least it's constantly improving, evolving, and most important of all, not stagnating on pure belief. Religion does not evolve voluntarily. The only time religion changes is when science forces it to do so, like when changing from a geocentric view of the world to a heliocentric.

[213374U]

And the study in question didn't conclude that being religious precludes intelligence.  What it does say, however, is that, overall, people who have strong religious beliefs are more likely than not to score lower than people who do not have strong religious beliefs.  Doesn't it make sense that a less intelligent person is more likely to accept an idea based on faith as opposed to facts?  "And the meek shall inherit the earth."  Perhaps meek refers to intelligence rather than income.

Read the other 30 pages and prove that those "studies" aren't agenda-driven as it's been argued. If you spent less time trolling and more time thinking you would have realized that faith isn't the opposite of science or facts. It's amusing to see atheists trying to dumb the issue down to that.

 

 

If I have one object and I join another of the same object and want to know how many I now have, 2, in case you can't keep up, does your take on the world allow you more or less?  Science is about the constant search for truth, regardless of if it ever gets there or not.  Mathematics is indisputable, however.  1+1 always equals 2.  Please tell me you're only arguing this for the sake of arguing.

That's pretty funny. For starters, you are mistaking science and philosophy. Science is not about the search of truth, but about the search of the mechanisms upon which the physical world works. It's not about the "what?" but about the "how?".

 

If you have one object and join another of the same object, you don't have two objects. You have one object and another object. You say you have two because that's how we have established numeric algebra. Ultimately mathematics is just a formal, abstract construct whose relation with the physical world is not self-evident.

[metadigital]

If I have one object and I join another of the same object and want to know how many I now have, 2, in case you can't keep up, does your take on the world allow you more or less?  Science is about the constant search for truth, regardless of if it ever gets there or not.  Mathematics is indisputable, however.  1+1 always equals 2.  Please tell me you're only arguing this for the sake of arguing.

That's pretty funny. For starters, you are mistaking science and philosophy. Science is not about the search of truth, but about the search of the mechanisms upon which the physical world works. It's not about the "what?" but about the "how?".

 

If you have one object and join another of the same object, you don't have two objects. You have one object and another object. You say you have two because that's how we have established numeric algebra. Ultimately mathematics is just a formal, abstract construct whose relation with the physical world is not self-evident.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep, just to concur, if we used a binary number system, for example, you would represent your two items as 10 items.

 

Seriously, though, said comment was addressing some epistemological arguments for the reliability of sense data (i.e. something akin to Immanuel Kant's Trancendental Idealism versus the Continental Rationalism propounded by Ren

[WITHTEETH]

Prove its not.  some people say the sun goes up and down because of the earths rotation, some say god, and the tibetan monks say its because they pray everyday.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If all Tibetan monks stopped praying for one day, I guarantee that the sun would still rise and set in the same manner as any other day.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You dare challenge the men who are responisible for the sun setting and rising? if they did stop praying then you would get no sun. so your crazy in chellenging them. :D

 

I'm just making a point in how everything takes a leap of faith to beleive (even math) science too which is math with 7 steps, thats all. some say the Quran is the purest belief, my opinion is science is.