nazz
Doubting Thomas
Yet I have heard atheists say science has disproven the existence of God.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Do the Inquisition and Modern Science have in Common?
- Thread starter newgodthinker
- Start date
Yet I have heard atheists say science has disproven the existence of God.
That's their opinion but I've yet to see any scientific finding(s) that disprove god(s)
How is that an appropriate response to the words you quoted?
That is because the kind of evidence they would expect to find in order to believe in God has been found lacking.
That says a lot more of how convincing they find the idea of God to be than it does about science.
I disagree enitrily. I find your world view with God to be the one that is lacking.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
What Do the Inquisition and Modern Science have in Common?
On a similar note, what does this thread and my anal sphincter have in common? I'll give you one guess.
On a similar note, what does this thread and my anal sphincter have in common? I'll give you one guess.
Some differences.....
The Inquisition gave us the auto da fe.
Modern science gave us the automobile.
The Inquisition had The Pope.
Modern Science has Sheldon Cooper.
The Inquisition had witch trials for innocent people.
Modern science has clinical trials for sick people.
The Inquisition had a geocentric universe.
Modern science has an expanding universe.
The Inquisition gave us a Monty Python sketch.
Modern science lets us watch it on the internet.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tym0MObFpTI
The Inquisition gave us the auto da fe.
Modern science gave us the automobile.
The Inquisition had The Pope.
Modern Science has Sheldon Cooper.
The Inquisition had witch trials for innocent people.
Modern science has clinical trials for sick people.
The Inquisition had a geocentric universe.
Modern science has an expanding universe.
The Inquisition gave us a Monty Python sketch.
Modern science lets us watch it on the internet.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tym0MObFpTI
Last edited:
technomage
Finding my own way
It's like we share one brain!
technomage
Finding my own way
How DARE you accuse me of having a brain! Or even a share in one!
:149:
That's a response for the "Be offended" thread.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I'm not sure why you think this. A quick search turned up a pew survey from 2009 that showed that 17% of scientists identify themselves as atheists, while 11% identify themselves as agnostic. Here is a link to the survey and analysis: Scientists and Belief | Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project. And here is a chart which has the breakdown of religious affiliation for the general public and for scientists:
Well said. :clap
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
Yea those are only the answers we give at the public polls. At the top secret Science for No God meetings we pretty much all swear allegience to no one.I'm not sure why you think this. A quick search turned up a pew survey from 2009 that showed that 17% of scientists identify themselves as atheists, while 11% identify themselves as agnostic. Here is a link to the survey and analysis: Scientists and Belief | Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project. And here is a chart which has the breakdown of religious affiliation for the general public and for scientists:
technomage
Finding my own way
Is that before or after desecrating teddie bears and swearing the downfall of All that is Right and Good and Wholesome?
nazz
Doubting Thomas
They should not make false claims about science and in the same breath say what great supporters of it they are
I take it that you did not understand what I said, then. Or maybe you just don't believe it?
Either way, that is an odd thing for you to say, since it in no way relates to anything else from our exchange, including your own previous post.
Who are "they"? What false claims do you think they did? And where does this idea that there is doubletalking involved come from?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Part of the problem with polls is the defining of terms, and the Pew poll is an example of the problem one can encounter. To have "agnostics" and "don't know" separated doesn't make sense since "don't know" is being "agnostic". Even with "atheist" one has to watch for how this may be defined because I know of people who say any disbelief in a deity qualifies as "atheistic", which then would include "agnostic", "don't know", etc.
I have also seen polls that don't go along hardly at all with the Pew poll, quite possibly for another reason, namely how we may be referred to versus how we may refer to ourselves. For example, I'm Jewish, but if asked I would put down either "agnostic" or "don't know" or "Judaism", I would have some difficulty largely because I do affiliate with "Judaism", but yet I'm non-theistic.
I don't really have the time to look it up, but there are two polls cited that very much go against the Pew poll, one cited by research cosmologist Leonard Susskind and another from another source that I simply cannot remember, but both point out that most scientists tend to be atheists or agnostics-- mostly the latter. Also, Susskind states that most of the research cosmologists that he knows that are theistically inclined aren't very orthodox with their beliefs.
Of the various scientific groups, cosmologists are the least theistic followed by physicists. Frankly, I can't remember which scientific group was on the other end of the spectrum, but I do remember that slightly over half said they were theists of one type or another.
Also, is the Pew poll of American scientists or all scientists? The poll Susskind cited wasn't just U.S. scientists.
I have also seen polls that don't go along hardly at all with the Pew poll, quite possibly for another reason, namely how we may be referred to versus how we may refer to ourselves. For example, I'm Jewish, but if asked I would put down either "agnostic" or "don't know" or "Judaism", I would have some difficulty largely because I do affiliate with "Judaism", but yet I'm non-theistic.
I don't really have the time to look it up, but there are two polls cited that very much go against the Pew poll, one cited by research cosmologist Leonard Susskind and another from another source that I simply cannot remember, but both point out that most scientists tend to be atheists or agnostics-- mostly the latter. Also, Susskind states that most of the research cosmologists that he knows that are theistically inclined aren't very orthodox with their beliefs.
Of the various scientific groups, cosmologists are the least theistic followed by physicists. Frankly, I can't remember which scientific group was on the other end of the spectrum, but I do remember that slightly over half said they were theists of one type or another.
Also, is the Pew poll of American scientists or all scientists? The poll Susskind cited wasn't just U.S. scientists.
nazz
Doubting Thomas
They, those atheists, who make such false claims.
Which would the false claim be? That, as you put it,
?
That is not a false claim, unless they happen to be lying for some reason. It is just a personal conviction based on their understandings of what a proof for the inexistence of God would be.
Such matters as the existence of God are inherently subjective.