Conquer Club

72% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences are atheists and 21% are agnostic
According to the leading science journal Nature 394:313, a recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that 72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a personal God. This survey and many more showing that more intelligent people tend not to believe in religion.

80% of U.S. prisoners are Christian and 0.2% are atheists
Data source is The Federal Bureau of Prisons, March 1997.

Or it just might prove the nature of the people who are actve in the National Academy of Sciences.

Well obviously people that believe they have uber daddies are dumb-dumbs.

kagetora wrote:72% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences are atheists and 21% are agnostic
According to the leading science journal Nature 394:313, a recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that 72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a personal God. This survey and many more showing that more intelligent people tend not to believe in religion.

80% of U.S. prisoners are Christian and 0.2% are atheists
Data source is The Federal Bureau of Prisons, March 1997.

Do you want to include History, Business, and other job outlets before focusing strictly on one group of scientists? Plus the Roman Catholic Church has many high ranking scientists working for it.

As for Prisoners, how many became reformed or became believers while in Prison? Also, what is the ratio of Christians/other believers compared to Atheists in the US?

I have many sources that show that higher intelligence reduces the percentages of religious people.

As for percentage of atheists in the US, I have seen numbers ranging from 9% to 35%

You're coming off as being more self righteous than Jerry Falwell. If all athiests were so smart they would realise that they can't change people's faith, especially over the enternet.

I guess the rule about athiests being smarter really isn't so absolute...

Kagetora, most of the responses you'll get here will allude to this:

"That only proves that the National Academy of Science is biased against christians. IQ tests are biased as well. Even though Christians are the vast majority of the country, godless heathens are taking it over, which is why they might more often be successful. Everyone knows that Christianity is being oppressed."

Ditocoaf wrote:Kagetora, most of the responses you'll get here will allude to this:

"That only proves that the National Academy of Science is biased against christians. IQ tests are biased as well. Even though Christians are the vast majority of the country, godless heathens are taking it over, which is why they might more often be successful. Everyone knows that Christianity is being oppressed."

lol That is sooo untrue. Also I don't know. Just because you're Atheist wouldn't make you smarter like most things wouldn't, but it might be the reverse that smarter people know that Atheism is true. Maybe... Personally I'm agnostic.

Actually in my school pretty much all the Athiests are stupid. Well my class atleast.

Lets hope no one takes this thread seriously.
People are different etc etc etc ad nauseum.

GabonX wrote:You're coming off as being more self righteous than Jerry Falwell. If all athiests were so smart they would realise that they can't change people's faith, especially over the enternet.

I guess the rule about athiests being smarter really isn't so absolute...

This coming from someone who spells internet wrong?

GabonX wrote:You're coming off as being more self righteous than Jerry Falwell. If all athiests were so smart they would realise that they can't change people's faith, especially over the enternet.

I guess the rule about athiests being smarter really isn't so absolute...

I dont see any atheists trying to change anyones faith, I do see plenty of posts debunking some of the nonsense peddled by the lunatic fringe of Christianity.

Belief in evolution is logical and consequently shows a degree of inteligence, literal belief in all of the bible shows the opposite. Inteligent Christians reconcile their faith with modern science, others lack the cerebral capacity to do the same.

joecoolfrog wrote:

GabonX wrote:You're coming off as being more self righteous than Jerry Falwell. If all athiests were so smart they would realise that they can't change people's faith, especially over the enternet.

I guess the rule about athiests being smarter really isn't so absolute...

I dont see any atheists trying to change anyones faith, I do see plenty of posts debunking some of the nonsense peddled by the lunatic fringe of Christianity.

Belief in evolution is logical and consequently shows a degree of inteligence, literal belief in all of the bible shows the opposite. Inteligent Christians reconcile their faith with modern science, others lack the cerebral capacity to do the same.

The Bibal wasn't ment to be taken entirley literaly. A lot of the stuff atheists consider nonscene is meant to be viewed at a metephorical standpoint, then it will make sence.

william18 wrote:

joecoolfrog wrote:

GabonX wrote:You're coming off as being more self righteous than Jerry Falwell. If all athiests were so smart they would realise that they can't change people's faith, especially over the enternet.

I guess the rule about athiests being smarter really isn't so absolute...

I dont see any atheists trying to change anyones faith, I do see plenty of posts debunking some of the nonsense peddled by the lunatic fringe of Christianity.

Belief in evolution is logical and consequently shows a degree of inteligence, literal belief in all of the bible shows the opposite. Inteligent Christians reconcile their faith with modern science, others lack the cerebral capacity to do the same.

The Bibal wasn't ment to be taken entirley literaly. A lot of the stuff atheists consider nonscene is meant to be viewed at a metephorical standpoint, then it will make sence.

And athiests (well, some of them) are fine with that. I like a lot of the bible's (well, a lot of the new testament's) moral teachings. However, a lot of religious people take the stuff so literally that it becomes absurd. And some of the weird and/or horrible stuff, well, it's hard to see how it could be taken metaphorically. Like the passage mandating that you bury your children alive if they learn anything about other religions. (in the old testament, of course)

william18 wrote:The Bibal wasn't ment to be taken entirley literaly. A lot of the stuff atheists consider nonscene is meant to be viewed at a metephorical standpoint, then it will make sence.

Not to be insulting, but Christians are the slipperyiest people ever.There's just a convient and unprovable/disprovable answer for everything.
"Zeus never actually rode a golden bull, because modern science has proved that there are none. So let's just interpret it differently and call it good."

Ditocoaf wrote:

william18 wrote:

joecoolfrog wrote:

GabonX wrote:You're coming off as being more self righteous than Jerry Falwell. If all athiests were so smart they would realise that they can't change people's faith, especially over the enternet.

I guess the rule about athiests being smarter really isn't so absolute...

I dont see any atheists trying to change anyones faith, I do see plenty of posts debunking some of the nonsense peddled by the lunatic fringe of Christianity.

Belief in evolution is logical and consequently shows a degree of inteligence, literal belief in all of the bible shows the opposite. Inteligent Christians reconcile their faith with modern science, others lack the cerebral capacity to do the same.

The Bibal wasn't ment to be taken entirley literaly. A lot of the stuff atheists consider nonscene is meant to be viewed at a metephorical standpoint, then it will make sence.

And athiests (well, some of them) are fine with that. I like a lot of the bible's (well, a lot of the new testament's) moral teachings. However, a lot of religious people take the stuff so literally that it becomes absurd. And some of the weird and/or horrible stuff, well, it's hard to see how it could be taken metaphorically. Like the passage mandating that you bury your children alive if they learn anything about other religions. (in the old testament, of course)

I agree people take chritianity to far (3rd Crusade,Spanish Inqusition etc,) but when the passages ask for extreme measures then it insures the religion will last a very long time. Many of the moral teachings prevented what is gong on now. Back then when there were no STD's(atleast I think) they still told men not to go to prostitutes. Now the scripture says the same except now we have STD's. This is almost like the testemants were carved to anticipate what was going to happen.

william18 wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:

william18 wrote:

joecoolfrog wrote:

GabonX wrote:You're coming off as being more self righteous than Jerry Falwell. If all athiests were so smart they would realise that they can't change people's faith, especially over the enternet.

I guess the rule about athiests being smarter really isn't so absolute...

I dont see any atheists trying to change anyones faith, I do see plenty of posts debunking some of the nonsense peddled by the lunatic fringe of Christianity.

Belief in evolution is logical and consequently shows a degree of inteligence, literal belief in all of the bible shows the opposite. Inteligent Christians reconcile their faith with modern science, others lack the cerebral capacity to do the same.

The Bibal wasn't ment to be taken entirley literaly. A lot of the stuff atheists consider nonscene is meant to be viewed at a metephorical standpoint, then it will make sence.

And athiests (well, some of them) are fine with that. I like a lot of the bible's (well, a lot of the new testament's) moral teachings. However, a lot of religious people take the stuff so literally that it becomes absurd. And some of the weird and/or horrible stuff, well, it's hard to see how it could be taken metaphorically. Like the passage mandating that you bury your children alive if they learn anything about other religions. (in the old testament, of course)

I agree people take chritianity to far (3rd Crusade,Spanish Inqusition etc,) but when the passages ask for extreme measures then it insures the religion will last a very long time. Many of the moral teachings prevented what is gong on now. Back then when there were no STD's(atleast I think) they still told men not to go to prostitutes. Now the scripture says the same except now we have STD's. This is almost like the testemants were carved to anticipate what was going to happen.

Those things happen when you mix religion and politics. There is a saying, "In this world good men will do good things, and bad men will do bad things. But for good men to do bad things, that takes religion."

And you are waaaayyyyy off base. There have always been STDs. And in great numbers.
And don't forget, men obviously have always gone to prostitutes, otherwise there never would have been any. There's a reason it is called the oldest profession in the world.

It isn't that the Testiments were written to anticipate, Its your interpretation of them that changes. Like for your own example above. It's all in how you see it.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

william18 wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:

william18 wrote:

joecoolfrog wrote:
I dont see any atheists trying to change anyones faith, I do see plenty of posts debunking some of the nonsense peddled by the lunatic fringe of Christianity.

Belief in evolution is logical and consequently shows a degree of inteligence, literal belief in all of the bible shows the opposite. Inteligent Christians reconcile their faith with modern science, others lack the cerebral capacity to do the same.

The Bibal wasn't ment to be taken entirley literaly. A lot of the stuff atheists consider nonscene is meant to be viewed at a metephorical standpoint, then it will make sence.

And athiests (well, some of them) are fine with that. I like a lot of the bible's (well, a lot of the new testament's) moral teachings. However, a lot of religious people take the stuff so literally that it becomes absurd. And some of the weird and/or horrible stuff, well, it's hard to see how it could be taken metaphorically. Like the passage mandating that you bury your children alive if they learn anything about other religions. (in the old testament, of course)

I agree people take chritianity to far (3rd Crusade,Spanish Inqusition etc,) but when the passages ask for extreme measures then it insures the religion will last a very long time. Many of the moral teachings prevented what is gong on now. Back then when there were no STD's(atleast I think) they still told men not to go to prostitutes. Now the scripture says the same except now we have STD's. This is almost like the testemants were carved to anticipate what was going to happen.

Those things happen when you mix religion and politics. There is a saying, "In this world good men will do good things, and bad men will do bad things. But for good men to do bad things, that takes religion."

And you are waaaayyyyy off base. There have always been STDs. And in great numbers.
And don't forget, men obviously have always gone to prostitutes, otherwise there never would have been any. There's a reason it is called the oldest profession in the world.

It isn't that the Testiments were written to anticipate, Its your interpretation of them that changes. Like for your own example above. It's all in how you see it.

Then I guess my argument about prostitution is viod.

william18 wrote:Then I guess my argument about prostitution is viod.

Fair enough, good sir. It's how we grow.

I am a little taken aback though; That's one of the very few times that I've seen someone on here change their mind about something, after acquiring new knowledge. Congratulations for us, humanity is still alive somewhere.

Juan_Bottom wrote:

william18 wrote:Then I guess my argument about prostitution is viod.

Fair enough, good sir. It's how we grow.

I am a little taken aback though; That's one of the very few times that I've seen someone on here change their mind about something, after acquiring new knowledge. Congratulations for us, humanity is still alive somewhere.

Heh... for instance, I don't think I've ever seen you concede a point...

Ditocoaf wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:

william18 wrote:Then I guess my argument about prostitution is viod.

Fair enough, good sir. It's how we grow.

I am a little taken aback though; That's one of the very few times that I've seen someone on here change their mind about something, after acquiring new knowledge. Congratulations for us, humanity is still alive somewhere.

Heh... for instance, I don't think I've ever seen you concede a point...

Of course I have. Ask Jay....

But have I ever seen you concede a point...

Juan_Bottom wrote:

Ditocoaf wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:

william18 wrote:Then I guess my argument about prostitution is viod.

Fair enough, good sir. It's how we grow.

I am a little taken aback though; That's one of the very few times that I've seen someone on here change their mind about something, after acquiring new knowledge. Congratulations for us, humanity is still alive somewhere.

Heh... for instance, I don't think I've ever seen you concede a point...

Of course I have. Ask Jay....

But have I ever seen you concede a point...

Of course I have, I'm agnostic. I'm inherently conceding all points to everyone, always.

j/k. But you'll see that in the religion thread I started a while back, people convinced me that I wasn't actually agnostic, but atheist.

I think I rarely ever concede on points. Which makes me want to start a new thread

suggs wrote:Lets hope no one takes this thread seriously.

Are you suggesting that some people take threads seriously?

Who knew?

Ditocoaf wrote:But you'll see that in the religion thread I started a while back, people convinced me that I wasn't actually agnostic, but atheist.

HEY! I remember that! Seemed almost like you accidently convinced yourself. It was awesome. Really you only needed a nudge.Good for you!

tzor wrote:Are you suggesting that some people take threads seriously?

Who knew?

I do, unless arguing with Jay.

jk