Poor trump - Page 18

@beetree, does that list make a distinction between how one was raised and how one actually believes? Also, that list takes into account people who lived over a century ago. I could make a list of geniuses who lived in pre-Christian times and they probably all believed in some religion. The fact is that current members of the NAS are almost exclusively atheist. So no, you didn't prove that scientists are just as religious as non-scientists.

If you want to use Wiki:
"In a 2013 meta-analysis, led by Professor Miron Zuckerman, of 63 scientific studies about IQ and religiosity, a negative relation between intelligence and religiosity was found in 53, and a positive relation in the remaining ten. Controlling for other factors, they can only confidently show strong negative correlation between intelligence and religiosity among American Protestants.[1] The meta-analysis discussed three possible explanations:

First, intelligent people are less likely to conform and, thus, are more likely to resist religious dogma.
Second, intelligent people tend to adopt an analytic (as opposed to intuitive) thinking style, which has been shown to undermine religious beliefs.
Third, Intelligent people may have less need for religious beliefs and practices, as some of the functions of religiosity can be given by intelligence instead. Such functions include the presentation of a sense that the world is orderly and predictable, a sense of personal control and self-regulation and a sense of enhancing self esteem and belongingness."

"The idea that analytical thinking makes one less likely to be religious is an idea held by some studies on this issue,[16] including a report from Harvard University.[17] First of all, the Harvard researchers found evidence suggesting that all religious beliefs become more confident when participants are thinking intuitively (atheists and theists each become more convinced). Thus reflective thinking generally tends to create more qualified, doubted belief.

Furthermore, the Harvard study found that participants who tended to think more reflectively were less likely to believe in a god.[17] Reflective thinking was further correlated with greater changes in beliefs since childhood: these changes were towards atheism for the most reflective participants, and towards greater belief in a god for the most intuitive thinkers. The study controlled for personality differences and cognitive ability, suggesting the differences were due to thinking styles – not simply IQ or raw cognitive ability." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence

There is this which compares stats across an 80 year period. https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm

From Pew: "A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006. Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view." http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

@Noitsyou. Did you forget you said this:

Scientists in general are more likely to be atheists. When you look at the best scientists, the ones who win Nobel Prizes, they are even more likely to be atheists than scientists in general. Now that is not proof but it is evidence that can lead to my conclusion

I will have more to say but I am too short on time. But really...! My list of stats still proves you wrong as the bottomline, and in addition to you contradicting yourself. 

Noitsyou Harvard? You mean the bastion of higher liberal indoctrination and anti religious learning and place where science is put ahead of faith proved that people who are religious are less intelligent? LOL Now that is funny argument.

Actually your list of stats doesn't help your case as even if we were to assume that the religious affiliation listed was an actual indicator of belief the percentage of religious Nobel Prize winners is science is still lower than non-scientists.

In fact, you will never be able to find a legitimate stat that shows scientists are just as religious as non-scientists. You will never find a stat that shows members of the NAS are just as religious as scientists who aren't members. And that is my point. If scientists were more religious 100 years ago it means just as much as the fact they were even more religious 500 years ago. That is, it means nothing. If you read my post carefully you will note I didn't use the past tense. I said the scientists "who win" not who have won. I'm speaking in the present tense so what happened in 1900 is irrelevant. When talking about the intelligence of people in the world today, dead people really don't count.

If they gave out Nobel Prizes in ancient Greece a lot of pagans with beliefs that by our standards are quite silly would have won. Would it make sense to bring them up in a discussion about the contemporary world? Then again, the percentage of ancient Greek thinkers who were atheists would be higher than the percentage of the average Greek who was. So the trend is an old one.

@Prager, I would put a "liberal" Harvard education light years ahead of your communist one. Which by the way, according to you, would have been extremely liberal.

It's so liberal it produced GWB, Mitt Romney, and Justices Scalia and Roberts.

Also, a Harvard study conducted by a black man found no racial bias in police shootings, going against the "liberal" narrative.

You also have no idea how scientific studies are conducted or published.

One more thing, that was an ad hominem. You know, the thing you incorrectly refer to as a Straw Man argument. I guess you got the Soviet version of philosophy.

There is difference between organized religion and Biblical Christianity.  Yet ignorant are mixing it together. AIn any case  Bible will challenge all intelligence levels if one is honest and tries to understand it. So as we see  below , bible is  not just about faith but also about knowledge. Many skeptics think that Christianity is for people who do not want to think or do not know how to think . As we see from  biased Harvard study above , Christians are often characterized as people who believe whatever they are told by the church because they are people of low intelligence we are led to believe. No pun intended.  Faith is thought of as something that one believes blindly - with no supporting evidence. However, this notion  does not represent biblical Christianity. In contrast, to what many skeptics and biased science snobs   believe, the Bible challenges its readers to test it and come to a reasonable conclusion. Contrary to what many non-believers think, the Bible does not teach blind faith. In fact, the Bible actually tells believers to test everything (1 Thessalonians 5:21 But  examine everything carefully;  hold fast to that which is good;)

No other "holy" book tells its readers to actually put what it says to the test. The Bible can make such a statement because it passes the tests of truthfulness that no other "holy" book can. God Himself in His revelation to Isaiah stated, "Come now, and let us reason together..."God, the Creator of humans and human reasoning ability wants us to use that ability to determine His plan of salvation. How do we determine if the Bible is true? We test it and see if it is reasonable. Psalm 19 tells us that the universe "declares the glory of God" and that this "voice goes out into all the earth." The Bible encourages people to use their minds. Even the act of worship should involve both the spirit and the mind.  I shall pray with the spirit and I shall pray with the mind also; I shall sing with the spirit and I shall sing with the mind also. (1 Corinthians 14:15)In fact, the Bible says that God created humans and endowed them with a mind so that they would use it."Who has put wisdom in the innermost being, Or has given understanding to the mind? (Job 38:36) The Bible says that God and Jesus Christ will test the minds (as well as the hearts) of people. The Bible says that those who do not believe do so, in part, because of deception in their minds.

The book of Proverbs in the Old Testament gives practical advice for living, raising children, and making good choices versus bad choices. Many of the verses discuss the importance of acquiring knowledge and wisdom, even to the degree of choosing knowledge over riches. Faith is of utmost importance to the Christian. But the Bible doesn't say to limit your belief to faith alone. In fact, it commands us to add first moral excellence then second knowledge.  Very smart dude Solomon, in his prayers to God, asked for wisdom and knowledge, both of which God granted to him. 

For the LORD gives wisdom; From His mouth come knowledge and understanding. (Proverbs 2:6)
Wise men store up knowledge, But with the mouth of the foolish, ruin is at hand. (Proverbs 10:14)
Every prudent man acts with knowledge, But a fool displays folly. (Proverbs 13:16)
The mind of the prudent acquires knowledge, And the ear of the wise seeks knowledge. (Proverbs 18:15)
Also it is not good for a person to be without knowledge, And he who makes haste with his feet errs. (Proverbs 19:2)

"Take my instruction, and not silver, And knowledge rather than choicest gold. (Proverbs 8:10)" 

 

 Adopted from and  More here:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/reason.html#n20

You really shouldn't argue with people smarter than you. You referred to the "biased" Harvard study but presented no evidence for that claim. In fact, you made a lot of claims without any supporting evidence. What are these tests of "truthfulness?"

You also missed the point. It isn't Christianity but religiosity. Another thing, are Muslims just as smart as Christians? Are they smarter than atheists?

So, you are calling me ignorant? What a mistake. Time to search through my PMs and put into my own words the stories I have heard about you. Is your forum slow because you are spending a lot of time here. Shtal finally left and now here you are. WTH? It doesn't look like you understand it when you have to copy and paste and do hours of research to find your points. Let me ask you this - there have been about 30 Sundays this year - how many of those did you spend in church? How many Saturdays did you spend drinking? Is a virgin birth reasonable? What is the test to determine if a virgin can get pregnant without semen? How many of your dogs have gotten pregnant without a male?

Meltdown, lmao.

 

I dare anyone...

LMAO!

http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2015/07/31/donald_trump_this_run_on_sentence_from_a_speech_in_sun_city_south_carolina.html