Poll: religon: a 7 point scale

Recommended Videos

Cavouku

New member
Mar 14, 2008
1,122
0
0
The thing is guys, we only can call something fictitious if it's been proven to be made up. A Deity goes back further than I personally care to track, and if we make an animal translator, I may think they believe in something. It's all a question of nature, and I think that if nature wants us to believe, maybe it has a reason.

Not saying we have to, but it's an interesting concept to explore.
 

Glerken

New member
Dec 18, 2008
1,539
0
0
Akai Shizuku said:
Glerken said:
I went with 6. I'm Atheist, but I can't say 7, because it is impossible to be 100% sure.
I'm actually surprised so many people went with 1 and 7. They're the annoying ones preaching their beliefs down others throats...
I chose 1 and I'm not doing that.
Okay, maybe you're an exception. Generally speaking, saying you're 100% sure leaves no room to see "God" or no God, from a different point of view. Leading to being condescending to people who have other beliefs, because you feel you have a truth that others don't.
I'm not saying it's bad to have a belief (or none) and be proud of that, but to say you're 100% sure you're right is impossible.
 

CptCamoPants

New member
Jan 3, 2009
198
0
0
I guess I should be a 6. But I still worship something, but that's just cuz the gods I worship kick ass.
P.S. My girlfriend would definitely be a 1, and she has never even suggested I convert to Christianity. She knows why I made my decision, and she respects that, I don't know how many people I could say that about, but it's probably more than some others think.
 

Zombie_Fish

Opiner of Mottos
Mar 20, 2009
4,584
0
0
bladeofdarkness said:
Zombie_Fish said:
bladeofdarkness said:
Zombie_Fish said:
bladeofdarkness said:
the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun :)
How do you know God is a fictional creature though?
how do you know dragons are ?
How do you know they aren't?
does the fact that i dont know if they are or arent means that the chances are 50% for either options ?
In short, yes. There is no proof either side, so either side of the arguement is actually perfectly logical.
 

keybird

New member
Jun 1, 2009
810
0
0
personally i belive God is just a figment of a persons imagination. Something they can depend on when they are scared or troubled.

Not something that is real.
 

HeartAttackBob

New member
Sep 11, 2008
79
0
0
The distribution of votes on this poll is very interesting. I will admit to being a little surprised. Here's why:

The majority of respondents to this poll (at time of this post ~60%) are at least weak atheists (5 higher on the scale), which is much higher than any numbers I've seen for the <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism target=self>US (<5%) or the UK (<30%).
This implies two things which are correlated with atheism and agnosticism:
1) respondents to this poll <a href=http://sda.berkeley.edu:8080/quicktables/quicksetoptions.do?reportKey=gss04%3A1 target=self>are more educated than the average American or Brit.
2) respondents to this poll are <a href=http://users.ugent.be/~fanseel/intelligence-religion.pdf target=self>more intelligent <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence target=self>than the average American or Brit.

Making the leap that respondents to this poll are representative of Escapists in general (which, I admit, is not necessarily true), I find these results very encouraging. I am glad to see evidence that this community, of which I am a member and have a small part, is more intelligent, educated, and atheistic than average in the US and UK.

An advance response to theists:
Note that I make no claims about your -or anyone's- individual intelligence or education level, but merely statistical averages and relationships that have been found in scientific studies. I invite you to be skeptical and check my sources and reasoning, as well as seek a variety of other sources of information.
 

Akai Shizuku

New member
Jul 24, 2009
3,183
0
0
Glerken said:
Akai Shizuku said:
Glerken said:
I went with 6. I'm Atheist, but I can't say 7, because it is impossible to be 100% sure.
I'm actually surprised so many people went with 1 and 7. They're the annoying ones preaching their beliefs down others throats...
I chose 1 and I'm not doing that.
Okay, maybe you're an exception. Generally speaking, saying you're 100% sure leaves no room to see "God" or no God, from a different point of view. Leading to being condescending to people who have other beliefs, because you feel you have a truth that others don't.
I'm not saying it's bad to have a belief (or none) and be proud of that, but to say you're 100% sure you're right is impossible.
I'm as sure as I feel I can be. I don't have condescending views towards atheists, most of them are rather intelligent people. The only atheists I really hate are the ones that try to be fascist about it. I enjoy having a civilized theological discussion with atheists as long as it doesn't burst into flames; I don't like conflict.
 

Cavouku

New member
Mar 14, 2008
1,122
0
0
HeartAttackBob said:
The distribution of votes on this poll is very interesting. I will admit to being a little surprised. Here's why:

The majority of respondents to this poll (at time of this post ~60%) are at least weak atheists (5 higher on the scale), which is much higher than any numbers I've seen for the <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism target=self>US (<5%) or the UK (<30%).
This implies two things which are correlated with atheism and agnosticism:
1) respondents to this poll <a href=http://sda.berkeley.edu:8080/quicktables/quicksetoptions.do?reportKey=gss04%3A1 target=self>are more educated than the average American or Brit.
2) respondents to this poll are <a href=http://users.ugent.be/~fanseel/intelligence-religion.pdf target=self>more intelligent <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence target=self>than the average American or Brit.

Making the leap that respondents to this poll are representative of Escapists in general (which, I admit, is not necessarily true), I find these results very encouraging. I am glad to see evidence that this community, of which I am a member and have a small part, is more intelligent, educated, and atheistic than average in the US and UK.

An advance response to theists:
Note that I make no claims about your -or anyone's- individual intelligence or education level, but merely statistical averages and relationships that have been found in scientific studies. I invite you to be skeptical and check my sources and reasoning, as well as seek a variety of other sources of information.
...I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, and I'm not sure what you just said, but I hope it's not that Atheists are smarter than religious?
 

theultimateend

New member
Nov 1, 2007
3,621
0
0
Goldbling said:
theultimateend said:
Goldbling said:
theultimateend said:
Goldbling said:
I voted 2.00 but I'm really 1.00, I Firmly believe there is a God. Maybe not the one I believe in, but there is defiantly a God.
I've always wondered the "why" to this.

In the end it doesn't matter, people who don't like reality will continue to fluff it and there is nothing nice anyone else can do to change that.

To me I just don't see the evidence. What is there that would give the idea to anyone that there is some sort of almighty being. I'm a huge fan of the universe and I get a boner everytime I read an astrophysics book, I am a huge fan of life and I get a cognitive boner anytime a new discovery is made. I just don't see the evidence for a supreme being nor does it appear that faking it does any justice to an otherwise astoundingly interesting existence.

I'd rather not shit on this cake just because I really feel the need to take a dump.
You believe what you believe and that's fine. No one can provide you with the "evidence" you need to know there is a God, you can only find that yourself.
Again you are trying to legitimize a view that undermines every other thing you know.

If we can just belief in things for funsies then all knowledge is entirely moot because it serves no purpose.

Essentially once you start believing in things because you can you are closing your mind to any other knowledge. Once you start being skeptical you are making yourself a hypocrite. If you accept the scientific theory for anything else it is unreasonable to make an exception for something just because it makes you feel good.

But then reason isn't exactly part of the gameplan. What benefit do you get out of faith that you wouldn't get out of optimism? I know the answer but I hate rhetorical questions so I'll let you give me an answer.
None, I suppose if that's the way you wan to think about it. Whats with the whole "Religion don't let you lern nothin'" thing going on lately? I seek knowledge like any other person religious or otherwise, I also aspire to do something beside fight with people on teh internets like Genealogy, Astronomy, hell maybe even be a Historian. There is no rule in the Bible that's said you much turn off your brain and shut out all logic. Logic also depends on the person, what seems a logical choise to one person may seem totally idiotic and ignorant to another.
Well historically that's the case. The numbers you use are Arabic Numerals, almost every star visible at night with your eye has an Arabic name, and initially the Arabic region of the world was responsible for basically all scientific advancement.

Then one day it was declared that mathematics was the work of the devil (sounds stupid but it happened). After that the Arab world collapsed cognitively and even now, thousands of years later it hasn't recovered.

Look at creationists. They are fighting hard to debunk evolution. However evolution has been evolving since it was first developed. They tend to use darwinian statements and act like people still believe he was 100% correct. Much like Einstein or Newton he had a vast majority of the basics down but wasn't entirely right. However what do you get out of creationism? You get nothing. It cannot help you develop cures, understand viruses, examine anything biologically.

The pure idea of faith is a slap in the face of knowledge. By the very nature of believing in something because you can and not because there is a reason to you leave yourself being a hypocrite. Why is it alright to believe in god just because but you can't believe in flying spaghetti monsters with the same legitimacy.

There is an invisible race of beings that produce no signs that would ever give light to their existence. They walk around the Earth just as we do. I've just developed something that can never be dis proven. Does that mean its true? From a scientific standpoint its not even worth thinking about. However if we go off the tenets of faith the answer should or possibly even must be "Yes it is true."

Every single time you reach a question that cannot simply be answered will you say "God did it." or will you investigate. If you investigate then why did you accept god so easily?
 

bladeofdarkness

New member
Aug 6, 2009
402
0
0
Zombie_Fish said:
bladeofdarkness said:
Zombie_Fish said:
bladeofdarkness said:
Zombie_Fish said:
bladeofdarkness said:
the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun :)
How do you know God is a fictional creature though?
how do you know dragons are ?
How do you know they aren't?
does the fact that i dont know if they are or arent means that the chances are 50% for either options ?
In short, yes. There is no proof either side, so either side of the arguement is actually perfectly logical.
you CANT actually mean what you just said
what about santa, or the tooth fairy, or the flying spaghetti monster

when two sides are arguing, the answer does NOT, by default, lies somewhere in the middle
its quite possible for one side to be plain wrong
 

Supraliminal

New member
Jul 18, 2009
213
0
0
theultimateend said:
Supraliminal said:
theultimateend said:
Supraliminal said:
Cliff_m85 said:
Supraliminal said:
yosophat said:
Cliff_m85 my answer is God created evolution; no mortal can recreate evolution especially not knowing what every gene does. Then what gene groups do and God knows why some genes are dormant, how many genes make up a group are there dormant groups? How one mutation only happen once in a while in a rather large amount of time specially in larger animals that have offspring in seasons. Consider AIDS, my favorite virus, there a a couple of million of people infected with it there is probably a million if not more viruses reproducing fast if not exponentially. So out of all of those walking petri dishes wouldn't one of them have an evolved version of airborne AIDS, well I know the answer is no because thats not how HIV works but according to evolution it could happen but it hasn't. YES Akai Shizuku biology is "mind-buggeringly" complex that's why I'm studying Chemistry instead lol.
DAmn I pressed post instead of preview. Wait a sec...

God created Evolution. Very clever, trying to mix religion and science. Why not they are both invented by humans.

"according to evolution it could happen but it hasn't."
Ehhh.... It could happen means that it's not going to happen for sure. And changes in life forms according to evolution take thousands of thousands of years. AIDS? Ain't that quite a "new" thing.
Actually evolution happens every time an organism mates and creates offspring. Everyone is slightly evolved from their parents.
Slightly, yes. But when do we get wings? Maybe never, maybe in the next 23,4 million years. Who knows? But what is for sure it's going to take a whole lotta time.

Yeah, I Should have said "And BIG changes in life forms according to evolution...[small]bla bla bla[/small]"

My bad.
Why on earth would you get wings?

You'd need weaker bones, your entire organic make up would need to get lighter and you'd have to change just about everything that is human about you.

Just what immediate benefit does wings give you over some weird fantasy image. You have the food you need without moving, you have shelter, and you have no predators.

There is no benefit to wings that would leave the creepy humans that are mid mutation still breeding with other folks.
It was an example.. Of a big change in Evolution.

Yes I shouls have said that.

My bad. Again. I'm ashamed
Very bad example. I would have pointed out that the pinky toe is getting smaller in people and will likely not exist in the distant future because of the advent of shoes. With Shoes it is an entirely unnecessary body part. However! It will take a long time since you'll have people with pinky toes and people without pinky toes breeding. All depends on if it is a dominant gene.

But yeah. Wings are bad. Just because people like angels and birds doesn't mean we'll ever be them. The sheer amount of changes in a human to get them in flight organically is astounding.
Yes, you are propably right. But appart from the wing idea, humans are going to change drastically when time goes by for millions of years( if we survive for that long ), and that was my point. When we start colonizing other planets and people live and breed in different kinds of enviroments, there will be lots of variety coming to human race.
Some don't get it, maybe thinking about things so far into the future gives 'em headache or it has something to do with the god dilemma..?
 

Akai Shizuku

New member
Jul 24, 2009
3,183
0
0
CosmicCommander said:
Akai Shizuku said:
CosmicCommander said:
Akai Shizuku said:
Cliff_m85 said:
Akai Shizuku said:
yosophat said:
Semitendon said:
I am curious, how exactly would you prove that God exists, or does not exist?

From what I have seen, people who believe in God usually do so as a matter of faith. Although they can site examples of creative design, miracles, and other suppossedly "God" inspired things, it always boils down to faith. As well it should, since it is a matter of spirituallity rather than science. In Christianity, faith in Jesus/God is the point. So it becomes more of an issue of whether you believe the idea, rather than ability to prove the existence.

For people who claim athieism, the question is equally if not more confusing. Since God is a considered a spiritual being by most people, there is no scientific evidence that can be applied. If there is no scientific evidence, then you must rely on YOUR ability to accept a God or not. Which quickly spirals into ridiculousness. How does not liking the way the world works and thinking life is unfair or unjust, prove that there is no God? Just because things don't happen the way you think they should, doesn't mean there is no God.

Maybe it would be a better world for everyone if the religious relied on faith to influence the non-religious, rather than invading privacy, attacking, and insisting everyone except them was going to hell. Maybe it would be a better world if the atheist's and others like them stopped antagonizing, insulting, and attacking the beliefs of the religious.
Greatest idea ever! I think I'll start praying now.
Akai Shizuku said:
I'm not a Christian, but I'm 100% certain that God exists.

When a rabbit runs through the snow, does it not leave footprints?
That's deep...
Sometimes I think about the uncountable amount of life on the planet; it all shares the same atoms and molecules; all those atoms were created in the center of our solar system; and any one of those atoms is billions of years old; and I think there has to be some purpose there has to be a God. This is me at my most certain.
Have you ever studied biology? Are you aware of how mind-buggeringly complex even some of the most simple creatures are? It's just impossible that this happened by coincidence.
Obviously you haven't studied Evolution, because it's nothing at all like 'coincidence'. It's natural reproduction with survival of the fittest kicking in with genes.
Yes, because such complicated systems can just happen all by themselves.
It's callled Immersion, idiot.

Immersion, In Science and Philosophy, is the tendancy for Order to rise Out of Disorder, Complex Life to emerge out of an ooze of Bacteria and Protien, ect...

Even in Human society, Immersion is present, as in the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and, probably the best example, the pioneering of Atomic energy through the chaos of WW2.
Hey, relax, I never insulted you. I just felt sarcasm was the most effective way to get my point across.

Isn't Immersion just a theory? And whether it's true or not, where does it come from?
Sorry mate, Not very good with sarcasm. But immersion, although it is a theory, is like any fact in it's early stage's. It's very simple, and has many examples, in human history, the natural world, and the universe. Like a star forming, that's an example of immersion, matter itself, was created through a chotic amount of energy, and radiation, Society was created by nomads who had to go through a drastic cooling down of the planet, a cold part of an ice-age, which afterwards, taught them techniques for settling down, and farming.

Immersion, although a relatively minor theory, explains a lot, and gives me hope, that it will help propel society into the age of reason.
What I see the main problem between atheism and religion to be is that many religions seem to hate science and knowledge with a passion. This is not the case with all religions (Islam, for instance, apparently espouses science), but it is with a lot of them. Christianity, Hinduism, ancient Egyptian religion, those nut jobs that worshiped the Sun...I could go on for days.
 

Cliff_m85

New member
Feb 6, 2009
2,581
0
0
Akai Shizuku said:
Glerken said:
Akai Shizuku said:
Glerken said:
I went with 6. I'm Atheist, but I can't say 7, because it is impossible to be 100% sure.
I'm actually surprised so many people went with 1 and 7. They're the annoying ones preaching their beliefs down others throats...
I chose 1 and I'm not doing that.
Okay, maybe you're an exception. Generally speaking, saying you're 100% sure leaves no room to see "God" or no God, from a different point of view. Leading to being condescending to people who have other beliefs, because you feel you have a truth that others don't.
I'm not saying it's bad to have a belief (or none) and be proud of that, but to say you're 100% sure you're right is impossible.
I'm as sure as I feel I can be. I don't have condescending views towards atheists, most of them are rather intelligent people. The only atheists I really hate are the ones that try to be fascist about it. I enjoy having a civilized theological discussion with atheists as long as it doesn't burst into flames; I don't like conflict.
Certainly you have been respectful. I just hope you research further into a field of science before presenting an argument against it.
 

diamond edge

New member
Aug 6, 2009
2
0
0
I would be inclined to agree with monkfish, in that, I am not religious, and while I'm not one hundred percent sure there is a god, I think all the religions are describing the same thing, none of them are just exactly sure of what they're describing. Then you have to factor in that the religions have been passed down word of mouth as well as changing languages (especially in the case of christianity) as well as the fact that some have had almost 180 turn arounds throughout their existence. It just makes it a little hard to swallow. There is a unifying force that creates and binds all living things, of that I am certain. Now, is it a omnipotent deity that determines the course of my existence? On that i'm a little shaky. I kind of have a combination of buddhist and taoist theories. The word religion just scares me though, mob mentality develops too quickly for my liking, then you have things like the crusades >_<
 

Shoqiyqa

New member
Mar 31, 2009
1,266
0
0
Akai Shizuku said:
I'm not a Christian, but I'm 100% certain that God exists.

When a rabbit runs through the snow, does it not leave footprints?
.....

.....

.....

o_O

>.<

o_O

.....

0.-

-.o

8-/

.....

Nope, I still don't get it. Wtf do rabbit-tracks in the snow have to do with the price of 5,000 fish sandwiches?
 

Akai Shizuku

New member
Jul 24, 2009
3,183
0
0
Cliff_m85 said:
Akai Shizuku said:
Glerken said:
Akai Shizuku said:
Glerken said:
I went with 6. I'm Atheist, but I can't say 7, because it is impossible to be 100% sure.
I'm actually surprised so many people went with 1 and 7. They're the annoying ones preaching their beliefs down others throats...
I chose 1 and I'm not doing that.
Okay, maybe you're an exception. Generally speaking, saying you're 100% sure leaves no room to see "God" or no God, from a different point of view. Leading to being condescending to people who have other beliefs, because you feel you have a truth that others don't.
I'm not saying it's bad to have a belief (or none) and be proud of that, but to say you're 100% sure you're right is impossible.
I'm as sure as I feel I can be. I don't have condescending views towards atheists, most of them are rather intelligent people. The only atheists I really hate are the ones that try to be fascist about it. I enjoy having a civilized theological discussion with atheists as long as it doesn't burst into flames; I don't like conflict.
Certainly you have been respectful. I just hope you research further into a field of science before presenting an argument against it.
Actually, I'm a strong supporter of science. Despite the advances we as a species have made, science is still rather young. I have the feeling that scientists with new theories will always debate on a number of issues until one side is proven and new issues arise. It's a fairly endless process that I think will go on until the world ends.
 

theultimateend

New member
Nov 1, 2007
3,621
0
0
Supraliminal said:
theultimateend said:
Supraliminal said:
theultimateend said:
Supraliminal said:
Cliff_m85 said:
Supraliminal said:
yosophat said:
Cliff_m85 my answer is God created evolution; no mortal can recreate evolution especially not knowing what every gene does. Then what gene groups do and God knows why some genes are dormant, how many genes make up a group are there dormant groups? How one mutation only happen once in a while in a rather large amount of time specially in larger animals that have offspring in seasons. Consider AIDS, my favorite virus, there a a couple of million of people infected with it there is probably a million if not more viruses reproducing fast if not exponentially. So out of all of those walking petri dishes wouldn't one of them have an evolved version of airborne AIDS, well I know the answer is no because thats not how HIV works but according to evolution it could happen but it hasn't. YES Akai Shizuku biology is "mind-buggeringly" complex that's why I'm studying Chemistry instead lol.
DAmn I pressed post instead of preview. Wait a sec...

God created Evolution. Very clever, trying to mix religion and science. Why not they are both invented by humans.

"according to evolution it could happen but it hasn't."
Ehhh.... It could happen means that it's not going to happen for sure. And changes in life forms according to evolution take thousands of thousands of years. AIDS? Ain't that quite a "new" thing.
Actually evolution happens every time an organism mates and creates offspring. Everyone is slightly evolved from their parents.
Slightly, yes. But when do we get wings? Maybe never, maybe in the next 23,4 million years. Who knows? But what is for sure it's going to take a whole lotta time.

Yeah, I Should have said "And BIG changes in life forms according to evolution...[small]bla bla bla[/small]"

My bad.
Why on earth would you get wings?

You'd need weaker bones, your entire organic make up would need to get lighter and you'd have to change just about everything that is human about you.

Just what immediate benefit does wings give you over some weird fantasy image. You have the food you need without moving, you have shelter, and you have no predators.

There is no benefit to wings that would leave the creepy humans that are mid mutation still breeding with other folks.
It was an example.. Of a big change in Evolution.

Yes I shouls have said that.

My bad. Again. I'm ashamed
Very bad example. I would have pointed out that the pinky toe is getting smaller in people and will likely not exist in the distant future because of the advent of shoes. With Shoes it is an entirely unnecessary body part. However! It will take a long time since you'll have people with pinky toes and people without pinky toes breeding. All depends on if it is a dominant gene.

But yeah. Wings are bad. Just because people like angels and birds doesn't mean we'll ever be them. The sheer amount of changes in a human to get them in flight organically is astounding.
Yes, you are propably right. But appart from the wing idea, humans are going to change drastically when time goes by for millions of years( if we survive for that long ), and that was my point. When we start colonizing other planets and people live and breed in different kinds of enviroments, there will be lots of variety coming to human race.
Some don't get it, maybe thinking about things so far into the future gives 'em headache or it has something to do with the god dilemma..?
Well we tend to look at change is a bad thing. That's why faith is so popular, it has little to no change *unless it absolutely must*.

When people start mutating even in the slightest bit, slightly lower ears, slightly higher eyes, darker skin, different pigments. These sort of things bother people. I think evolution will be a slow process in people (even by evolutionary standards) because we are very picky about our breeding and much of it relies on simple tricks of the trade.

Symmetry is big. Historically the most 'beautiful' people in the world have all been highly Symmetrical. Ears at roughly the same height, eyes, nose not slanted, shoulders not angled at all. This is largely because the more symmetry you have the less damage you sustained as a fetus and the more complete your genetic makeup. So anyone who has mutations, even helpful ones, that break this mold tend to not get breeded with very often.

http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/watch/beyondbelief - Great little series with one of my favorite people in the world. If you are in New York, try and meet him.
 

Akai Shizuku

New member
Jul 24, 2009
3,183
0
0
Shoqiyqa said:
Akai Shizuku said:
I'm not a Christian, but I'm 100% certain that God exists.

When a rabbit runs through the snow, does it not leave footprints?
.....

.....

.....

o_O

>.<

o_O

.....

0.-

-.o

8-/

.....

Nope, I still don't get it. Wtf do rabbit-tracks in the snow have to do with the price of 5,000 fish sandwiches?
What I meant is that the universe had to have been left by something, due to the basic logic of cause and effect.