Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

93% of Elite Scientists are Atheists: Is it Obvious Why?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 77 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 26 Apr 2013 15:34:42 BDT
Henry James says:
Surveys indicate that 85-93% of the elite members of the National Academy of Scientists (US) are atheists.

Is the explanation so obvious that we don't need to restate it? Or do any of you have any interesting insights as to the cause?

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Apr 2013 15:42:57 BDT
Bellatori says:
Hi Henry... how's the afterlife?

I think I would go with "the explanation so obvious that we don't need to restate it"

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Apr 2013 15:44:51 BDT
Dr HotFXMan says:
A similar percentage also applies in the case of the fellowships of the Royal Society and the Royal Astronomical Society.

Posted on 26 Apr 2013 17:14:03 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Yes, seems the obvious answer.

Posted on 26 Apr 2013 19:22:29 BDT
tangfastico says:
Yes, the answer is obvious. They're American!

Posted on 26 Apr 2013 19:30:18 BDT
Heretic says:
The world had some of it's most intelligent people running it's banking system. Intelligence is not a guarantee of common sense.

SWH

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Apr 2013 19:33:09 BDT
Bellatori says:
True which is why 7->15% are religiously inclined I would guess.

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Apr 2013 19:34:10 BDT
Bellatori says:
"The world had some of it's most intelligent people running it's banking system." I was not aware that being a con artist necessarily equated to high intelligence, just to feral cunning.

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Apr 2013 20:22:56 BDT
Heretic says:
Bellatori says: "I was not aware that being a con artist necessarily equated to high intelligence,"

I wasn't aware we were talking about high intelligence, surely then we should look towards Mr Marley.

"just to feral cunning."

Feral cunning enough to dupe the rest of us.

SWH

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Apr 2013 20:27:59 BDT
Bellatori says:
Yes, well Mr Marley's partner sure had us over good and proper...

Posted on 26 Apr 2013 22:57:10 BDT
Utasanshin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 03:33:40 BDT
Henry James says:
Uta
The literary critic in me finds your "logic" and reasoning lucidity to be, shall we say, not of the elite variety.
"Atheism is little more than the mirror image of what it is denying" is a vacuous statement, to cite one glaring example. Your grasp of analogy and metaphor is perilously shaky here, as it is through your entire post (stamp collecting is another good example).
Numerous more broadly based surveys demonstrate that the higher a person's intelligence/IQ, the less likely they are to believe in a personal god. One might speculate on the meaning of that connection - I expect you will say that higher intelligence is no guarantee of, what?, ....higher intelligence?

Posted on 27 Apr 2013 06:03:51 BDT
Last edited by the author on 27 Apr 2013 06:04:58 BDT
cm1815 says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 27 Apr 2013 07:39:52 BDT
Last edited by the author on 27 Apr 2013 10:17:47 BDT
Someone who has just used the phrase 'scientism' is someone who has just placed a ceiling limit on the level of intelligence that will be used in the conversation.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 07:40:39 BDT
K. Hoyles says:
cm1815 - 'Historians - if they're honest - should say: "There seems to be some credible evidence that A resurrection MAY have happened about 2000 years ago. Let's try to check it out some more."'

They've tried. Historians need evidence to support their theories, like everyone else.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 08:03:18 BDT
C. A. Small says:
"There seems to be some credible evidence that A resurrection MAY have happened about 2000 years ago"- only there is none, Not a shred.

Maybe you need to purchase a dictionary, and look up the words credible and evidence and see where you have gone badly wrong.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 08:35:54 BDT
Drew Jones says:
"There seems to be some credible evidence that A resurrection MAY have happened about 2000 years ago. Let's try to check it out some more."
OK, let's grant you that. This would be the point the scientists won't go past so now's your chance... what have you got?

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 09:31:39 BDT
Bellatori says:
cm1815 says:
"Historians - if they're honest - should say: "There seems to be some credible evidence that A resurrection MAY have happened about 2000 years ago. Let's try to check it out some more.""

I have a shelf of books where Historians have tried to validate that Jesus existed let alone was resurrected. I think you are carting before horsing...

" and self-electing" Probably not... self-selecting, yes, however. The terminally stupid are generally not that welcome...

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 15:12:18 BDT
Last edited by the author on 27 Apr 2013 15:13:30 BDT
Henry James says:
so cm1815,
if the next Albert Einstein were up for election to the National Academy,
you believe other scientists would vote against him if he happened to believe in God????
I can see how you could believe that the resurrection actually happened.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 15:47:40 BDT
Utasanshin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 16:01:19 BDT
Pendragon says:
"what [atheism is] attempting to deny is itself of almost no interest"

Are you here saying that the existence of God is of almost no interest?

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 16:04:46 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Believing a a deity many years ago due to ignorance is one thing. Spouting on about Aquinas and Aristotle as if they had some modern insight appears to be a theists basic stance- see the idiotic Tom M.

Atheism is a lack of belief in a deity. Nothing more. And since both Aristotle and Aquinas both seem to be beyond reach for communication- I suggest you stop using them as some sort of trump card. Unless, of course, you are asserting their knowledge is equal to today's scientists?

Atheists in general seem to oppose stupid beliefs in fairy stories, myths and legends, I certainly do.

Posted on 27 Apr 2013 16:13:00 BDT
Henry James says:
Yes, we atheists oppose *stupid* beliefs in myths, though most of us realize that myths reveal many "truths" about human psychology, belief systems, and storytelling habits. And are thus quite valuable to know and study.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 16:26:08 BDT
Utasanshin says:
Of course not. There could be no subject of greater interest. It's just that when the debate is conducted at such a primitive level, it's totally fruitless, pointless and uninteresting. I'm not interested in the arguments of people who deny the existence of the flying spaghetti monster, which is the level of Dawkins-style atheism, or of people who come up with emotive arguments without first defining what they're talking about ('God', 'deity', etc.) and who engage in constant category confusion through inability to distinguish between the totally different realms in which science and religion operate. Because science and religion are totally independent spheres, it's wholly irrelevant whether one percent or 99 per cent of elite scientists are Christians, Buddhists, Marxists, atheists or whatever. (C.A. Small comes up with a typical category confusion when he implicitly assumes that today's scientists have more knowledge than Aristotle and Aquinas. Of course, within their restricted areas of expertise, today's scientists have more knowledge of science than did Aristotle and Aquinas, but arguments about God and religion have absolutely nothing to do with science.)

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Apr 2013 17:01:11 BDT
Bellatori says:
How delightful that you are so superior. It is shame that you are unwilling to condescend to our level and educate us...
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the religion discussion forum

Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Important Announcement from Amazon
153 27 Aug 2014
Je suis Charlie 581 3 minutes ago
What's wrong with atheism? 3539 7 hours ago
Faith and Blind Faith 288 21 hours ago
For Stu 354 2 days ago
death by cancer 743 2 days ago
Being held accountable for your actions. 1 2 days ago
The Sword Of Damocles 342 3 days ago
Off Topic - The Cinnamon Trust 30 3 days ago
the pub 121 3 days ago
Could thems Jesus make thems vanilla frappes from thems water? 48 3 days ago
A fair forum. 2754 3 days ago

More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  24
Total posts:  77
Initial post:  26 Apr 2013
Latest post:  29 Apr 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions