For the love of God... scientists in uproar at Â£1m religion prize / General Chatting / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: General Chatting

« Previous topic | Next topic »

For the love of God... scientists in uproar at Â£1m religion prize

previous 1 2

Move Thread

LAN_403

Ash Small

Thu Apr 07 2011, 08:27PM

Registered Member #3414 Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245

Chris Russell wrote ...

.The one thing I'd like to correct is the mistaken assumption that belief follows a linear progression with agnostics straddling the line between belief in God and disbelief in God. It doesn't work that way:

.

definition of gnostic theist = 'I know there is a God'

definition of gnostic atheist = 'I know there is no God'

definition of gnostic agnostic = 'I know there might be a God'.

EDIT: I should have used the word 'believe' instead of 'know'. This is a science forum. (posted after Chris replied below)

Chris Russell

Thu Apr 07 2011, 08:53PM

... not Russel!
Registered Member #1 Joined: Thu Jan 26 2006, 12:18AM
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Posts: 1052

Which would make an agnostic gnostic: "I don't know what I know."

Nah

Thu Apr 07 2011, 11:36PM

Registered Member #3567 Joined: Mon Jan 03 2011, 10:49PM
Location: USA, 1960s
Posts: 260

I don't see the point of this thread.

While I am religious and do belive in god, I also belive in the:

Big Bang
Evolution
The atom
The universe is around 13 trillion years old (plus or minus a trillion or so)
Freedom of homosexuals
abortion
and so on

I would just like to clear up the fact that not all religious people are stuffy unscientific people and some are quite scientific.

3l3ctrici7y

Fri Apr 08 2011, 03:51AM

Registered Member #1806 Joined: Sun Nov 09 2008, 04:58AM
Location: USA
Posts: 136

Mr. Coyne says that "science is based on doubt and questioning".
I wonder where he comes down on something like "anthropogenic climate change", formerly known as global warming before the discovered we're in a cooling trend, and more formerly known as global cooling; before we were in a warming trend. ...A branch of "science" where the best they can come up with is that we have a "consensus". Yes, there is a broad "consensus" in the "scientific" community, that man is causing "climate change". Also; I oft hear supporters of man made climate change use words like believe; asking questions like "Don't you believe in climate change?"

He must have missed the memo, that the whole hoax that was "climate science" was blown wide open. It happened just DAYS after I last spoke about this here on 4hv. It would not be surprising if many of you did not know that the scandal/hoax of "climate science " was unveiled. The news that you listen to that made you a believer has no interest in telling you the truth now.. or ever. Those of you that would like to cite "facts" pertaining to climate science.. you're still trusting the methods and honesty of those that collected and reported those "facts". Unless you have done first hand study yourself, you're still just believing.

I was just looking at Google for hits about how belief in anthropogenic climate change is essentially a religion, just as atheism, or just plain theism; and lo, what do I find? I just love seeing progressives getting caught in their own tangled webs of inconsistency. The reason so many here and elsewhere so vehemently defend climate change is, that for them, it is their religion. Everyone has a religion. If it is not obvious, I will explain; the employee was dismissed for espousing his belief in man made climate change. The progressive government has stated that employers cannot dismiss employees except for certain reasons. Dismissal for religious views is certainly not on the list of acceptable reasons. So in order for the employer to be in violation of the "wrongful" dismissal laws, the employees belief in climate change has to be [correctly] defined as a religion. Isn't progressivism grand?

Many here already strongly believe in man made global cooling/warming or climate change. I do not expect to change their minds, but there could be some that still have an open mind about the topic; those are the ones I hope to influence.

3l3ctrici7y

Fri Apr 08 2011, 04:19AM

Registered Member #1806 Joined: Sun Nov 09 2008, 04:58AM
Location: USA
Posts: 136

Proud Mary wrote ...

I think 3l3ctrici7y should be commended for having the courage of his convictions, and not having crept off bleating into his funk hole.

What a display of mature professionalism. We can all learn from your example.

Proud Mary wrote ...
It seems to me that the main antagonism is not so much between those who believe in a god, and those that do not, but between those who believe in the infallible authority of Bronze Age, Iron Age, and MediÃ¦val religious writings, and those who do not.

Clearly, contemporary "scientific" writings that have been proven to be falsified are a much better basis for a religion than MediÃ¦val writings are.

Chris Russell

Fri Apr 08 2011, 05:13AM

... not Russel!
Registered Member #1 Joined: Thu Jan 26 2006, 12:18AM
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Posts: 1052

Right, this thread has nowhere to go but down at this point. Let's call it a day and end on a positive note before things get ugly.

previous 1 2

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob