New study on atheists

[Lucas]

THE!!!! one. not that one or this one but THE one. THEEEE

DONT YOU FORGET IT

[Scott R. Brown]

THE!!!! one. not that one or this one but THE one. THEEEE

DONT YOU FORGET IT

I am soooooo confused!!!!!!

Which one is THE One and which one is THEEEE One?

There are too many One's to choose from!!

How can I not forget something I haven't even figured out yet?

[Drake]

The assumption isn't being drawn from the fact there is a study. The assumption is formed because the study is being done from a theological perspective.

Sometimes, it is not unwise to make such assumptions when information can be extrapolated from the event.

An uninterested and non-invested source for the study would not invite such an assumption.

I didn't read the survey. Did you? Just because a research project is being done by a religious person doesn't mean there must be bias. That's an assumption. That's like assuming a religious quantum computing scientist will attribute decoherence to "the devil's trickery"

[Lucas]

I am soooooo confused!!!!!!

Which one is THE One and which one is THEEEE One?

There are too many One's to choose from!!

How can I not forget something I haven't even figured out yet?

Wrong. There can be ONLY one. That one is me, this one, the one. Not two, not three, and definately not zero, but one. If you add three and subtract four and add one, you get one. ME. Get it?

[Scott R. Brown]

Wrong. There can be ONLY one. That one is me, this one, the one. Not two, not three, and definately not zero, but one. If you add three and subtract four and add one, you get one. ME. Get it?

I got it! You are very lonely because you all alone and probably because you do advance mathematics in your spare time!

Try doing crosswords in Starbucks, while blogging on your Apple laptop!

Free advice from The TWO.......NOT One, NOT Three, but TWO and ONLY TWO!!!

[Lucas]

Dear Two,

I do not have a source to find an apple that is large enough to stay on my lap entirely. I could perhaps put one on one of my legs. As two is your department, I hesitate to use both of my legs for this activity. Definition number 50 on the urban dictionary describes a blog as; "A slang term referring to a massive "dump" taken after a successful meal. (Big-ass-log)= Blog!", so perhaps after I eat the large apple that you can source for me, I will have plenty to blog with! Definition numer 86 describes starbucks as; "A place to take a dump when you're in the city." So apparently this would be a grand place to blog while doing a crossword puzzle.

I shall contemplate this advice.

Regards,
The One

[Lee Chiang Po]

Many years ago I bore witness to 2 different serveys concerning such. Because it would have been offensive to many people for many reasons, the surveys were actually covering a wide range of things, about 4 good pages of questions, asked in a way in a sequence that would not indicate patterns refering to a persons intellegence or religion. However as all the different information was catigorized, it gave some really strong indications. People that seek higher education tend to be slightly more intellegent than those that do not. So education and such were used to indicate the overall intellegence of each group. Not really scientific I guess. But it indicated that starting with the much lower intellegent people were not only earning lower income annually, but tended to be more religious. As they move up in intellegence to the middle ground, it was a mix. About equal in faithful and athiests. As it moved on up in intellegence religion sort of fell off considerably. So, what it indicated was the more religious you were, the dumber you had to be. And the smarter you were, the less likely you were to be religious.
The agruement as to whether or not there is a God is one that can not be decided. The only ones that would know are the ones that die and supposedly pass into the hereafter. We never hear from these people ever again, so they are not that cooperative. We will never know. So, we continue to except 10% of peoples income in the name of their Savior. We pray for their souls and teach them to put the weight of their burden upon the shoulders of this Savior. It gives them a warm and fuzzy feeling, and it makes my purse heavy with coin.

[Syn7]

Or it could mean that contact with higher education resulted in less religiosity. That does not mean that intelligence and/or knowledge has any correlation with religiosity. It could be many things.




On another note... A few coins for a warm fuzzy doesn't really sound like a bad deal to me. Regardless of the validity of these feelings in a factual historical construct.

If being a good lil rank and file christian soldier makes you happy, go for it. Just don't force your sh1t on me and we can be friends.

[Syn7]

The assumption isn't being drawn from the fact there is a study. The assumption is formed because the study is being done from a theological perspective.

You assume he cannot form an less biased study because of his profession? I say less biased instead of non biased because non biased does not exist. We all have our own perspectives, but it is possible to look outside your own perspective. It is also possible to study many perspectives in order to eliminate bias from a study, never all, but you do the best you can. Because the man is a theology professor is not enough info to assume he cannot do this.

Sometimes, it is not unwise to make such assumptions when information can be extrapolated from the event.

Yeah, there is a word for that, it's called bias. ironic since that is the word you originally chose to use.

An uninterested and non-invested source for the study would not invite such an assumption.

We all have some bias, interested or not. Why can't you just admit it was a short sighted comment? I've never seen you admit fault, this concerns me.

[Drake]

If an atheist were to conduct the survey, wouldn't it be an equally foolish assumption to think he or she would be less biased?

In the context of the afterlife, or lack thereof, EVERYONE has some sort of bias. Unless, of course, they are machines. Then, they clearly know that Brachamachina is the true and only god.

[ghostexorcist]

That's nice that people are discussing natural bias in research, but is anyone going to participate in the study? Like I said, I'm holding my judgement until the paper and or book comes out.

[poshmissy]

Hello Everyone! In my opinion, anyone whether he believes in God or doesn't believe that a God exists, they all deserve some respect for what they believe in. We have several religions in this world and each of us has own opinion on what to believe spiritually.

[David Jamieson]

Hello Everyone! In my opinion, anyone whether he believes in God or doesn't believe that a God exists, they all deserve some respect for what they believe in. We have several religions in this world and each of us has own opinion on what to believe spiritually.

I am not sure I respect what they believe in, but I respect them as human beings, see and understand they are all allowed to make their own mistakes and so long as their beliefs bring harm to no one else, it's irrelevant what they believe.

But the beliefs themselves do not require being respected if your view of them is that they are wrong or superstitious or factually unstable.

If a belief cannot be factually defended and argued for, then people should probably stop defending the indefensible and arguing the inarguable.

person a: "I believe in God"
person b: "good for you, want pizza?"

the end.