12-02-2006, 08:55 PM | #81 | ||||
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
As for the evolution, that's the exact same source where I got the 45% digit. 55% say God created humans in his present form. The other 45% say humans evolved either with or without the guidance of God. Quote:
"Religiosity and intelligence is a subject that studies the correlation, if any, between religiosity and intelligence." That's exactly right, and that's exactly what I said in my first reply to the video. Correlation is not causation. "Critics in these areas examine the validity and fairness of cognitive testing, as well as the problems in the definition and operationalization of the other measurements under discussion, in this case religiosity." Once again, something I said earlier. Are the statistics skewed at all? E.g. are the people claiming to be religious wholly so? Issues of substantiation, sir. "There is little research directly linking IQ with higher or lower levels of religiosity and spirituality. [2]" [PDF] What's more in this article is that he finds no "significant correlation between religiosity levels and IQ." "Studies focusing on the correlation between religiosity and other socioeconomic factors, such as higher education and interest in science, will be mentioned. However, such studies were not designed to consider the relationship between intelligence and religiosity. Even if the attribute measured can arguably relate with intelligence, the validity of using the results to imagine a correlation between religiosity and intelligence is very limited" What else needs to be said? From one of the sources (4) linked in your quote passage: "Nearly 38 percent of natural scientists -- people in disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology -- said they do not believe in God. Only 31 percent of the social scientists do not believe. Some stand-out stats: 41 percent of the biologists don't believe, while that figure is just 27 percent among political scientists. In separate work at the University of Chicago, released in June, 76 percent of doctors said they believed in God and 59 percent believe in some sort of afterlife." I also suggest reading the criticism part of the Wikipedia source you posted. It explains how correlation does not always mean causation, how some of the studies have been taken on high school and university students (who typically are young), how atheism among people tends to decline after marriage and after the age of 30, and how nearly all of these studies have been conducted in only the U.S. What's more there are studies that contradict the studies you are pointing out. In 1992 91% of people who received a baccalaureate degree from the University of Utah believed in (a) God, for example. 76% of Mormon graduates attended church regularly, and 78% with higher college degrees attended church regularly, for example. --- A 1998 study by Leslie J. Francis found no correlation, positive or negative, between intelligence and religiosity among 15-16 year olds. A 2006 study by Ellen Paek found a positive correlation between adult church-attending Christians and emotional intelligence. A 1985 Study by Lee Ellis found "at least among church members, the evidence consistently indicates that frequent church attenders have lower crime rates than infrequent church attenders . . . belief in an afterlife with divine punishment possible, at least among people who consider themselves members of an organized religion, is associated with lower crime rates. These are from scholarly journals found through databases provided to my university. This is the full extent of the results, really. This is what my point was, nagual678. There are reasons that very rarely will such old sources be accepted for anything in academia. Why? Because of progression. New studies tend overshadow older ones. New technology becomes available. People change. Culture changes. Was education in 1930 at all similar to how it is now? Probably very little. How come there doesn't really seem to be any peer-reviewed published articles in any scholarly journals that reflect these previous studies? Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by o_uber; 12-02-2006 at 09:02 PM. |
||||
|
12-03-2006, 12:22 AM | #82 | ||||||
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
The bigger contradiction is the fact that they have to presume that god made an inferior biological organism in the first place, as if not forseeing the difficulties that organism would face. Where is the omnipotence and foresight? Do you see the imposibility and lie in making such assumptions? Quote:
What you *should* be worried about is organizations that seek to promote religiosity under the guise of institutional research, in the name of intelligence and civility. Like the research stated here , because when it was first conducted and proven to be counter-productive to the message of the institute, there are reports that the institute attempted to scrub and play down the results on the ineffectiveness of prayer vs. their pro theological theories. Quote:
Quote:
Have you also not noticed the trend where these groups of LTD and Mormons that do not protest agaisnt the teaching of evolution, the acceptance of modern surgery, or concepts in science that contradict theology? While mormons may reject modernity all-together, their values place them against extremism and let them view things clearly. A stark contradiction to Born-against and Evangelists or traditional Catholics. Despite the high concentration of LTD and Mormons in Utah, abortion there is legal, and evolution is taught in both public and private schools along with contraception in health classes. Not even the Mormons feel the need to convert others to their lifestyle. I see this as a humble recognition of individual freedoms. Your deception is exposed. Quote:
Quote:
Maybe you're too dismissive and self-obscured... maybe i'm a little paranoid and reactionary... point being, we'll never agree. Last edited by o_the russian; 12-03-2006 at 12:28 AM. |
||||||
|
12-03-2006, 12:32 AM | #83 | |
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
Just how many times have you heard atheism as attributed to 'evil' ? and just who was saying it? |
|
|
12-03-2006, 12:33 AM | #84 |
Useless
Retired FF Staff
|
And who gave a shit?
__________________
Look at all those dead links. |
|
12-03-2006, 03:15 AM | #85 |
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Your Mamas House
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
How did the number of people who think that evolutionist is false/correct come into this? I don't even see why it matters how many think for either side. You could put 5 billion idiots together and they still wouldnt have the inventive potential of one genius.
This thread is getting really depressing. |
|
12-03-2006, 03:21 AM | #86 |
Useless
Retired FF Staff
|
This thread lost all meaning at page 3. It's a rant-off now.
__________________
Look at all those dead links. |
|
12-03-2006, 04:02 AM | #87 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Midtown Express
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
It's a tl;dr competition...
|
|
12-03-2006, 04:09 AM | #88 |
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Your Mamas House
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Oh ya well my sources confirm it ISN'T A TL;DR(I know exactly what that means) and it in fact hasn't lost its meaning by page 3!!!
__________________________________________________ ___________ A bunch of sources no one in their right mind would give a shit about A bunch of sources no one in their right mind would give a shit about A bunch of sources no one in their right mind would give a shit about A bunch of sources no one in their right mind would give a shit about A bunch of sources no one in their right mind would give a shit about A bunch of sources no one in their right mind would give a shit about A bunch of sources no one in their right mind would give a shit about |
|
12-03-2006, 04:45 AM | #89 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Europe, Front Yard
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
So if this thread is so worthless to you then by all means refrain from posting in it, a discussion is going on and if you want to add something constructive then do so. Otherwise stay away. Jesus, is this rocket science ?
|
|
12-03-2006, 05:31 AM | #90 | |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Midtown Express
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
As far as a hijack goes I think it's sad to see "education" and "intelligence" being used interchangeably. Different vectors and they're using studies that weren't focused on that to begin with but on other things and the "conclusions" were extrapolated. Not that it's much "cleaner" in results why not look at simple demographics. The most recent I can find publicly for MENSA (1996) shows roughly 19% in the Atheist, Agnostic and no religion categories as opposed to a report from 2001 that shows roughly 15% of the US general population in those same categories. Obviously the gen pop demographics includes Mensa members but the ~42,000 active members then are hardly enough to skew the US gen pop stats. ~4% is not what I'd call a huge difference. In any case it seems to me like Russian has hijacked another thread to create stick pony parade in honor of another of his pet obsessions. |
|
|
12-03-2006, 05:44 AM | #91 | |
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
The thread was never derailed, it evolved and you didnt evolve with it... just because you couldnt follow the train of thought, whether you didnt care or didnt want to read all the information, is not my problem. Every point is a valid and on-going arguement within the original, if you cant see it you must have blinders on. |
|
|
12-03-2006, 05:48 AM | #92 | |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Midtown Express
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
|
|
|
12-03-2006, 03:25 PM | #93 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Jersey, USA!
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
My beautiful thread .... destroyed ...
|
|
12-03-2006, 04:56 PM | #94 |
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Your Mamas House
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
When you looked at the topic you posted did you really think it had a chance in hell?
|
|
12-03-2006, 05:03 PM | #95 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Europe, Front Yard
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
No I'm not getting in a flamewar, just stay the hell out of this thread (and others threads) if your only addition consists in posts like that one. Last post about this from me. |
|
|
12-03-2006, 06:24 PM | #96 |
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Your Mamas House
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Nagual what the hell is your problem? I was trying to suggest that posting controversial stuff on this board usually results in 8 paragraph long essay wars. So no my post wasn't thread shitting, go away and stop being a grumpy old man Nagual.
|
|
12-03-2006, 07:37 PM | #97 | ||
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The Peoples Republic of Harmfull Free Radicals
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
My point is that you could have made your point without being snide, or use the technical term, a 'dickhead'. Bigot would be another good word to use here. Quote:
(edited to fix quote) Last edited by o_nezumi; 12-04-2006 at 09:20 PM. |
||
|
12-03-2006, 08:42 PM | #98 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Jersey, USA!
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
Also, lets start a crusade to end sarcasm! Everything is taken too seriously these days so why try anymore ... this referring to my last sarcastic post. If you guys can't take a hint, get away from the computer for awhile. Really. |
|
|
12-03-2006, 08:49 PM | #99 | |||||
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
Quote:
You've got false assumptions to support your superiority complex. Quote:
As for the multitude of studies, you have yet to produce any. You linked to a Wikipedia that listed four or five articles/studies/polls describing this. This is your multitude? This is but a grain of sand in academe. Did you miss it? "There is little research directly linking IQ with higher or lower levels of religiosity and spirituality.[2]" Came straight from your article (and they're right); you just failed to quote it. The scientific community and academia do not support you. You've got false assumptions to support your superiority complex. Quote:
As for the Utah studies, I was using that as point to counter your idea that religiosity = stupidity. How does evolution, modern surgery, or scientific "concepts" disprove theology? You're making extraordinary claims with extraordinarily little fact. You're making false assumptions to support your superiority complex. Quote:
This is a good read: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Religion/BG1064.cfm Last edited by o_uber; 12-03-2006 at 08:58 PM. |
|||||
|
12-04-2006, 02:35 AM | #100 | |||||
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts Rated Helpful 0 Times
|
Quote:
My advantage as an atheist isnt direclty in intelligence, its understanding that the natural forces I listed are not causations and powers of god or representation of any devine will. That is all. Something anyone believeing in gods omnipotence cant get past. You're making everything into some kind of shovenistic commedy as you run out of ideas. Surely, person such as yourself is the most intelligent of the 'theologic bunch' ? Quote:
Quote:
You asked for more studies? ... ok... aside from the 5 or so modern ones in that Wiki that you declared were too few..., check here for a listing, correlation, and conclusion. Those are older studies than the Wiki, yet prove the same correlation. 1. Thomas Howells, 1927 Study of 461 students showed religiously conservative students "are, in general, relatively inferior in intellectual ability." 2. Hilding Carlsojn, 1933 Study of 215 students showed that "there is a tendency for the more intelligent undergraduate to be sympathetic toward… atheism." 3. Abraham Franzblau, 1934 Confirming Howells and Carlson, tested 354 Jewish children, aged 10-16. Found a negative correlation between religiosity and IQ as measured by the Terman intelligence test. 4. Thomas Symington, 1935 Tested 400 young people in colleges and church groups. He reported, "There is a constant positive relation in all the groups between liberal religious thinking and mental ability… There is also a constant positive relation between liberal scores and intelligence…" 5. Vernon Jones, 1938 Tested 381 students, concluding "a slight tendency for intelligence and liberal attitudes to go together." 6. A. R. Gilliland, 1940 At variance with all other studies, found "little or no relationship between intelligence and attitude toward god." 7. Donald Gragg, 1942 Reported an inverse correlation between 100 ACE freshman test scores and Thurstone "reality of god" scores. 8. Brown and Love, 1951 At the University of Denver, tested 613 male and female students. The mean test scores of non-believers was 119 points, and for believers it was 100. The non-believers ranked in the 80th percentile, and believers in the 50th. Their findings "strongly corroborate those of Howells." 9. Michael Argyle, 1958 Concluded that "although intelligent children grasp religious concepts earlier, they are also the first to doubt the truth of religion, and intelligent students are much less likely to accept orthodox beliefs." 10. Jeffrey Hadden, 1963 Found no correlation between intelligence and grades. This was an anomalous finding, since GPA corresponds closely with intelligence. Other factors may have influenced the results at the University of Wisconsin. 11. Young, Dustin and Holtzman, 1966 Average religiosity decreased as GPA rose. 12. James Trent, 1967 Polled 1400 college seniors. Found little difference, but high-ability students in his sample group were over-represented. 13. C. Plant and E. Minium, 1967 The more intelligent students were less religious, both before entering college and after 2 years of college. 14. Robert Wuthnow, 1978 Of 532 students, 37 percent of Christians, 58 percent of apostates, and 53 percent of non-religious scored above average on SATs. 15. Hastings and Hoge, 1967, 1974 Polled 200 college students and found no significant correlations. 16. Norman Poythress, 1975 Mean SATs for strongly anti- religious (114, moderately anti-religious (1119), slightly anti-religious (110, and religious (1022). 17. Wiebe and Fleck, 1980 Studied 158 male and female Canadian university students. They reported "nonreligious S's tended to be strongly intelligent" and "more intelligent than religious S's." And many more are available at that site I linked to. The greater research piece that was done in correlation with all of these studies and many more is actulay publishing its 27 volume this coming Januray, check The Council for Secular Humanism Let me post for you the conclusion of this long long study: Quote:
Quote:
And here is a better read for you, complete with citations and everything. And it will explain to you how religion != morality for #1, and #2 is actualy a detraction to global morality. Last edited by o_the russian; 12-04-2006 at 02:45 AM. |
|||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|