Religious people are less intelligent than atheists

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Religious people are less intelligent than atheists
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · Next

AuthorMessage
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19397
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1404257 - Posted: 17 Aug 2013, 9:59:34 UTC - in response to Message 1404254.  
Last modified: 17 Aug 2013, 10:04:46 UTC

And if you leave out the lit and peace ones?

We all should do, they aren't real prizes are they, just political and social niceties. You get a world renowned prize for writing a book? That should be relegated to the Pulitzer Prize. The Nobel awards are in the categories of Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature, Peace, and Economic sciences. In my view the Peace prize has been devalued in recent years. It was well earned in 1993 by Nelson Mandela, but Jimmy Carter in 2002, Obama in 2009, and the EU in 2012 have debased it. Far too much back slapping going on.


So, it's one per 4.6 million then.

Or maybe as 2 per 4.6 million if you count George Bernard Shaw, besides his Lit prize he did found the London School of Economics.
ID: 1404257 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34060
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1404458 - Posted: 17 Aug 2013, 21:39:37 UTC - in response to Message 1403993.  

The Irish republic, population 4.6 million, United Kingdom, population 64 million

Eire only has 7 Nobel laureates, the UK has 119.

Irish = 1 Nobel per 657,000 population.

UK = 1 Nobel per 538,000 population.

I would say that was fairly close.




Yep, I'd call it the rule of three:)
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1404458 · Report as offensive
Profile Shannock9
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 1396
Credit: 634,964
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1405670 - Posted: 20 Aug 2013, 22:10:53 UTC
Last modified: 20 Aug 2013, 22:11:17 UTC

Certain religious groups - you know who you are - promote celibacy for their "brightest" adherents.

Looks like a program for breeding down to me.

ID: 1405670 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34060
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1405944 - Posted: 21 Aug 2013, 13:21:16 UTC
Last modified: 21 Aug 2013, 13:23:16 UTC

Discussions always seem to be rational over here in the science corner...
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1405944 · Report as offensive
musicplayer

Send message
Joined: 17 May 10
Posts: 2442
Credit: 926,046
RAC: 0
Message 1406750 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 4:52:02 UTC

Amen.
ID: 1406750 · Report as offensive
Profile Lynn Special Project $75 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Nov 00
Posts: 14162
Credit: 79,603,650
RAC: 123
United States
Message 1406779 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 6:26:22 UTC - in response to Message 1406750.  
Last modified: 23 Aug 2013, 6:37:53 UTC

It's Science, (non-Seti). I'm rational most of the time. Amen.

Throw one out into the universe.

Lynn
ID: 1406779 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407716 - Posted: 25 Aug 2013, 22:15:23 UTC

Other than mouthing off is there any proof to the topic of this thread?
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...
ID: 1407716 · Report as offensive
musicplayer

Send message
Joined: 17 May 10
Posts: 2442
Credit: 926,046
RAC: 0
Message 1407729 - Posted: 25 Aug 2013, 23:48:11 UTC
Last modified: 25 Aug 2013, 23:48:52 UTC

Is this continous discussion still being allowed here?

Whether you or me or someone else is supposed to be intelligent or maybe intelligence may be found around us for that matter, science is supposed to be approached and dealt with by means of a specific angle in order to be objective and serious.

Religion and religious belief is among some or most of us either because it is being taught, or because there is something personal to it, possibly based on life experiences.

Many people who are scientists and therefore doing scientific work happen to be atheists. Therefore, in case you are supposed to be a "believer", you therefore are not supposed to be a good scientist either.

Molecular biologists who are studying the DNA in our cells are well aware of how complex nature in fact may be. There may well be similar or other things present in space which we are not familiar with or aware of. Some people favor small or big crafts, others tend to believe in "angels".

Therefore, in my opinion experience counts and why not bring with you both a little bit of this as well as a little bit of that in order to get a better hand on the whole picture?

In the end, numbers alone may not be the only answer to the big question - namely are we alone in the Universe or not.

If not, "they" are still supposed to be aliens.
ID: 1407729 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19397
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1407751 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 0:32:41 UTC - in response to Message 1407716.  
Last modified: 26 Aug 2013, 0:32:53 UTC

Other than mouthing off is there any proof to the topic of this thread?

Read the original post and the link which it contains.
ID: 1407751 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 1407757 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 1:02:34 UTC - in response to Message 1407751.  

Other than mouthing off is there any proof to the topic of this thread?

Read the original post and the link which it contains.


Hmm.... many of us agreed earlier that the discussion was nice and civil. Then ID comes along and claims it's all "mouthing off", and in true ID fashion, completely ignores the evidence given and simply states there's no proof. No wonder we can't have any civil discussions with him around.
ID: 1407757 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407758 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 1:12:26 UTC

Religious people are less intelligent than atheists:... nice and civil?
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...
ID: 1407758 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 1407759 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 1:14:15 UTC - in response to Message 1407758.  
Last modified: 26 Aug 2013, 1:17:31 UTC

Religious people are less intelligent than atheists:... nice and civil?


It was the findings of a meta-analysis performed on studies taken from 1928 to 2012. Why is this not civil? Because you disagree with it?
ID: 1407759 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19397
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1407765 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 1:54:21 UTC - in response to Message 1407758.  

Religious people are less intelligent than atheists:... nice and civil?

If you had gone and looked at the link, you would have seen it is a shortening of the newspaper article title. That title in full would not have fitted within the space on these boards.

And before you go off on another tangent, take a few notes.
1, I wouldn't have believed it from my contacts with people who hold strong religious beliefs.
2, I was brought up in a former Italian colony where the majority of Europeans were still Italians and went to a school run by the Roman Catholic Church until I was 13.
3, I lived in Italy for over 8 years within 30 miles of the Vatican City.
ID: 1407765 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407768 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 2:09:36 UTC

THANK GOD for google! LOL

Google this...."Religious people are less intelligent than atheists."

There are plenty of studies that say something a lot different than what has been posted here. LOL!

Stupid people are, on average, less intelligent than smart people! Bawahahahahaha!


Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...
ID: 1407768 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19397
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1407770 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 2:13:33 UTC - in response to Message 1407768.  
Last modified: 26 Aug 2013, 2:14:35 UTC

There are plenty of studies that say something a lot different than what has been posted here. LOL!


Guess you still haven't read the original link or the alternative in the 2nd post. Even the researchers said not all studies found this conclusion, but 53 out of 63 did.

P.S. You haven't commented on my synopsis yet.
ID: 1407770 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 31002
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1407773 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 2:16:51 UTC - in response to Message 1407757.  
Last modified: 26 Aug 2013, 2:17:40 UTC

Hmm.... many of us agreed earlier that the discussion was nice and civil. Then ID comes along and claims it's all "mouthing off", and in true ID fashion, completely ignores the evidence given and simply states there's no proof. No wonder we can't have any civil discussions with him around.

I wondered what was suddenly wrong, why people who were having a college level discussion were suddenly involved with a kindergarten playground fight. Thanks for letting me know.

Shortly I'm sure this entire list will be fully displayed ---
    â—¦argumentum ad antiquitatem
    â—¦argumentum ad hominem
    â—¦argumentum ad ignorantiam
    â—¦argumentum ad logicam
    â—¦argumentum ad misericordiam
    â—¦argumentum ad nauseam
    â—¦argumentum ad numerum
    â—¦argumentum ad populum
    â—¦argumentum ad verecundiam
    â—¦circulus in demonstrando
    â—¦complex question
    â—¦dicto simpliciter
    â—¦naturalistic fallacy
    â—¦nature, appeal to
    â—¦non sequitur
    â—¦petitio principii
    â—¦post hoc ergo propter hoc
    â—¦red herring
    â—¦slippery slope
    â—¦straw man
    â—¦tu quoque


ID: 1407773 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407774 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 2:24:02 UTC - in response to Message 1407770.  

There are plenty of studies that say something a lot different than what has been posted here. LOL!


Guess you still haven't read the original link or the alternative in the 2nd post. Even the researchers said not all studies found this conclusion, but 53 out of 63 did.

P.S. You haven't commented on my synopsis yet.


I simply don't trust you. I have read a lot about this since I have made my first post on this thread.

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...
ID: 1407774 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407776 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 2:25:52 UTC - in response to Message 1407773.  

Hmm.... many of us agreed earlier that the discussion was nice and civil. Then ID comes along and claims it's all "mouthing off", and in true ID fashion, completely ignores the evidence given and simply states there's no proof. No wonder we can't have any civil discussions with him around.

I wondered what was suddenly wrong, why people who were having a college level discussion were suddenly involved with a kindergarten playground fight. Thanks for letting me know.

Shortly I'm sure this entire list will be fully displayed ---
    â—¦argumentum ad antiquitatem
    â—¦argumentum ad hominem
    â—¦argumentum ad ignorantiam
    â—¦argumentum ad logicam
    â—¦argumentum ad misericordiam
    â—¦argumentum ad nauseam
    â—¦argumentum ad numerum
    â—¦argumentum ad populum
    â—¦argumentum ad verecundiam
    â—¦circulus in demonstrando
    â—¦complex question
    â—¦dicto simpliciter
    â—¦naturalistic fallacy
    â—¦nature, appeal to
    â—¦non sequitur
    â—¦petitio principii
    â—¦post hoc ergo propter hoc
    â—¦red herring
    â—¦slippery slope
    â—¦straw man
    â—¦tu quoque



Argumentum ad populum has already been done in this thread.....
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...
ID: 1407776 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 1407782 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 2:34:25 UTC - in response to Message 1407776.  

Argumentum ad populum has already been done in this thread.....


If we accept that there are more believers than non-believers, and if we accept that every believer posting in this thread has stated a disagreement with the findings, then it would seem your statement is incorrect.
ID: 1407782 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19397
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1407784 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 2:47:42 UTC - in response to Message 1407774.  

I simply don't trust you.
Why?

I have read a lot about this since I have made my first post on this thread.

Then why don't you enlighten us with a concise report on your findings and include a few links to reputable sites, preferably trustworthy academic ones.
ID: 1407784 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Religious people are less intelligent than atheists


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.