Feed on Posts or Comments 28 August 2014

Christianity &Islam &Science Johnson on 12 Jan 2009 12:01 am

A good explanation of science

This video offers a good explanation of science and the scientific process for religious believers:

A great quote from the video:

“People can be very keen to express opinions about scientific theories that they have never studied. Without having made any effort to acquaint themselves with the evidence for a given theory, or checked that they have understood its basic claims, many seem to believe that their uninformed intuitions qualify them to dismiss the theory as absurd, or because they feel that something is beyond their capacity for understanding, then it is beyond everyone else’s capacity, or it is simply impossible.”

This problem can often be found in the thinking of religious believers. If you would like to open your mind to reality rather than religious dogma, this book can help:

- WhyWontGodHealAmputees.com

33 Responses to “A good explanation of science”

  1. on 30 Apr 2009 at 1:45 am 1.Thomas Beha said …

    This is excellent video to get folks to realize they need to understand SCIENCE!!!!!! and dump religion beliefs in the TRASH CANS!!!

  2. on 30 Apr 2009 at 4:05 pm 2.Rostam said …

    I sincerely hope all the atheist watch this video CLOSELY. Study the science before you attempt to use it as an argument and stop looking at the science with a bias of proving the bad ol’christians wrong. Rather, be objective and put your presuppositions aside. Realize many more scientist are God believers rather than atheist. That is not by accident.

  3. on 30 Apr 2009 at 4:44 pm 3.Severin said …

    Of course it is not by accident! It is the result of thousends of years of imposing of religion(s) to people under tremendous forcing, threatening and punishing, including brutal killing.

    People need time to start to understand! People need freedom to get rid of their fears. They need time to accomodate to their own free will – it was not a sort of thing people was alowed to have for centuries.

  4. on 30 Apr 2009 at 4:51 pm 4.Lou's other brother said …

    “Realize many more scientist are God believers rather than atheist.”

    That’s a misleading statement, of course.

    Scientists in general are much less likely than the general population to believe in gods.

    That is not by accident.

    Likewise, the more education a person has, the less likely he or she is to believe in gods.

    That is not by accident.

    Further, the more intelligent a person is, the less likely he or she is to believe in gods.

    That is not by accident.

  5. on 30 Apr 2009 at 5:49 pm 5.Lou said …

    Rostem,

    I can attest that most atheist do not act like those you see on the web. Most do not have the goal in life of attempting to prove religions wrong. They realize that it is an impossible feat. Science is not a perfet, well, science. Scientist have a difficult time leaving their presuppositions behind.
    I can also personally attest that most scientist do, by a large margin, believe in God or do espouse some form of theism or religion. Science in fact, has brought many to a realization that their is a God. I do agree as well, this is not by accident. My idol growing up, Anthony Flew, is the perfect example.

  6. on 30 Apr 2009 at 6:25 pm 6.Anonymous said …

    You gonna provide the evidence you said you had earlier in your last post? The evidence that caused you to convert?

    And for the record, stop using fallacious arguments and petty opinions (which is what about 99% of what you have been saying w/o evidence).

  7. on 30 Apr 2009 at 7:13 pm 7.Lou's other brother said …

    I can attest that most theists act like those you see on the web. Most have the goal in life of attempting to prove religions right. They don’t realize that it is an impossible feat. Religion is not a perfect, well, anything. Religious scientists have a difficult time leaving their presuppositions behind.

  8. on 30 Apr 2009 at 7:24 pm 8.Lou's other brother said …

    I just realized how well my brother Lou summed it up when he said:

    “Scientist have a difficult time leaving their presuppositions behind. I can also personally attest that most scientist do, by a large margin, believe in God or do espouse some form of theism or religion.”

    Yes, exactly. The scientists who do believe in gods are the ones who have a difficult time leaving their presuppositions behind.

  9. on 30 Apr 2009 at 10:17 pm 9.Rostam said …

    It is Rostam Lou not Rostem just to be clear. No offense taken. I’m sure many atheist are not militant but many are militant haters. Many are on the college campuses and live to attack Christians and Jews. They back away from Muslims since they realize Muslims might decide to bring the jihad.

    I read a great book last year on the 50 greatest scientist of all time. 45-46 were christian or Jew! I guess that presupposition wasn’t such a problem after all.

  10. on 30 Apr 2009 at 10:42 pm 10.Anonymous said …

    Your first paragraph is entirely unsubstantiated, and your second paragraph is also meaningless (especially if you can’t even give us the title).

  11. on 01 May 2009 at 1:06 am 11.Gern Blansten said …

    WASHINGTON (CNN) — The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.

    More than half of people who attend services at least once a week — 54 percent — said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is “often” or “sometimes” justified. Only 42 percent of people who “seldom or never” go to services agreed, according to the analysis released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

    White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified — more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.

  12. on 01 May 2009 at 9:48 am 12.ANONYMOUS said …

    Now this would be fodder for righteous indignation, shock, anti-faith efforts and the like were not the survey so thoroughly flawed. You see, the analysis makes the broad claim about torture being more acceptable to people of faith but you have to really dig into the actual report to find that they based their findings on 742 people. Yeah… 742… out of more than 200 MILLION Churchgoers in the US alone. I concluded democrats and Independents were more likely to torture. Most importantly, torture is not defined.
    Furthermore, not even the report mentions that the survey pool was further limited to a 1-week sampling and only included white evangelicals, Catholic, Protestants and unaffiliated. — In other words, the report should really be titled, Less than 0.01% of WHITE Democrats and Independents think torture is justified.

  13. on 01 May 2009 at 10:19 am 13.Gern Blansten said …

    Probability sampling, where a small randomly selected sample of the population can be used to estimate the distribution of an attitude or opinion in the entire population with statistical confidence, provides the foundation for survey research and political polling. The basis of probability-based random sampling is that every member of the population must have a known, non-zero chance of being selected. Probability sampling provides the means by which the margin of sampling error can be calculated and the level of confidence in survey estimates reported. Sampling error results from collecting data from some rather than all members of the population and is highly dependent on the size of the sample.

  14. on 01 May 2009 at 12:35 pm 14.Lou said …

    Apologies for the name error Rostam. I guess the loudest of the atheist, the militants, are the ones getting the most attention and therefore receive the most exposure. Not much different than what we see with muslims and the wahhabi sect.

    As far as scientist, the fields of science where the presuppositions of God would impact the outcome of science must be acutely small. It sems to be a silly argument. I think the many great scientist who are theist would pretty much put that to rest.

    Anonymous (must be a new one) good point. Define torture? Waterboarding is used on our own Navy Seals but suddenly we consider that torture? It wasn’t during Nam and not under Reagan, Clinton, Bush I & II. Cold rooms, sleep deprivation or listening to the Jonas bros for 18 hours? Torture?

    If they didn’t define torture then the survey is useless.

  15. on 01 May 2009 at 2:05 pm 15.Gern Blansten said …

    From the Los Angeles Times:

    Although it is possible to be a scientist and still believe in God — as some scientists seem to manage it — there is no question that an engagement with scientific thinking tends to erode, rather than support, religious faith. Taking the U.S. population as an example: Most polls show that about 90% of the general public believes in a personal God; yet 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences do not. This suggests that there are few modes of thinking less congenial to religious faith than science is.

  16. on 01 May 2009 at 2:07 pm 16.Gern Blansten said …

    That’s Sam Harris in the Times, by the way.

  17. on 01 May 2009 at 2:12 pm 17.Gern Blansten said …

    Leading scientists still reject God

    Originally appeared in Nature, Vol. 394, No. 6691, p. 313

    The question of religious belief among US scientists has been debated since early in the century. Our latest survey finds that, among the top natural scientists, disbelief is greater than ever — almost total.

    Research on this topic began with the eminent US psychologist James H. Leuba and his landmark survey of 1914. He found that 58% of 1,000 randomly selected US scientists expressed disbelief or doubt in the existence of God, and that this figure rose to near 70% among the 400 “greater” scientists within his sample [1]. Leuba repeated his survey in somewhat different form 20 years later, and found that these percentages had increased to 67 and 85, respectively[2].

    In 1996, we repeated Leuba’s 1914 survey and reported our results in Nature[3]. We found little change from 1914 for American scientists generally, with 60.7% expressing disbelief or doubt. This year, we closely imitated the second phase of Leuba’s 1914 survey to gauge belief among “greater” scientists, and find the rate of belief lower than ever — a mere 7% of respondents.

    Leuba attributed the higher level of disbelief and doubt among “greater” scientists to their “superior knowledge, understanding, and experience” [3]. Similarly, Oxford University scientist Peter Atkins commented on our 1996 survey, “You clearly can be a scientist and have religious beliefs. But I don’t think you can be a real scientist in the deepest sense of the word because they are such alien categories of knowledge.”[4] Such comments led us to repeat the second phase of Leuba’s study for an up-to-date comparison of the religious beliefs of “greater” and “lesser” scientists.

    Our chosen group of “greater” scientists were members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Our survey found near universal rejection of the transcendent by NAS natural scientists. Disbelief in God and immortality among NAS biological scientists was 65.2% and 69.0%, respectively, and among NAS physical scientists it was 79.0% and 76.3%. Most of the rest were agnostics on both issues, with few believers. We found the highest percentage of belief among NAS mathematicians (14.3% in God, 15.0% in immortality). Biological scientists had the lowest rate of belief (5.5% in God, 7.1% in immortality), with physicists and astronomers slightly higher (7.5% in God, 7.5% in immortality).

  18. on 01 May 2009 at 5:30 pm 18.Rostam said …

    No need to look up the LA Times article. Only an Opinion article from Sam Harris. Imagine an atheist putting a positive spin on atheist.

    Also, keep in mind scientist are expected and pressured not have no religious beliefs. In order to obtain the most credibility, the system pressures scientist to remain agnostic. But to contradict Gern’s argument, I present another study. Amazing how the results vary so much.

    “About two-thirds of scientists believe in God, according to a new survey that uncovered stark differences based on the type of research they do.

    The study, along with another one released in June, would appear to debunk the oft-held notion that science is incompatible with religion.

    Those in the social sciences are more likely to believe in God and attend religious services than researchers in the natural sciences, the study found.

    The opposite had been expected.

    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.

    In the new study, Rice University sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund surveyed 1,646 faculty members at elite research universities, asking 36 questions about belief and spiritual practices.

    “Based on previous research, we thought that social scientists would be less likely to practice religion than natural scientists are, but our data showed just the opposite,” Ecklund said.

    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.

    “Now we must examine the nature of these differences,” Ecklund said today. “Many scientists see themselves as having a spirituality not attached to a particular religious tradition. Some scientists who don’t believe in God see themselves as very spiritual people. They have a way outside of themselves that they use to understand the meaning of life.”

    Ecklund and colleagues are now conducting longer interviews with some of the participants to try and figure it all out.”

  19. on 01 May 2009 at 6:00 pm 19.Gern Blansten said …

    The claim that “About two-thirds of scientists believe in God, according to a new survey” is a lie.

    For a truthful description of Prof. Ecklund’s research, written by her, go to http://religion.ssrc.org/reforum/Ecklund/

    In her own words,
    >When asked their beliefs about God, nearly 34 percent of academic scientists answer ?I do not believe in God? and about 30 percent answer ?I do not know if there is a God and there is no way to find out,? the classic agnostic response. This means that over 60 percent of professors in these natural and social science disciplines describe themselves as either atheist or religiously agnostic. In comparison, among those in the general U.S. population, about 3 percent claim to be atheists and about 5 percent are religiously agnostic.

    I.e., about two-thirds of scientists do NOT believe in God. The hoax by Britt and guitarsandmore has exactly inverted this, claiming that about two-thirds DO believe in God.

    For an expose of the hoax by someone who actually bothered to speak with Ecklund, see http://www.statenews.com/op_article.phtml?pk=35422 .

    And for a Christian Website that had the courage to expose the hoax, see : http://christdot.org/modules.php?name=News&new_topic=35 (scroll down).

    It’s shameful how some of the god-fakers will lie to advance their religion!

    The god-fakers ought to be ashamed of themselves.

  20. on 01 May 2009 at 6:01 pm 20.Gern Blansten said …

    Rostam, you are spreading a hoax:

    The claim that “About two-thirds of scientists believe in God, according to a new survey” is a lie.

    For a truthful description of Prof. Ecklund’s research, written by her, go to http://religion.ssrc.org/reforum/Ecklund/

    In her own words,
    >When asked their beliefs about God, nearly 34 percent of academic scientists answer ?I do not believe in God? and about 30 percent answer ?I do not know if there is a God and there is no way to find out,? the classic agnostic response. This means that over 60 percent of professors in these natural and social science disciplines describe themselves as either atheist or religiously agnostic. In comparison, among those in the general U.S. population, about 3 percent claim to be atheists and about 5 percent are religiously agnostic.

    I.e., about two-thirds of scientists do NOT believe in God. The hoax by Britt and guitarsandmore has exactly inverted this, claiming that about two-thirds DO believe in God.

    For an expose of the hoax by someone who actually bothered to speak with Ecklund, see http://www.statenews.com/op_article.phtml?pk=35422 .

    And for a Christian Website that had the courage to expose the hoax, see : http://christdot.org/modules.php?name=News&new_topic=35 (scroll down).

    It’s shameful how some of the god-fakers will lie to advance their religion!

    The god-fakers ought to be ashamed of themselves.

  21. on 01 May 2009 at 6:02 pm 21.Gern Blansten said …

    Rostam, you are spreading a hoax:

    The claim that “About two-thirds of scientists believe in God, according to a new survey” is a lie.

    For a truthful description of Prof. Ecklund’s research, written by her, go to http://religion.ssrc.org/reforum/Ecklund/

  22. on 01 May 2009 at 6:02 pm 22.Gern Blansten said …

    And some more:

    In Ecklund’s own words,
    >When asked their beliefs about God, nearly 34 percent of academic scientists answer ?I do not believe in God? and about 30 percent answer ?I do not know if there is a God and there is no way to find out,? the classic agnostic response. This means that over 60 percent of professors in these natural and social science disciplines describe themselves as either atheist or religiously agnostic. In comparison, among those in the general U.S. population, about 3 percent claim to be atheists and about 5 percent are religiously agnostic.

    I.e., about two-thirds of scientists do NOT believe in God. The hoax by Britt and guitarsandmore has exactly inverted this, claiming that about two-thirds DO believe in God.

  23. on 01 May 2009 at 6:03 pm 23.Gern Blansten said …

    And some more:

    For an expose of the hoax by someone who actually bothered to speak with Ecklund, see http://www.statenews.com/op_article.phtml?pk=35422 .

    And for a Christian Website that had the courage to expose the hoax, see : http://christdot.org/modules.php?name=News&new_topic=35 (scroll down).

    It’s shameful how some of the god-fakers will lie to advance their religion!

    The god-fakers ought to be ashamed of themselves.

  24. on 01 May 2009 at 6:03 pm 24.Gern Blansten said …

    And some more:

    For an expose of the hoax by someone who actually bothered to speak with Ecklund, see http://www.statenews.com/op_article.phtml?pk=35422 .

  25. on 01 May 2009 at 7:05 pm 25.Gern Blansten said …

    Here’s the real story about that study, for people who care about reality and truth:

    https://www.msu.edu/user/bice/articles/articles/scientist_faith.pdf

  26. on 01 May 2009 at 7:32 pm 26.Lou said …

    “When asked “to what extent do you consider yourself a spiritual person?” about 66 percent of
    natural scientists and about 69 percent of the social scientists describe themselves as spiritual.
    This means there is a population of scientists who say they have no religious affiliation but who
    see spirituality as important. Indeed, about 39 percent of those without a current religious
    affiliation still consider themselves spiritual. In addition, over 22 percent of the scientists who
    atheists are spiritual. And over 27 percent of the scientists who are agnostic are spiritual.”

    Directly from the research Rostam which is significantly more up to date than Gern’s. I practice at a University hospital and can attest this is probably the case. I am one of the ones with no religious affiliation. A spiritual atheist is an interesting dichotomy….

    Rostam you are correct. In the university system there is an underlying pressure to keep your religion quiet and not obvious. Admitting such can be harmful to your career. It is more a PC understanding than for the cause of atheism.

    Have a great w/e.

  27. on 01 May 2009 at 8:03 pm 27.Gern Blansten said …

    And Lou continues with his scumbaggery.

  28. on 01 May 2009 at 8:19 pm 28.Lou's other brother said …

    “Spirituality”–at least in terms of that study–has nothing to do with religion or gods. That much is obvious, since portions of the atheist and agnostic respondents claimed to be spiritual.

    I remember when that survey came out. Many people were dishonest in how they represented the results. Lou and Rostam are being equally dishonest. Quit being dishonest, guys. Gern is right. It seems sort of scummy to do that.

    I can understand why you’d want to think that most scientists are religious like you, but, sorry, it’s just not reality.

  29. on 01 May 2009 at 8:27 pm 29.Lou said …

    I apologize for my unintentional mistake. Rostam will you do the same?

  30. on 01 May 2009 at 8:47 pm 30.Anonymous said …

    Rostam (Persian: ????, pronounced [?ostæm],[??stæm]) is a mythical hero of Iran and son of Zal and Rudaba. In some ways, the position of Rostam in the historical tradition is curiously parallel to that of Surena, the hero of the Carrhae. His figure was endowed with many features of the historical personality of Rostam. The latter was always represented as the mightiest of Iranian paladins, and the atmosphere of the episodes in which he features is strongly reminiscent of the Arsacid period. He was immortalized by the 10th century poet Ferdowsi of Tus in the Shahnameh or Epic of Kings, which contain pre-Islamic folklore and history.

  31. on 01 May 2009 at 8:49 pm 31.Anonymous said …

    “Rostam was a miracle baby. Within 5 days he had grown into a boy, and within weeks he had grown to the height and strength of a young man. As a child, he was the only person able to kill a white elephant that was rampaging through the palace.”

    Mythology. Just like religion.

  32. on 01 May 2009 at 8:52 pm 32.Anonymous said …

    Then you have this….

    Rostam was founded in 1982 by Mabat-Up, a group of privately owned companies devoted to the development of pharmaceuticals and feminine hygiene products. Rostam is solely committed to developing, manufacturing and marketing tampons, and is dedicated to maximizing customer’s PL Tampon share by meeting customer’s individual needs. Shortly after the year 2000, Rostam established operations in the US with offices located in Lincoln, Rhode Island. Rostam US offers dedicated customer service, logistics, sales and marketing services to ease the execution of retailer requirements in the United States and Canada. Rostam is the world’s leading supplier of premium quality private label tampons and we’re committed to your success!

  33. on 02 May 2009 at 1:00 am 33.Anonymous said …

    Why does it seem that the Christians who visit this site are always lying or dishonest abotu stuff?

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply