[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
ZEB wrote:
And just when Pack had me convinced that all atheists were just fun loving guiltless hedonists.
Oh well another myth busted.
Okay, now I’m really late for Church.
Bye.
Tounge-in-cheek or not, that was an incredibly patronising summation of all the effort I have put into being mindful and respectful or your beliefs whilst still being true to mine and trying to explain them to you so we could find common ground. You just demonstrated perfectly the condescension and patronising tone that gets atheist’s backs up.
I was going to say I thought it was beneath you, but actually the frequency with which you do it makes me start to wonder whether it is in fact EXACTLY your sort of level.
How disappointing. [/quote]
Wow, you have thin skin.
You call Christianity “fairy tales” and that we imagine God bla bla bla.
One crack about hedonism and you get bent out of shape.
But you did like the “fun loving” part right?
Hey wait…what do you have against hedonism? “A life devoted to pleasure”, guilt free of course.
Come on, you must have thicker skin that that.
I thought we were all friends here making fun of each others beliefs in a light hearted way of course.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
ZEB wrote:
There are several wacky atheist sites that claim Einstein didn’t believe in God. But then again those are the same sites which insist that there are contradictions in the Bible of which there are none.
“Thou shall not kill”
and
“Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.”
Contradiction.[/quote]
I’ll be as brief as possible:
The 6th Commandment reads “thou shall not murder.”
Murder is the taking of innocent life.
In the OT a witch (or sorceress) was considered to be guilty of immense sin because as a group they had turned their back on God (at least in those days) and worthy of death.
In Hebrew there are 9 different words that mean to cause the death of another. But they do not all mean the same thing. The commandment is against murder, not death.
To further clarify:
All murder is killing but not all killing is murder.
Hence, some things are murder, such as taking an innocent life. Some folks like me would list abortion here. Other things are not murder of which one is taking a life in order to preserve your own, such as in a time of war etc.
The OT has some pretty heavy duty penalties.
It makes me even happier that Jesus Christ walked the earth in the NT.
Finally, while I have heard many claim contradictions in the Bible I have personally never seen one.
[quote]Adamsson wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
ZEB wrote:
There are several wacky atheist sites that claim Einstein didn’t believe in God. But then again those are the same sites which insist that there are contradictions in the Bible of which there are none.
“Thou shall not kill”
and
“Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.”
Contradiction.
I have shown you several contradictions. When it comes to Einstein:
“I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe at the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it”
or:
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it”
or…
“The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive”
Einsten was not a christian, claiming that shows how desperate the likes of ZEB is…
[/quote]
Adamsson, I’ll give you credit for one thing, no one on this thread can twist the truth as well as you in order to come out with an outcome that suits your needs. But this time, you’ve been caught.
[b]The following is an earlier post of mine in response to your nonsense that Einstein never believed in God. In addition to that you’ll notice that I also clearly state that I never said that Einstein was a Christian.
That you would continue to perpetuate that lie in order to “win” an Internet argument speaks far better against your other silly points on God than I could ever hope to, so thank you.[/b]
"Zeb
7-2-07
3:51
This is a passage from a 1929 Saturday Evening Post interview:
“To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?”
(Einstein) “As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.”
“Have you read Emil Ludwig’s book on Jesus?”
(Einstein) “Emil Ludwig’s Jesus is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot.”
“You accept the historical Jesus?”
(Einstein) “Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.” 7
Now, I’m not stating now, nor did I ever say that Einstein was a Christian. But to deny he believed in God is ridiculous."
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Adamsson wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
ZEB wrote:
There are several wacky atheist sites that claim Einstein didn’t believe in God. But then again those are the same sites which insist that there are contradictions in the Bible of which there are none.
“Thou shall not kill”
and
“Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.”
Contradiction.
I have shown you several contradictions. When it comes to Einstein:
“I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe at the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it”
or:
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it”
or…
“The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive”
Einsten was not a christian, claiming that shows how desperate the likes of ZEB is…
Adamsson, I’ll give you credit for one thing, no one on this thread can twist the truth as well as you in order to come out with an outcome that suits your needs. But this time, you’ve been caught.
[b]The following is an earlier post of mine in response to your nonsense that Einstein never believed in God. In addition to that you’ll notice that I also clearly state that I never said that Einstein was a Christian.
That you would continue to perpetuate that lie in order to “win” an Internet argument speaks far better against your other silly points on God than I could ever hope to, so thank you.[/b]
"Zeb
7-2-07
3:51
This is a passage from a 1929 Saturday Evening Post interview:
“To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?”
(Einstein) “As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.”
“Have you read Emil Ludwig’s book on Jesus?”
(Einstein) “Emil Ludwig’s Jesus is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot.”
“You accept the historical Jesus?”
(Einstein) “Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.” 7
Now, I’m not stating now, nor did I ever say that Einstein was a Christian. But to deny he believed in God is ridiculous."
[/quote]
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it”
This is Einsteins words…
and you still claim:
2But to deny he believed in God is ridiculous."
You are, as usual, in opposition to the facts… You are wrong, plain and easy. God is a fairytale. A gruesom, jealous, bloodthirsty god from a fairytale… He is not a real being. It is a simple as that… the fact that grown people believe in zeus… or god… or thor… for that matter, is just laughable. So are you… denying the plain facts…
Did Einstein change his mind, a couple of times? I don’t know. But if your quote is correct (and I know mine is and I already posted the source) then what are we left with?
By the way where did you find that quote, I want to check it myself. I’m sorry to say that you don’t have a very good reputation for (clears throat) accuracy.
Otherwise,
where is my apology regarding the fact that you lied about me claiming that Einstein was a Christian?
Oh that’s right no guilt, no remorse and certainly no apologies when you’ve bent the truth to meet your needs.
I don’t think you are representing atheism very well, or…maybe you are, I honestly don’t know at this point.
Did Einstein change his mind, a couple of times? I don’t know. But if your quote is correct (and I know mine is and I already posted the source) then what are we left with?
By the way where did you find that quote, I want to check it myself. I’m sorry to say that you don’t have a very good reputation for (clears throat) accuracy.
Otherwise,
where is my apology regarding the fact that you lied about me claiming that Einstein was a Christian?
Oh that’s right no guilt, no remorse and certainly no apologies when you’ve bent the truth to meet your needs.
I don’t think you are representing atheism very well, or…maybe you are, I honestly don’t know at this point.
[/quote]
Where have i NOT been accurate? Where have i made false claims…?
You can find the quotes (and further references) in the book “the god delusion” on page 36. A book you SHOULD read. Since it would do you good.
This book and Sam Harris’ “The end of faith”, also clearly describes why christians should NOT try to take the moral high ground, as long as they lay their faith in a book which condones giving your daughter away for gang rapes and sex slavery… among other atrocieies.
All research on morals and ethics show that christians are in no way more ethical than others, rather the other way around. (just as interesting as the “people with a high education is less likely to be religious”-results from the same field of research…).
All research on morals and ethics show that christians are in no way more ethical than others, rather the other way around. (just as interesting as the “people with a high education is less likely to be religious”-results from the same field of research…).
[/quote]
Could you point out some of these studies? I’d like to take a look at them for myself. And, are they including people who call themselves Christians because their family line is christian? Or, people that identify themselves as practicing Christians? Very important distinction, in my experience.
The scientific method means nothing to you does it? Adaptation is not the same as evolution.
Yes it is. Certain genes are selected because they offer survival/reproduction benefits.
One of the big holes in the theory is that as species evolve from one adaptation to the next nobody can find the in between species.
That is because there are none. At least not in the way you understand it.
This happens all time. Where is the bridge between ape and man? Where is the bridge between dinosaurs and birds?
Adaptation is a fact, evolution is still in the “theory” category. Or should I just take your authoritative word on it?
No, science never proves anything, you can stay “agnostic” to anything it tells you, if you like.
Once it calls something a theory though, there is a shitload of evidence beyond “God made it so”.[/quote]
I am kind of disappointed in you Orion. You are normally a careful thinker but in this case you were not. As I have said before I support the theory of evolution. I think it works well and explains a lot about natural history. It is not right, however, to give it more credence than it deserves.
It is a theory, it has not been proven statistically significantly enough to make it beyond that. The person(s) who do manage to prove that will be recognized and we will all know thier names. There are anomalies that evolution cannot account for. Extinctions, gaps, weaker rather than stronger species surviving for long periods of time.
These are problems for the theory. I like evolution, but it does not solve all the problems in the history of living things.
[quote]Adamsson wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Adamsson wrote:
I’ll try to put this in simple terms:
Evolution is a fact, it happens all the time, all around us. =
Evolution is a theory. You know how I know? 'cause it’s called “The Theory of Evolution” I think it’s a fine theory, myself. I think it explains natural history very well, but it’s still a theory. No scientist would have the balls to call it fact because most scientists know there is very little that can be proven in absolutes.
This is also why the validity of experiments are quatified using statisitcal data rather than raw data. Very little is abosolute. If you want to study absolutes, mathmatics is your best bet.
No scientists…?
I have shown you this article by Gould, I have also shown you statements from Richard Dawkins, one of the most, if not the, most important evolution experts.
You don’t seem to have the capability to read the Gould article, so I’m giving you one more chance. Stop making a fool of yourself, you have NO clue… WHAT SO EVER about evolution and how it is (and it is) a fact. You are in way over your head on this one I’m afraid.
(And your theories about “burden of proof” is just laughable… You should really try to think before you write something, you are a way too easy target when you spew out your regular bullshit)
I get it now the is some ego trip for you isn’t it? You are on some big dick contest to prove your are some mental giant when you have only proven yourself to be weak; developing strength for your arguments only by way of ad hominem attacks. You brought nothing to the table worth addressing so I am done playing your foolish games.
I like discussing things but I have little interest in people insulting me for a ego boost. Quit wasting my time.
Did Einstein change his mind, a couple of times? I don’t know. But if your quote is correct (and I know mine is and I already posted the source) then what are we left with?
By the way where did you find that quote, I want to check it myself. I’m sorry to say that you don’t have a very good reputation for (clears throat) accuracy.
Otherwise,
where is my apology regarding the fact that you lied about me claiming that Einstein was a Christian?
Oh that’s right no guilt, no remorse and certainly no apologies when you’ve bent the truth to meet your needs.
I don’t think you are representing atheism very well, or…maybe you are, I honestly don’t know at this point.
Where have i NOT been accurate? Where have i made false claims…?[/quote]
You stated that I posted that Einstein was a Christian. I never said any such thing, and I think you know that.
Also, you never stated where you obtained the Einstein quote. That’s not a lie, just an omission.
Yea, yea (clears throat) Sam Harris. He’s quite a reputable guy. I’m sure he’s as reputable as, oh say the apostle Paul. No wait he’s not. Sorry. The books of the Bible have been poured over by literally thousands of scholars (don’t make me point you to the credentials) for hundreds of years.
And you know what?
The Bible has come up clean every time.
Um, Sam Harris…Please.
It could be because we are sinnners. As all men/women are sinners.
There is no one that is without sin, no not even one!
Um, that’s biblical, but then you know that don’t you?
So you’re saying that you’d have to be pretty ignorant to believe in God huh?
(Caution, I’m not trying to prove the existence of God from the list below. Just trying to point out that adamsson is quite wrong once again regarding his latest assertion.)
You must not have read the book “The Scientific 100”: A Ranking of the Most Influential Scientists, Past and Present, Citadel Press (2000), written by John Galbraith Simmons."
Out of the list of 100 something like 8 or so declare themselves to be atheists.
Gee do you think the other 92 dummies will ever catch on? What do they know anyway, Nobel Prize winners, atomic scientists, experts in the field of chemistry, astronomy, the list goes on and on.
Ha, what a bunch of bafoons huh?
People like that need to march over to T-Nation and get the real skinny from you huh adamsson?
LOL
You’re starting to embarrass yourself.
Here’s the list for you, I know how you hate to look things up
“1 Isaac Newton the Newtonian Revolution Anglican (rejected Trinitarianism, i.e., Athanasianism;
believed in the Arianism of the Primitive Church)
2 Albert Einstein Twentieth-Century Science Jewish
3 Neils Bohr the Atom Jewish Lutheran
4 Charles Darwin Evolution Anglican (nominal); Unitarian
5 Louis Pasteur the Germ Theory of Disease Catholic
6 Sigmund Freud Psychology of the Unconscious Jewish; Atheist; Freudian psychoanalysis (Freudianism)
7 Galileo Galilei the New Science Catholic
8 Antoine Laurent Lavoisier the Revolution in Chemistry Catholic
9 Johannes Kepler Motion of the Planets Lutheran
10 Nicolaus Copernicus the Heliocentric Universe Catholic (priest)
11 Michael Faraday the Classical Field Theory Sandemanian
12 James Clerk Maxwell the Electromagnetic Field Presbyterian; Anglican; Baptist
13 Claude Bernard the Founding of Modern Physiology
14 Franz Boas Modern Anthropology Jewish
15 Werner Heisenberg Quantum Theory Lutheran
16 Linus Pauling Twentieth-Century Chemistry Lutheran
17 Rudolf Virchow the Cell Doctrine
18 Erwin Schrodinger Wave Mechanics Catholic
19 Ernest Rutherford the Structure of the Atom
20 Paul Dirac Quantum Electrodynamics
21 Andreas Vesalius the New Anatomy Catholic
22 Tycho Brahe the New Astronomy Lutheran
23 Comte de Buffon l’Histoire Naturelle
24 Ludwig Boltzmann Thermodynamics
25 Max Planck the Quanta Protestant
26 Marie Curie Radioactivity Catholic (lapsed)
27 William Herschel the Discovery of the Heavens Jewish
28 Charles Lyell Modern Geology
29 Pierre Simon de Laplace Newtonian Mechanics atheist
30 Edwin Hubble the Modern Telescope
31 Joseph J. Thomson the Discovery of the Electron
32 Max Born Quantum Mechanics Jewish Lutheran
33 Francis Crick Molecular Biology atheist
34 Enrico Fermi Atomic Physics Catholic
35 Leonard Euler Eighteenth-Century Mathematics Calvinist
36 Justus Liebig Nineteenth-Century Chemistry
37 Arthur Eddington Modern Astronomy Quaker
38 William Harvey Circulation of the Blood Anglican (nominal)
39 Marcello Malpighi Microscopic Anatomy Catholic
40 Christiaan Huygens the Wave Theory of Light Calvinist
41 Carl Gauss (Karl Friedrich Gauss) Mathematical Genius Lutheran
42 Albrecht von Haller Eighteenth-Century Medicine
43 August Kekule Chemical Structure
44 Robert Koch Bacteriology
45 Murray Gell-Mann the Eightfold Way Jewish
46 Emil Fischer Organic Chemistry
47 Dmitri Mendeleev the Periodic Table of Elements
48 Sheldon Glashow the Discovery of Charm Jewish
49 James Watson the Structure of DNA atheist
50 John Bardeen Superconductivity
51 John von Neumann the Modern Computer Jewish Catholic
52 Richard Feynman Quantum Electrodynamics Jewish
53 Alfred Wegener Continental Drift
54 Stephen Hawking Quantum Cosmology atheist
55 Anton van Leeuwenhoek the Simple Microscope Dutch Reformed
56 Max von Laue X-ray Crystallography
57 Gustav Kirchhoff Spectroscopy
58 Hans Bethe the Energy of the Sun Jewish
59 Euclid the Foundations of Mathematics Platonism / Greek philosophy
60 Gregor Mendel the Laws of Inheritance Catholic (Augustinian monk)
61 Heike Kamerlingh Onnes Superconductivity
62 Thomas Hunt Morgan the Chromosomal Theory of Heredity
63 Hermann von Helmholtz the Rise of German Science
64 Paul Ehrlich Chemotherapy Jewish
65 Ernst Mayr Evolutionary Theory atheist
66 Charles Sherrington Neurophysiology
67 Theodosius Dobzhansky the Modern Synthesis Russian Orthodox
68 Max Delbruck the Bacteriophage
69 Jean Baptiste Lamarck the Foundations of Biology
70 William Bayliss Modern Physiology
71 Noam Chomsky Twentieth-Century Linguistics Jewish atheist
72 Frederick Sanger the Genetic Code
73 Lucretius Scientific Thinking Epicurean; atheist
74 John Dalton the Theory of the Atom Quaker
75 Louis Victor de Broglie Wave/Particle Duality
76 Carl Linnaeus the Binomial Nomenclature Christianity
77 Jean Piaget Child Development
78 George Gaylord Simpson the Tempo of Evolution
79 Claude Levi-Strauss Structural Anthropology Jewish
80 Lynn Margulis Symbiosis Theory Jewish
81 Karl Landsteiner the Blood Groups Jewish
82 Konrad Lorenz Ethology
83 Edward O. Wilson Sociobiology
84 Frederick Gowland Hopkins Vitamins
85 Gertrude Belle Elion Pharmacology
86 Hans Selye the Stress Concept
87 J. Robert Oppenheimer the Atomic Era Jewish
88 Edward Teller the Bomb Jewish
89 Willard Libby Radioactive Dating
90 Ernst Haeckel the Biogenetic Principle
91 Jonas Salk Vaccination Jewish
92 Emil Kraepelin Twentieth-Century Psychiatry
93 Trofim Lysenko Soviet Genetics Russian Orthodox; Communist
94 Francis Galton Eugenics
95 Alfred Binet the I.Q. Test
96 Alfred Kinsey Human Sexuality atheist
97 Alexander Fleming Penicillin Catholic
98 B. F. Skinner Behaviorism atheist
99 Wilhelm Wundt the Founding of Psychology atheist
100 Archimedes the Beginning of Science Greek philosophy”
I can also produce just as impressive list of authors, writers business folks and those in the field of education. Those in very high prominence in every field of endeavor claim that there is a God. And many, many of them are Christians!
As to your veiled assertion that only the ignorant believe in God…it’s bunk.
“1 Isaac Newton the Newtonian Revolution Anglican (rejected Trinitarianism, i.e., Athanasianism;
believed in the Arianism of the Primitive Church)
2 Albert Einstein Twentieth-Century Science Jewish
3 Neils Bohr the Atom Jewish Lutheran
4 Charles Darwin Evolution Anglican (nominal); Unitarian
5 Louis Pasteur the Germ Theory of Disease Catholic
6 Sigmund Freud Psychology of the Unconscious Jewish; Atheist; Freudian psychoanalysis (Freudianism)
7 Galileo Galilei the New Science Catholic
8 Antoine Laurent Lavoisier the Revolution in Chemistry Catholic
9 Johannes Kepler Motion of the Planets Lutheran
10 Nicolaus Copernicus the Heliocentric Universe Catholic (priest)
11 Michael Faraday the Classical Field Theory Sandemanian
12 James Clerk Maxwell the Electromagnetic Field Presbyterian; Anglican; Baptist
13 Claude Bernard the Founding of Modern Physiology
14 Franz Boas Modern Anthropology Jewish
15 Werner Heisenberg Quantum Theory Lutheran
16 Linus Pauling Twentieth-Century Chemistry Lutheran
17 Rudolf Virchow the Cell Doctrine
18 Erwin Schrodinger Wave Mechanics Catholic
19 Ernest Rutherford the Structure of the Atom
20 Paul Dirac Quantum Electrodynamics
21 Andreas Vesalius the New Anatomy Catholic
22 Tycho Brahe the New Astronomy Lutheran
23 Comte de Buffon l’Histoire Naturelle
24 Ludwig Boltzmann Thermodynamics
25 Max Planck the Quanta Protestant
26 Marie Curie Radioactivity Catholic (lapsed)
27 William Herschel the Discovery of the Heavens Jewish
28 Charles Lyell Modern Geology
29 Pierre Simon de Laplace Newtonian Mechanics atheist
30 Edwin Hubble the Modern Telescope
31 Joseph J. Thomson the Discovery of the Electron
32 Max Born Quantum Mechanics Jewish Lutheran
33 Francis Crick Molecular Biology atheist
34 Enrico Fermi Atomic Physics Catholic
35 Leonard Euler Eighteenth-Century Mathematics Calvinist
36 Justus Liebig Nineteenth-Century Chemistry
37 Arthur Eddington Modern Astronomy Quaker
38 William Harvey Circulation of the Blood Anglican (nominal)
39 Marcello Malpighi Microscopic Anatomy Catholic
40 Christiaan Huygens the Wave Theory of Light Calvinist
41 Carl Gauss (Karl Friedrich Gauss) Mathematical Genius Lutheran
42 Albrecht von Haller Eighteenth-Century Medicine
43 August Kekule Chemical Structure
44 Robert Koch Bacteriology
45 Murray Gell-Mann the Eightfold Way Jewish
46 Emil Fischer Organic Chemistry
47 Dmitri Mendeleev the Periodic Table of Elements
48 Sheldon Glashow the Discovery of Charm Jewish
49 James Watson the Structure of DNA atheist
50 John Bardeen Superconductivity
51 John von Neumann the Modern Computer Jewish Catholic
52 Richard Feynman Quantum Electrodynamics Jewish
53 Alfred Wegener Continental Drift
54 Stephen Hawking Quantum Cosmology atheist
55 Anton van Leeuwenhoek the Simple Microscope Dutch Reformed
56 Max von Laue X-ray Crystallography
57 Gustav Kirchhoff Spectroscopy
58 Hans Bethe the Energy of the Sun Jewish
59 Euclid the Foundations of Mathematics Platonism / Greek philosophy
60 Gregor Mendel the Laws of Inheritance Catholic (Augustinian monk)
61 Heike Kamerlingh Onnes Superconductivity
62 Thomas Hunt Morgan the Chromosomal Theory of Heredity
63 Hermann von Helmholtz the Rise of German Science
64 Paul Ehrlich Chemotherapy Jewish
65 Ernst Mayr Evolutionary Theory atheist
66 Charles Sherrington Neurophysiology
67 Theodosius Dobzhansky the Modern Synthesis Russian Orthodox
68 Max Delbruck the Bacteriophage
69 Jean Baptiste Lamarck the Foundations of Biology
70 William Bayliss Modern Physiology
71 Noam Chomsky Twentieth-Century Linguistics Jewish atheist
72 Frederick Sanger the Genetic Code
73 Lucretius Scientific Thinking Epicurean; atheist
74 John Dalton the Theory of the Atom Quaker
75 Louis Victor de Broglie Wave/Particle Duality
76 Carl Linnaeus the Binomial Nomenclature Christianity
77 Jean Piaget Child Development
78 George Gaylord Simpson the Tempo of Evolution
79 Claude Levi-Strauss Structural Anthropology Jewish
80 Lynn Margulis Symbiosis Theory Jewish
81 Karl Landsteiner the Blood Groups Jewish
82 Konrad Lorenz Ethology
83 Edward O. Wilson Sociobiology
84 Frederick Gowland Hopkins Vitamins
85 Gertrude Belle Elion Pharmacology
86 Hans Selye the Stress Concept
87 J. Robert Oppenheimer the Atomic Era Jewish
88 Edward Teller the Bomb Jewish
89 Willard Libby Radioactive Dating
90 Ernst Haeckel the Biogenetic Principle
91 Jonas Salk Vaccination Jewish
92 Emil Kraepelin Twentieth-Century Psychiatry
93 Trofim Lysenko Soviet Genetics Russian Orthodox; Communist
94 Francis Galton Eugenics
95 Alfred Binet the I.Q. Test
96 Alfred Kinsey Human Sexuality atheist
97 Alexander Fleming Penicillin Catholic
98 B. F. Skinner Behaviorism atheist
99 Wilhelm Wundt the Founding of Psychology atheist
100 Archimedes the Beginning of Science Greek philosophy”
[/quote]
Good fuck. You are now officially retarded. Go ahead and accuse me of ad hominem. You are retarded. If you never posted on these boards again it would be resounding victory for rational thought.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
ZEB wrote:
There are several wacky atheist sites that claim Einstein didn’t believe in God. But then again those are the same sites which insist that there are contradictions in the Bible of which there are none.
“Thou shall not kill”
and
“Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.”
Contradiction.
I’ll be as brief as possible:
The 6th Commandment reads “thou shall not murder.”
Murder is the taking of innocent life.
In the OT a witch (or sorceress) was considered to be guilty of immense sin because as a group they had turned their back on God (at least in those days) and worthy of death.
In Hebrew there are 9 different words that mean to cause the death of another. But they do not all mean the same thing. The commandment is against murder, not death.
To further clarify:
All murder is killing but not all killing is murder.
Hence, some things are murder, such as taking an innocent life. Some folks like me would list abortion here. Other things are not murder of which one is taking a life in order to preserve your own, such as in a time of war etc.
The OT has some pretty heavy duty penalties.
It makes me even happier that Jesus Christ walked the earth in the NT.
Finally, while I have heard many claim contradictions in the Bible I have personally never seen one.
[/quote]
Of course the bible will never contradict itself if you can take the liberty to hijack the meaning of any of the words used.
Face it, to say “thou shall not kill”, then give instructions on who to kill, is a contradiction.
Twisting it to mean “Thou shall not murder…but its ok to kill under some circumstances” is bunk. Besides, that kinda brings up moral relativism, which Christians dont seem to be too keen on, from what I’ve gathered.
All research on morals and ethics show that christians are in no way more ethical than others, rather the other way around. (just as interesting as the “people with a high education is less likely to be religious”-results from the same field of research…).
Could you point out some of these studies? I’d like to take a look at them for myself. And, are they including people who call themselves Christians because their family line is christian? Or, people that identify themselves as practicing Christians? Very important distinction, in my experience.[/quote]
I agree its an important distinction. Most “Christians” I know are the strip-club-on-friday-church-on-sunday types.
All research on morals and ethics show that christians are in no way more ethical than others, rather the other way around. (just as interesting as the “people with a high education is less likely to be religious”-results from the same field of research…).
Could you point out some of these studies? I’d like to take a look at them for myself. And, are they including people who call themselves Christians because their family line is christian? Or, people that identify themselves as practicing Christians? Very important distinction, in my experience.
I agree its an important distinction. Most “Christians” I know are the strip-club-on-friday-church-on-sunday types.
Just my observation.
[/quote]
I was meaning more like “I’m christian (because my parents were), but I don’t go to church or read scripture,” types. There are a lot of people, in my experience, who accept the label, but don’t practice the faith at all. No, not even on Sunday’s.
Haha, yes… attacking Sam Harris personally, without any reason for it, is a good idea Zeb… You are, as someone above me so eloquently put it: now an official retard. (see, I just did to you, as you did to me and to Sam Harris).
That list is seriously flawed. One have to take several important points into consideration. First of all, it was not like you had much of an option if you go 50-100-150 years back and from there on back to year 150…
Being christian in the name, to survive or to get funding, is not the same as “Hey, evolution is crap, dinosaurs never existed, god parted the red sea and you’ll go to hell”-christians, like YOU zeb.
Secondly, I have proved beyond ANY reasonable doubt, that Einstein did NOT believe in a god, he even states that the quote you are hanging your hopes on is FALSE and is misinterpreted intentionally… STILL you refuse to read it, just as you refuse to read the Gould-article. But ofcourse, you have a: “well, scientists that say that they don’t believe in god WILL BURN IN HELL”-attitude, which won’t help ofcourse…
To quote Richard Dawkins: “The only website I could find that claimed to liste “Nobel Prize-winning Scientific Christians” came up with six, out of a total of several hundred scientific Nobelists. Of these six, it turned out that four were not Nobel Prize-winners at all; and at least one, to my certain knowledge, is a non-believer who attends church for purely social reasons.”
A study by Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi found that amon Nobel Prize laureates in the sciences, as well as those in literature, there was a remarkable degree of irreligiosity, as compared to the populations they came from.
A study in Nature by Larson and Witham in 1998 showed that of those american scientists considered eminent enough by their peers to have been elected to the national academy of sciences, only about 7 % believe in a personal god.
Elisabeth Cornwell and Michael Stirrat did a similar study on the Royal Society in Britain. 2.8% of the fellows answered positive on a personal god. Michael Shermer and Frank Sulloway in the “how we believe: the search for god in an age of science” show that religiosity is indeed negatively correlated with education. More highly educated people are less likely to be religious. Religiosity is also negatively correlated with interest in science and strongly negative correlated with political liberalism.
A meta-study (a comparative study of studies on a field) by Paul Bell, published in Mensa Magazine in 2002 shows that of 43 studies in the field of intelligence/education/religion since 1927, all but ONE (ONE, UNO… EINS!) show a negative correlation between intelligence/education and religion.
Safe to say, the thrown together list our little household retard (the day you start reading my sources and adressing my questions, you’ll lose the nickname, ok retard?) Zeb comes with, is ofcourse faulty. It reeks of “hey, we’ll just call people christians, especially dead people, they can’t defend themselves”.
I am kind of disappointed in you Orion. You are normally a careful thinker but in this case you were not. As I have said before I support the theory of evolution. I think it works well and explains a lot about natural history. It is not right, however, to give it more credence than it deserves.
It is a theory, it has not been proven statistically significantly enough to make it beyond that. The person(s) who do manage to prove that will be recognized and we will all know thier names. There are anomalies that evolution cannot account for. Extinctions, gaps, weaker rather than stronger species surviving for long periods of time.
These are problems for the theory. I like evolution, but it does not solve all the problems in the history of living things.[/quote]
How do you know how long I studied the theory of evolution?
Granted my interests were more in the area of evolutionary psychology but I do know enough that
a) all the “gaps”, if they even exist in the specific case and weren`t answered a long time ago, do not overthrow a theory.
b) theories are never proven. The general theory of evolution however is so , well, general, that it will probably always stay in principle.
To answer to one of your ideas were evolution goes wrong:
Species do not jump into a new species. In fossil records it might look that way, because the transition happened fast but all the intermediary individuals were able to reproduce with their direct ancestor and descendent.
Insofar it does not make sense to look for “missing links” because there are none.
Since there is never a definite outcome, just a data code in constant flux there is also no definite “species” at least not on a time vector.
I am kind of disappointed in you Orion. You are normally a careful thinker but in this case you were not. As I have said before I support the theory of evolution. I think it works well and explains a lot about natural history. It is not right, however, to give it more credence than it deserves.
It is a theory, it has not been proven statistically significantly enough to make it beyond that. The person(s) who do manage to prove that will be recognized and we will all know thier names. There are anomalies that evolution cannot account for. Extinctions, gaps, weaker rather than stronger species surviving for long periods of time.
These are problems for the theory. I like evolution, but it does not solve all the problems in the history of living things.
How do you know how long I studied the theory of evolution?
[/quote]
I don’t and never commented on your studies of evolution
Yea, so? Whose trying to overthrow it. I am saying it just a theory, not that it’s wrong.
You are wrong, plain and easy. God is a fairytale. A gruesom, jealous, bloodthirsty god from a fairytale… He is not a real being. It is a simple as that… the fact that grown people believe in zeus… or god… or thor… for that matter, is just laughable. So are you… denying the plain facts… 
