Poll: religon: a 7 point scale

[Zombie_Fish]

the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun

How do you know God is a fictional creature though?

 

[Cliff_m85]

I'm like a 5.7 but said 6. Who am I to say weather there is or isn't a god(depending on what 'god' means to you)? I personally don't think there is one, but like I said, I have only a 50% chance of being right.

Actually you have a 50% chance of being right. However if you were a theist you'd have a much smaller chance. Taken all the religions, all the branchs of those religions, and the chance that the deity is from a religion we don't yet have....their chance plummets.

 

[Glerken]

I went with 6. I'm Atheist, but I can't say 7, because it is impossible to be 100% sure.
I'm actually surprised so many people went with 1 and 7. They're the annoying ones preaching their beliefs down others throats...

 

[Goldbling]

I voted 2.00 but I'm really 1.00, I Firmly believe there is a God. Maybe not the one I believe in, but there is defiantly a God.

I've always wondered the "why" to this.

In the end it doesn't matter, people who don't like reality will continue to fluff it and there is nothing nice anyone else can do to change that.

To me I just don't see the evidence. What is there that would give the idea to anyone that there is some sort of almighty being. I'm a huge fan of the universe and I get a boner everytime I read an astrophysics book, I am a huge fan of life and I get a cognitive boner anytime a new discovery is made. I just don't see the evidence for a supreme being nor does it appear that faking it does any justice to an otherwise astoundingly interesting existence.

I'd rather not shit on this cake just because I really feel the need to take a dump.

You believe what you believe and that's fine. No one can provide you with the "evidence" you need to know there is a God, you can only find that yourself.

Again you are trying to legitimize a view that undermines every other thing you know.

If we can just belief in things for funsies then all knowledge is entirely moot because it serves no purpose.

Essentially once you start believing in things because you can you are closing your mind to any other knowledge. Once you start being skeptical you are making yourself a hypocrite. If you accept the scientific theory for anything else it is unreasonable to make an exception for something just because it makes you feel good.

But then reason isn't exactly part of the gameplan. What benefit do you get out of faith that you wouldn't get out of optimism? I know the answer but I hate rhetorical questions so I'll let you give me an answer.

None, I suppose if that's the way you wan to think about it. Whats with the whole "Religion don't let you lern nothin'" thing going on lately? I seek knowledge like any other person religious or otherwise, I also aspire to do something beside fight with people on teh internets like Genealogy, Astronomy, hell maybe even be a Historian. There is no rule in the Bible that's said you much turn off your brain and shut out all logic. Logic also depends on the person, what seems a logical choise to one person may seem totally idiotic and ignorant to another.

 

[Akai Shizuku]

I am curious, how exactly would you prove that God exists, or does not exist?

From what I have seen, people who believe in God usually do so as a matter of faith. Although they can site examples of creative design, miracles, and other suppossedly "God" inspired things, it always boils down to faith. As well it should, since it is a matter of spirituallity rather than science. In Christianity, faith in Jesus/God is the point. So it becomes more of an issue of whether you believe the idea, rather than ability to prove the existence.

For people who claim athieism, the question is equally if not more confusing. Since God is a considered a spiritual being by most people, there is no scientific evidence that can be applied. If there is no scientific evidence, then you must rely on YOUR ability to accept a God or not. Which quickly spirals into ridiculousness. How does not liking the way the world works and thinking life is unfair or unjust, prove that there is no God? Just because things don't happen the way you think they should, doesn't mean there is no God.

Maybe it would be a better world for everyone if the religious relied on faith to influence the non-religious, rather than invading privacy, attacking, and insisting everyone except them was going to hell. Maybe it would be a better world if the atheist's and others like them stopped antagonizing, insulting, and attacking the beliefs of the religious.

Greatest idea ever! I think I'll start praying now.

I'm not a Christian, but I'm 100% certain that God exists.

When a rabbit runs through the snow, does it not leave footprints?

That's deep...
Sometimes I think about the uncountable amount of life on the planet; it all shares the same atoms and molecules; all those atoms were created in the center of our solar system; and any one of those atoms is billions of years old; and I think there has to be some purpose there has to be a God. This is me at my most certain.

Have you ever studied biology? Are you aware of how mind-buggeringly complex even some of the most simple creatures are? It's just impossible that this happened by coincidence.

Obviously you haven't studied Evolution, because it's nothing at all like 'coincidence'. It's natural reproduction with survival of the fittest kicking in with genes.

Yes, because such complicated systems can just happen all by themselves.

It's callled Immersion, idiot.

Immersion, In Science and Philosophy, is the tendancy for Order to rise Out of Disorder, Complex Life to emerge out of an ooze of Bacteria and Protien, ect...

Even in Human society, Immersion is present, as in the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and, probably the best example, the pioneering of Atomic energy through the chaos of WW2.

Hey, relax, I never insulted you. I just felt sarcasm was the most effective way to get my point across.

Isn't Immersion just a theory? And whether it's true or not, where does it come from?

Scientific Theory: a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

Scientific theories are a collection of scientific FACTS.

The thing is, a theory is called a theory because it hasn't been 100% proven. If it were, I do believe it would be called a theorem.

 

[bladeofdarkness]

the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun

How do you know God is a fictional creature though?

how do you know dragons are ?

 

[XJ-0461]

Probably an exact 6.00. I doubt the existance of a God, but I'm open to possibillity of there being some sort of "higher power".

 

[Cavouku]

the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun

How do you know God is a fictional creature though?

And what's wrong with dragons anyways? No seriously, just because we've attributed something to mythology doesn't mean to debunk it entirely. Though if it fits, we can 6.0 dragons.

 

[Akai Shizuku]

I went with 6. I'm Atheist, but I can't say 7, because it is impossible to be 100% sure.
I'm actually surprised so many people went with 1 and 7. They're the annoying ones preaching their beliefs down others throats...

I chose 1 and I'm not doing that.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun

How do you know God is a fictional creature though?

how do you know dragons are ?

I never mentioned that they were fictional or not. We do have no proof that they are real.

 

[Cliff_m85]

I am curious, how exactly would you prove that God exists, or does not exist?

From what I have seen, people who believe in God usually do so as a matter of faith. Although they can site examples of creative design, miracles, and other suppossedly "God" inspired things, it always boils down to faith. As well it should, since it is a matter of spirituallity rather than science. In Christianity, faith in Jesus/God is the point. So it becomes more of an issue of whether you believe the idea, rather than ability to prove the existence.

For people who claim athieism, the question is equally if not more confusing. Since God is a considered a spiritual being by most people, there is no scientific evidence that can be applied. If there is no scientific evidence, then you must rely on YOUR ability to accept a God or not. Which quickly spirals into ridiculousness. How does not liking the way the world works and thinking life is unfair or unjust, prove that there is no God? Just because things don't happen the way you think they should, doesn't mean there is no God.

Maybe it would be a better world for everyone if the religious relied on faith to influence the non-religious, rather than invading privacy, attacking, and insisting everyone except them was going to hell. Maybe it would be a better world if the atheist's and others like them stopped antagonizing, insulting, and attacking the beliefs of the religious.

Greatest idea ever! I think I'll start praying now.

I'm not a Christian, but I'm 100% certain that God exists.

When a rabbit runs through the snow, does it not leave footprints?

That's deep...
Sometimes I think about the uncountable amount of life on the planet; it all shares the same atoms and molecules; all those atoms were created in the center of our solar system; and any one of those atoms is billions of years old; and I think there has to be some purpose there has to be a God. This is me at my most certain.

Have you ever studied biology? Are you aware of how mind-buggeringly complex even some of the most simple creatures are? It's just impossible that this happened by coincidence.

Obviously you haven't studied Evolution, because it's nothing at all like 'coincidence'. It's natural reproduction with survival of the fittest kicking in with genes.

Yes, because such complicated systems can just happen all by themselves.

It's callled Immersion, idiot.

Immersion, In Science and Philosophy, is the tendancy for Order to rise Out of Disorder, Complex Life to emerge out of an ooze of Bacteria and Protien, ect...

Even in Human society, Immersion is present, as in the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and, probably the best example, the pioneering of Atomic energy through the chaos of WW2.

Hey, relax, I never insulted you. I just felt sarcasm was the most effective way to get my point across.

Isn't Immersion just a theory? And whether it's true or not, where does it come from?

Scientific Theory: a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

Scientific theories are a collection of scientific FACTS.

The thing is, a theory is called a theory because it hasn't been 100% proven. If it were, I do believe it would be called a theorem.

Actually you are completely and utterly wrong. Science doesn't deal in absolutes. Nothing is 100% proven because it constantly must be questioned and tested. Gravity is a theory as well.

Theorem is a mathematical term, by the way...not a scientific term. I can see why you are a bit confused, I was too before taking my courses in Biology focusing on Evolution.

 

[theultimateend]

Cliff_m85 my answer is God created evolution; no mortal can recreate evolution especially not knowing what every gene does. Then what gene groups do and God knows why some genes are dormant, how many genes make up a group are there dormant groups? How one mutation only happen once in a while in a rather large amount of time specially in larger animals that have offspring in seasons. Consider AIDS, my favorite virus, there a a couple of million of people infected with it there is probably a million if not more viruses reproducing fast if not exponentially. So out of all of those walking petri dishes wouldn't one of them have an evolved version of airborne AIDS, well I know the answer is no because thats not how HIV works but according to evolution it could happen but it hasn't. YES Akai Shizuku biology is "mind-buggeringly" complex that's why I'm studying Chemistry instead lol.

DAmn I pressed post instead of preview. Wait a sec...

God created Evolution. Very clever, trying to mix religion and science. Why not they are both invented by humans.

"according to evolution it could happen but it hasn't."
Ehhh.... It could happen means that it's not going to happen for sure. And changes in life forms according to evolution take thousands of thousands of years. AIDS? Ain't that quite a "new" thing.

Actually evolution happens every time an organism mates and creates offspring. Everyone is slightly evolved from their parents.

Slightly, yes. But when do we get wings? Maybe never, maybe in the next 23,4 million years. Who knows? But what is for sure it's going to take a whole lotta time.

Yeah, I Should have said "And BIG changes in life forms according to evolution...[small]bla bla bla[/small]"

My bad.

Why on earth would you get wings?

You'd need weaker bones, your entire organic make up would need to get lighter and you'd have to change just about everything that is human about you.

Just what immediate benefit does wings give you over some weird fantasy image. You have the food you need without moving, you have shelter, and you have no predators.

There is no benefit to wings that would leave the creepy humans that are mid mutation still breeding with other folks.

It was an example.. Of a big change in Evolution.

Yes I shouls have said that.

My bad. Again. I'm ashamed

Very bad example. I would have pointed out that the pinky toe is getting smaller in people and will likely not exist in the distant future because of the advent of shoes. With Shoes it is an entirely unnecessary body part. However! It will take a long time since you'll have people with pinky toes and people without pinky toes breeding. All depends on if it is a dominant gene.

But yeah. Wings are bad. Just because people like angels and birds doesn't mean we'll ever be them. The sheer amount of changes in a human to get them in flight organically is astounding.

 

[bladeofdarkness]

the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun

How do you know God is a fictional creature though?

how do you know dragons are ?

How do you know they aren't?

does the fact that i dont know if they are or arent means that the chances are 50% for either options ?

 

[CosmicCommander]

I am curious, how exactly would you prove that God exists, or does not exist?

From what I have seen, people who believe in God usually do so as a matter of faith. Although they can site examples of creative design, miracles, and other suppossedly "God" inspired things, it always boils down to faith. As well it should, since it is a matter of spirituallity rather than science. In Christianity, faith in Jesus/God is the point. So it becomes more of an issue of whether you believe the idea, rather than ability to prove the existence.

For people who claim athieism, the question is equally if not more confusing. Since God is a considered a spiritual being by most people, there is no scientific evidence that can be applied. If there is no scientific evidence, then you must rely on YOUR ability to accept a God or not. Which quickly spirals into ridiculousness. How does not liking the way the world works and thinking life is unfair or unjust, prove that there is no God? Just because things don't happen the way you think they should, doesn't mean there is no God.

Maybe it would be a better world for everyone if the religious relied on faith to influence the non-religious, rather than invading privacy, attacking, and insisting everyone except them was going to hell. Maybe it would be a better world if the atheist's and others like them stopped antagonizing, insulting, and attacking the beliefs of the religious.

Greatest idea ever! I think I'll start praying now.

I'm not a Christian, but I'm 100% certain that God exists.

When a rabbit runs through the snow, does it not leave footprints?

That's deep...
Sometimes I think about the uncountable amount of life on the planet; it all shares the same atoms and molecules; all those atoms were created in the center of our solar system; and any one of those atoms is billions of years old; and I think there has to be some purpose there has to be a God. This is me at my most certain.

Have you ever studied biology? Are you aware of how mind-buggeringly complex even some of the most simple creatures are? It's just impossible that this happened by coincidence.

Obviously you haven't studied Evolution, because it's nothing at all like 'coincidence'. It's natural reproduction with survival of the fittest kicking in with genes.

Yes, because such complicated systems can just happen all by themselves.

It's callled Immersion, idiot.

Immersion, In Science and Philosophy, is the tendancy for Order to rise Out of Disorder, Complex Life to emerge out of an ooze of Bacteria and Protien, ect...

Even in Human society, Immersion is present, as in the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and, probably the best example, the pioneering of Atomic energy through the chaos of WW2.

Hey, relax, I never insulted you. I just felt sarcasm was the most effective way to get my point across.

Isn't Immersion just a theory? And whether it's true or not, where does it come from?

Sorry mate, Not very good with sarcasm. But immersion, although it is a theory, is like any fact in it's early stage's. It's very simple, and has many examples, in human history, the natural world, and the universe. Like a star forming, that's an example of immersion, matter itself, was created through a chotic amount of energy, and radiation, Society was created by nomads who had to go through a drastic cooling down of the planet, a cold part of an ice-age, which afterwards, taught them techniques for settling down, and farming.

Immersion, although a relatively minor theory, explains a lot, and gives me hope, that it will help propel society into the age of reason.

 

[Cavouku]

The thing is guys, we only can call something fictitious if it's been proven to be made up. A Deity goes back further than I personally care to track, and if we make an animal translator, I may think they believe in something. It's all a question of nature, and I think that if nature wants us to believe, maybe it has a reason.

Not saying we have to, but it's an interesting concept to explore.

 

[Glerken]

I went with 6. I'm Atheist, but I can't say 7, because it is impossible to be 100% sure.
I'm actually surprised so many people went with 1 and 7. They're the annoying ones preaching their beliefs down others throats...

I chose 1 and I'm not doing that.

Okay, maybe you're an exception. Generally speaking, saying you're 100% sure leaves no room to see "God" or no God, from a different point of view. Leading to being condescending to people who have other beliefs, because you feel you have a truth that others don't.
I'm not saying it's bad to have a belief (or none) and be proud of that, but to say you're 100% sure you're right is impossible.

 

[CptCamoPants]

I guess I should be a 6. But I still worship something, but that's just cuz the gods I worship kick ass.
P.S. My girlfriend would definitely be a 1, and she has never even suggested I convert to Christianity. She knows why I made my decision, and she respects that, I don't know how many people I could say that about, but it's probably more than some others think.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

the flaw with the "there is no evidence AGAINST the existence of god" argument is that if you try and apply it to any other fictional creature you'd get laughed out of the room.

just try it
"there is not proof that dragons dont exist, in fact most human civilizations at one point or another believed in the existance of dragons"
"you cant disprove the tooth fairy"
"santa is real until proven otherwise"

try it at home, its fun

How do you know God is a fictional creature though?

how do you know dragons are ?

How do you know they aren't?

does the fact that i dont know if they are or arent means that the chances are 50% for either options ?

In short, yes. There is no proof either side, so either side of the arguement is actually perfectly logical.

 

[keybird]

personally i belive God is just a figment of a persons imagination. Something they can depend on when they are scared or troubled.

Not something that is real.

 

[HeartAttackBob]

The distribution of votes on this poll is very interesting. I will admit to being a little surprised. Here's why:

The majority of respondents to this poll (at time of this post ~60%) are at least weak atheists (5 higher on the scale), which is much higher than any numbers I've seen for the <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism target=self>US (<5%) or the UK (<30%).
This implies two things which are correlated with atheism and agnosticism:
1) respondents to this poll <a href=http://sda.berkeley.edu:8080/quicktables/quicksetoptions.do?reportKey=gss04%3A1 target=self>are more educated than the average American or Brit.
2) respondents to this poll are <a href=http://users.ugent.be/~fanseel/intelligence-religion.pdf target=self>more intelligent <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence target=self>than the average American or Brit.

Making the leap that respondents to this poll are representative of Escapists in general (which, I admit, is not necessarily true), I find these results very encouraging. I am glad to see evidence that this community, of which I am a member and have a small part, is more intelligent, educated, and atheistic than average in the US and UK.

An advance response to theists:

Spoiler

Note that I make no claims about your -or anyone's- individual intelligence or education level, but merely statistical averages and relationships that have been found in scientific studies. I invite you to be skeptical and check my sources and reasoning, as well as seek a variety of other sources of information.