Poll: religon: a 7 point scale

[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.

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.

I'm as sure as I feel I can be. I don't have condescending views towards atheists, most of them are rather intelligent people. The only atheists I really hate are the ones that try to be fascist about it. I enjoy having a civilized theological discussion with atheists as long as it doesn't burst into flames; I don't like conflict.

 

[Alone Disciple]

1....Hope to see you all on the other side someday.

 

[Cavouku]

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.

...I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, and I'm not sure what you just said, but I hope it's not that Atheists are smarter than religious?

 

[theultimateend]

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.

Well historically that's the case. The numbers you use are Arabic Numerals, almost every star visible at night with your eye has an Arabic name, and initially the Arabic region of the world was responsible for basically all scientific advancement.

Then one day it was declared that mathematics was the work of the devil (sounds stupid but it happened). After that the Arab world collapsed cognitively and even now, thousands of years later it hasn't recovered.

Look at creationists. They are fighting hard to debunk evolution. However evolution has been evolving since it was first developed. They tend to use darwinian statements and act like people still believe he was 100% correct. Much like Einstein or Newton he had a vast majority of the basics down but wasn't entirely right. However what do you get out of creationism? You get nothing. It cannot help you develop cures, understand viruses, examine anything biologically.

The pure idea of faith is a slap in the face of knowledge. By the very nature of believing in something because you can and not because there is a reason to you leave yourself being a hypocrite. Why is it alright to believe in god just because but you can't believe in flying spaghetti monsters with the same legitimacy.

There is an invisible race of beings that produce no signs that would ever give light to their existence. They walk around the Earth just as we do. I've just developed something that can never be dis proven. Does that mean its true? From a scientific standpoint its not even worth thinking about. However if we go off the tenets of faith the answer should or possibly even must be "Yes it is true."

Every single time you reach a question that cannot simply be answered will you say "God did it." or will you investigate. If you investigate then why did you accept god so easily?

 

[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 ?

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

you CANT actually mean what you just said
what about santa, or the tooth fairy, or the flying spaghetti monster

when two sides are arguing, the answer does NOT, by default, lies somewhere in the middle
its quite possible for one side to be plain wrong

 

[Supraliminal]

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.

Yes, you are propably right. But appart from the wing idea, humans are going to change drastically when time goes by for millions of years( if we survive for that long ), and that was my point. When we start colonizing other planets and people live and breed in different kinds of enviroments, there will be lots of variety coming to human race.
Some don't get it, maybe thinking about things so far into the future gives 'em headache or it has something to do with the god dilemma..?

 

[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?

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.

What I see the main problem between atheism and religion to be is that many religions seem to hate science and knowledge with a passion. This is not the case with all religions (Islam, for instance, apparently espouses science), but it is with a lot of them. Christianity, Hinduism, ancient Egyptian religion, those nut jobs that worshiped the Sun...I could go on for days.

 

[Cliff_m85]

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.

I'm as sure as I feel I can be. I don't have condescending views towards atheists, most of them are rather intelligent people. The only atheists I really hate are the ones that try to be fascist about it. I enjoy having a civilized theological discussion with atheists as long as it doesn't burst into flames; I don't like conflict.

Certainly you have been respectful. I just hope you research further into a field of science before presenting an argument against it.

 

[diamond edge]

I would be inclined to agree with monkfish, in that, I am not religious, and while I'm not one hundred percent sure there is a god, I think all the religions are describing the same thing, none of them are just exactly sure of what they're describing. Then you have to factor in that the religions have been passed down word of mouth as well as changing languages (especially in the case of christianity) as well as the fact that some have had almost 180 turn arounds throughout their existence. It just makes it a little hard to swallow. There is a unifying force that creates and binds all living things, of that I am certain. Now, is it a omnipotent deity that determines the course of my existence? On that i'm a little shaky. I kind of have a combination of buddhist and taoist theories. The word religion just scares me though, mob mentality develops too quickly for my liking, then you have things like the crusades >_<

 

[Shoqiyqa]

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?

.....

.....

.....



>.<



.....

0.-

-.o

8-/

.....

Nope, I still don't get it. Wtf do rabbit-tracks in the snow have to do with the price of 5,000 fish sandwiches?

 

[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.

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.

I'm as sure as I feel I can be. I don't have condescending views towards atheists, most of them are rather intelligent people. The only atheists I really hate are the ones that try to be fascist about it. I enjoy having a civilized theological discussion with atheists as long as it doesn't burst into flames; I don't like conflict.

Certainly you have been respectful. I just hope you research further into a field of science before presenting an argument against it.

Actually, I'm a strong supporter of science. Despite the advances we as a species have made, science is still rather young. I have the feeling that scientists with new theories will always debate on a number of issues until one side is proven and new issues arise. It's a fairly endless process that I think will go on until the world ends.

 

[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.

Yes, you are propably right. But appart from the wing idea, humans are going to change drastically when time goes by for millions of years( if we survive for that long ), and that was my point. When we start colonizing other planets and people live and breed in different kinds of enviroments, there will be lots of variety coming to human race.
Some don't get it, maybe thinking about things so far into the future gives 'em headache or it has something to do with the god dilemma..?

Well we tend to look at change is a bad thing. That's why faith is so popular, it has little to no change *unless it absolutely must*.

When people start mutating even in the slightest bit, slightly lower ears, slightly higher eyes, darker skin, different pigments. These sort of things bother people. I think evolution will be a slow process in people (even by evolutionary standards) because we are very picky about our breeding and much of it relies on simple tricks of the trade.

Symmetry is big. Historically the most 'beautiful' people in the world have all been highly Symmetrical. Ears at roughly the same height, eyes, nose not slanted, shoulders not angled at all. This is largely because the more symmetry you have the less damage you sustained as a fetus and the more complete your genetic makeup. So anyone who has mutations, even helpful ones, that break this mold tend to not get breeded with very often.

http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/watch/beyondbelief - Great little series with one of my favorite people in the world. If you are in New York, try and meet him.

 

[Akai Shizuku]

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?

.....

.....

.....



>.<



.....

0.-

-.o

8-/

.....

Nope, I still don't get it. Wtf do rabbit-tracks in the snow have to do with the price of 5,000 fish sandwiches?

What I meant is that the universe had to have been left by something, due to the basic logic of cause and effect.

 

[yosophat]

Having mated fruit-flies and getting them to evolve I can clearly say "Yes, a mortal can recreate evolution".

All you're doing is tossing God into a completely naturalistic setting, hoping that people don't mind adding nonsense to science.

Yeah.... right.... Putting legs in place of atenna and wings is evolution. Post something meaningful like when you put gills or poison barbs in its ass. Evolution cannot explain how new systems appear like gills or lungs. What you are essentially doing is begging those flies to please look slightly different so I can say you have evolved or I will inbreed you so much you'll look like a retarded monkey-fish because you already have the genes that make you look like one. I only say that God created evolution because alone evolution does not make sense; it cannot create the diverse systems that are common out of thin air. Its like saying gills directly evolved to lungs and anything in between that jump was non-beneficial so the organism dies and there is no change.

 

[CymTyr]

Without pushing my personal beliefs on others I couldn't help but notice that the majority of people polled have gone with atheism. I wonder if this is a common phenomenon with gamers or the world culture as time goes on...

I believe what I believe, you believe what you believe. I will agree to disagree with anyone who logically disagrees with something I believe in, and would expect the same treatment.

What I will say is religion, dating back for the past 10 thousand years at least, has caused human death that would not have otherwise happened. Look up the ancient Sumerian religion, or one of the other "original" religions. God(s) at that point in time were not nice, friendly, and forgiving. Human sacrifice was committed daily. If you look closely at today you will see some eery similarities.

Seriously, I encourage everyone atheist or theist to look up where the necronomicon came from. It offers some insight into why people act the way they do nowadays, because we haven't really changed that much; technology has.

EDIT: oh yeah I believe in my own god, so make of it what you will.

 

[theultimateend]

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?

No. It leaves paw prints.

Likewise how big is this rabbit? How large are their paws? If they are wide enough it could disperse its weight enough to leave no impression in the snow at all. It's unlikely but with the proper proportions it could be done.

Is this snow nearly ice or is it nearly slush?

We need some more information here.

 

[Cliff_m85]

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.

I'm as sure as I feel I can be. I don't have condescending views towards atheists, most of them are rather intelligent people. The only atheists I really hate are the ones that try to be fascist about it. I enjoy having a civilized theological discussion with atheists as long as it doesn't burst into flames; I don't like conflict.

Certainly you have been respectful. I just hope you research further into a field of science before presenting an argument against it.

Actually, I'm a strong supporter of science. Despite the advances we as a species have made, science is still rather young. I have the feeling that scientists with new theories will always debate on a number of issues until one side is proven and new issues arise. It's a fairly endless process that I think will go on until the world ends.

Once again, you can't 'prove' things in science.....ever. As well as another mention that a theory is a collection of facts. Scientists aren't debating theories, but debating certain facts in collect theories. So once again, scientists will never 'prove' anything because there will always be more to learn in a theory.

 

[Shoqiyqa]

... assuming there's either a Christian God or nothing, mathematically speaking you really should believe in God. Look-up Pascal's Wager.

Assuming there's a Christian god for whom that's good enough or nothing ...

According to the literature, though, if you don't it's because he doesn't want you to, right?

Strange sort of deity. Makes people in its own image, but they all look different and tend to hate anyone who looks different. Gives a thousand different groups of them a thousand different sets of rules and then leaves them to fight over which ones are right and throws all the ones who guessed wrong into fire for eternity. Sees everything, foresees everything, controls everything, loves everyone, made everyone the way they are on purpose ... uses Earth to test these people and throws the failures into the fire to suffer for eternity for having been made imperfect ... on purpose ... and demands absolute unquestioning total adoration at all times without any palpable or visible rewards ... and, er, is pure good ... and made demons to tempt people to stray so the tiniest imperfections would show up and more people could be sent to hell ... errr ...

You know, I've advised people to leave men like that.


...

The world is unfair, there are starving people in Africa, ... World Wars, ...

Just seems like it was meant to be this way.Really dude, do you mean this? How can you morally say that?

Allow me to add:

On August 4, 2002, best friends Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, both 10 [http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/predators/ian_huntley/index.html], posed for a picture sporting their new red Manchester United football shirts before sitting down to dinner with family and friends. It was a festive occasion and the Wells family was having a barbecue. Shortly after dinner, Holly and Jessica stepped out of the house and went to a nearby sports center to buy some candy. They were never seen alive again.

On August 17, 2002, 13 days after the girls disappeared, a game warden walking through the woods made a heart wrenching discovery. He found the girls partially burned bodies in a six-foot-deep ditch close to the RAF Lakenheath airbase in Suffolk. Autopsy reports on the girls listed their probable cause of death as asphyxiation. The girls parents worst nightmare became a reality.

Sarah was abducted on July 1. [http://www.forsarah.com/html/anguish.html]

The family had spent the afternoon together on the beach near her grandparents' home in Kingston Gorse, West Sussex.

At the end of the day the four children walked into a field of wheat.

But Sarah turned back - and was thought to have been grabbed by a man in a white van.

Her body was found 16 days later. Sara remembers her daughter racing across the sands on that last day.

I told her that Alyssa wouldn't be at school today. She doesn't lie in the classroom. She doesn't lie any more at school. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvBbBQOifx4]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNDLRAB0yNM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLmvI-yPZss

On the sixteenth of March 1996 ... [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dExPZzD3KG8]

More than 60,000 tonnes of saturated coal and rock engulfed a farm, houses and the junior school [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tbVtx-xggg]

3 August: Following a 999 call, Peter is taken to hospital but pronounced dead on arrival. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/may/22/baby-p-timeline]

The first girl went missing in 1995. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/pm/1680822.stm] She had arrived at Gatwick from West Africa, claimed asylum and was taken into care by social services in West Sussex. She then vanished.

65 more were to follow. Experts say this represents a tiny fraction of the true figure.

... for many the war never ended. They're still suffering the effects of chemical warfare. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJxb7CY13uc]

Just seems like it was meant to be this way.

 

[Cavouku]

Without pushing my personal beliefs on others I couldn't help but notice that the majority of people polled have gone with atheism. I wonder if this is a common phenomenon with gamers or the world culture as time goes on...

I believe what I believe, you believe what you believe. I will agree to disagree with anyone who logically disagrees with something I believe in, and would expect the same treatment.

What I will say is religion, dating back for the past 10 thousand years at least, has caused human death that would not have otherwise happened. Look up the ancient Sumerian religion, or one of the other "original" religions. God(s) at that point in time were not nice, friendly, and forgiving. Human sacrifice was committed daily. If you look closely at today you will see some eery similarities.

Seriously, I encourage everyone atheist or theist to look up where the necronomicon came from. It offers some insight into why people act the way they do nowadays, because we haven't really changed that much; technology has.

People cause wars, not religion T~T

Wars happen because people either want conformity, or something they don't have. Religion just happens to fall into category one, and this is a basic human thing. Wars happen with or without religion.

Oh I'm sorry, sacrifices; well, I think that all those early ideals were fairly unavoidable, as people thought that someone's life brought life, whether religion caused it or once. Primordial science, I guess. Alchemy. Etc.

 

[Cliff_m85]

Having mated fruit-flies and getting them to evolve I can clearly say "Yes, a mortal can recreate evolution".

All you're doing is tossing God into a completely naturalistic setting, hoping that people don't mind adding nonsense to science.

Yeah.... right.... Putting legs in place of atenna and wings is evolution. Post something meaningful like when you put gills or poison barbs in its ass. Evolution cannot explain how new systems appear like gills or lungs. What you are essentially doing is begging those flies to please look slightly different so I can say you have evolved or I will inbreed you so much you'll look like a retarded monkey-fish because you already have the genes that make you look like one. I only say that God created evolution because alone evolution does not make sense; it cannot create the diverse systems that are common out of thin air. Its like saying gills directly evolved to lungs and anything in between that jump was non-beneficial so the organism dies and there is no change.

Obviously someone has no knowledge of what evolution really is. Yes, we can and have explained gills and lungs by observing the fish-mudskipper and other organisms that actually developed both organs.

Flies that look slightly different have evolved. Take a wolf, for example. Capture it and hold it in a cage with a female and get them to mate. Take the tamest of the pups and mate them, continue onward and you will have a wolf with ears that are floppier since it no longer relies on sound to get food. Take those pups and continue mating and you will produce a dog as time goes on. Slight changes, overtime, become huge changes.

No, gills did not evolved directly to lungs. Slow gradual changes produced the lung as we have.