In America, atheists are still in the closet

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Science never claimed the world was flat, or that the stars rotated around us. That was all theology. Science wasn't invented until the late 1800's.
Science is a self correcting knowledge generating human undertaking. Clearly, not all scientists believed the abestos thing - although that's from waaaaaaaaaaay before my time.
And the cigarette thing, well, it was science that came out with the answers to what happens when you smoke. It was industry that produced fake science to claim cigarettes weren't harmful - did anyone ever seriously claim it was healthy???

This post clearly displays a misunderstanding of learning very much at the core of your thinking. Indeed, it was scientific thought thinking the world was flat, not theology. When the first human used a club to kill another human, it was scientific thinking that allowed the epiphany. The outrageous claim that science wasn't invented until the late 19th century shows you don't understand the most elementary concepts of thought and human development. Applied knowledge based on observed facts has been around since the first man started planting the first crops, etc. E.g., Semmelweiss was using observation and scientific thought in the 1700s to introduce the concept of germs. The incredible arrogance of such thinking is what keeps you ruled by the Peter Principle.

Bringmedinner wrote:

<quoted text>
This post clearly displays a misunderstanding of learning very much at the core of your thinking. Indeed, it was scientific thought thinking the world was flat, not theology. When the first human used a club to kill another human, it was scientific thinking that allowed the epiphany. The outrageous claim that science wasn't invented until the late 19th century shows you don't understand the most elementary concepts of thought and human development. Applied knowledge based on observed facts has been around since the first man started planting the first crops, etc. E.g., Semmelweiss was using observation and scientific thought in the 1700s to introduce the concept of germs. The incredible arrogance of such thinking is what keeps you ruled by the Peter Principle.

While it was inaccurate to state it the way they had, the scientific method that has allowed for any real advance in science did not exist until the early 1800s, the people who developed it admit as much, the Catholics, and why they also say that there is no science in religious texts. However, the flat Earth was a religious concept, the entire assertion was rooted in religion, not science. Science takes a lot more effort than looking around and saying "this is what I see so that's what is." Science was used to determine the world was round, and this discovery was not even unveiled until much later because of fear of religious persecution, since anyone who even said it was got hanged by the religious leaders at the time. The first people who did discover this fact had actually entered their Dark Ages much sooner than the second time it was observed, but until the scientific method was established it was not proven. The first people to discover this fact were the Middle Easterners, Egypt to be precise. The Middle East had a huge scientific lead to Europe at the time, but when they entered the Dark Age scientific advancement froze until much later, leaving them behind until countries like India regained their drive and reentered the scientific fields. India has since made rather great contributions to medical science.

Hidingfromyou wrote:

Your information is correct. We are primates.

Have you heard of the primate of all Ireland? From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland... :

"The Catholic primate of all-Ireland [Cardinal Sean Brady] has said that he will not resign as Church leader despite revelations in the BBC's This World programme. It found Cardinal Sean Brady had names and addresses of those being abused by paedophile priest Brendan Smyth. However, he did not pass on those details to police or parents."

Bringmedinner wrote:

Indeed, it was scientific thought thinking the world was flat, not theology.

Nonsense. The same people that said that the earth is flat also said that the sun goes around the earth, and that both were made by a god. It's all in your bible, and it's all prescientific thought.

EBeasley wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry you are so angry and bitter. You don't know if HTS already has a publisher by the way, or is already an established writer. All you are doing is assuming which is often faulty. I see we will never agree on anything here. There are some people who post here who are athiests who are at least polite and not so hostile as you are. You must have had a hard life so far and I'm sorry for that for you. I hope you are happier in the future. You must have been through a lot to be so angry. I never deliberately meant to make you upset. I thought this was a forum to discuss these things. I might be wrong.

I am not angry or bitter, it’s all in you funnymentalist and closed mind. I am making statement of fact, just because those facts upset your/HTS’s sensibilities is not my problem. The only way you/he will be published is by fraud, i.e. more lying or by going to a publishing house in maybe china or saudi arabia where such stringent ethical mores are not applied or you could of course approach one of the myriad christian apologist websites that don’t seem bothered about ethics or lies just so long as theft can spread their outmoded hatred. If you don’t like that then tough.

I agree with plenty of people on here but certainly not the disproven, discredited and deliberately ignorant mumbo jumbo cr/\P that you/hts spout and because it is a discussion site I am entitles to state my opinion in these posts. If you don’t like that then tough.

Listen honeybitch, I am polite to people who are polite to me. Claiming that I am angry, bitter and that I have had a bad life just because I know some publishing law and have studied ethics as is appertains to publishing and that you/HTS don’t know sh|t is not anger, bitterness or resentment, it is simple fact. If you don’t like that then tough.

When someone claims lies as facts and states that they will use of what I say without my permission for their own profit then it is within my rights to point out the flaws in their obnoxious scheme, after all this is a discussion site. If you don’t like that then tough.

Like I said, I am not angry, I just have no tolerance for the deliberately ignorant. And to prove your ignorance you will notice that my original post on this ethics matter was made in response to your/HTS’s rather pathetic and so called parting shot which you changed your alias and picked up, how very christain of you.

KittenKoder wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =urwVVycMp8g

Aha! Gallup is using a different definition of "nonreligious" than Pew or ARIS does. They count "nones," i.e. unaffiliated adults, while Gallup counts people who say that "religion is not an important part of their daily life and that they seldom or never attend religious services." Yet the latter probably contains a subset who still believe in the faith of their parents and will return to it later in life, perhaps while rearing their own kids.

Here's the original Gallup article for those who are curious (always best to go back to original statistical sources when you can, right?):

http://www.gallup.com/poll/153479/mississippi...

NightSerf wrote:

<quoted text>
Aha! Gallup is using a different definition of "nonreligious" than Pew or ARIS does. They count "nones," i.e. unaffiliated adults, while Gallup counts people who say that "religion is not an important part of their daily life and that they seldom or never attend religious services." Yet the latter probably contains a subset who still believe in the faith of their parents and will return to it later in life, perhaps while rearing their own kids.
Here's the original Gallup article for those who are curious (always best to go back to original statistical sources when you can, right?):
http://www.gallup.com/poll/153479/mississippi...

I never said it was fact or scientific. ;) Just fun to say.

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Have you heard of the primate of all Ireland? From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland... :
"The Catholic primate of all-Ireland [Cardinal Sean Brady] has said that he will not resign as Church leader despite revelations in the BBC's This World programme. It found Cardinal Sean Brady had names and addresses of those being abused by paedophile priest Brendan Smyth. However, he did not pass on those details to police or parents."

Last week there was a documentary on UK TV about it. I didn’t watch most of it but the bit I did watch indicated that there are now people in large numbers leaving the church, not because of delusion with their faith but because they are delusioned with their leaders.

ChristineM wrote:

<quoted text>
Last week there was a documentary on UK TV about it. I didn’t watch most of it but the bit I did watch indicated that there are now people in large numbers leaving the church, not because of delusion with their faith but because they are delusioned with their leaders.

The UK has already gone to Hell.
America is following at a rapid pace with their Marxist president.
With another four years of Obama, America will be finished.

ChristineM wrote:

<quoted text>
Last week there was a documentary on UK TV about it. I didn’t watch most of it but the bit I did watch indicated that there are now people in large numbers leaving the church, not because of delusion with their faith but because they are delusioned with their leaders.

Good to know!

This illustrates nicely how the media is killing organized religion - by showing it to the world. Without satellite telecommunications and the Internet, this story might not have gotten coverage outside of the UK press. I learned about it from a friend in the UK on another Topix thread, Khatru, who probably saw it on BBC like you did http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

But, he posted it on Topix, I saw it along with many others from outside the UK, and now you and I are discussing it here, and it becomes ammunition against organized religion in a variety of new venues as well it should be - all courtesy of modern science and communications technology, which has been a major setback for religion, beginning with Gutenberg. Like many fungi, religion flourishes best in the dark.

Nobody you know wrote:

<quoted text>
The UK has already gone to Hell.
America is following at a rapid pace with their Marxist president.
With another four years of Obama, America will be finished.

Odd, the UK has made great strides toward equal rights, not quite caught up to the US but moving forward faster. They are also producing more scientific advances than the US, which all or Europe passes the US now really and is just behind Japan who is behind China.

Now to your other failed assertion, if anything Obama is actually a Republican, his policies are mostly conservative and fit within the Republican politician voting records. You are correct that four more years of him will slow us more, but not for the reasons you seem to believe, which can only be found asserted by conspiracy nuts at this point in time. So far Obama has done little more than extend Republican policies, with a few Democrat aligned policies and almost no liberal ones at all.

If you are going to make political assertions, do your homework first.

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Odd, the UK has made great strides toward equal rights, not quite caught up to the US but moving forward faster. They are also producing more scientific advances than the US, which all or Europe passes the US now really and is just behind Japan who is behind China.
Now to your other failed assertion, if anything Obama is actually a Republican, his policies are mostly conservative and fit within the Republican politician voting records. You are correct that four more years of him will slow us more, but not for the reasons you seem to believe, which can only be found asserted by conspiracy nuts at this point in time. So far Obama has done little more than extend Republican policies, with a few Democrat aligned policies and almost no liberal ones at all.
If you are going to make political assertions, do your homework first.

Child, do not lecture to me. I am 67 years old.
The UK is going into HELL with their liberal immigration of Muzies.
Obama is a Communist. Your claim that he is Republican tells me that you are a complete idiot.

Nobody you know wrote:

<quoted text>
The UK has already gone to Hell.
America is following at a rapid pace with their Marxist president.
With another four years of Obama, America will be finished.

And? Have you got anything constructive to say rather than just ranting personal hatreds?

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Good to know!
This illustrates nicely how the media is killing organized religion - by showing it to the world. Without satellite telecommunications and the Internet, this story might not have gotten coverage outside of the UK press. I learned about it from a friend in the UK on another Topix thread, Khatru, who probably saw it on BBC like you did http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
But, he posted it on Topix, I saw it along with many others from outside the UK, and now you and I are discussing it here, and it becomes ammunition against organized religion in a variety of new venues as well it should be - all courtesy of modern science and communications technology, which has been a major setback for religion, beginning with Gutenberg. Like many fungi, religion flourishes best in the dark.

Cheers, just looked at Khatru’s post, yes that was the program.
Another nail in their coffin..

Nobody you know wrote:

<quoted text>
Child, do not lecture to me. I am 67 years old.
The UK is going into HELL with their liberal immigration of Muzies.
Obama is a Communist. Your claim that he is Republican tells me that you are a complete idiot.

Child? Age has little to do with intelligence, and could only be of import if your education level was beyond high school, even then, you'd have to have been through school prior to last year at the college level of politics and anthropology to match my understanding of both.

The UK "hell" of which you speak is actually a bunch of ramblings from their right wing political party known as the English Defense League, not based on reality at all. In reality they have no problems at all from the Muslims moving there and the only violence that has happened around them has been from anti-Muslim protesters. Try talking to people who live there that are not completely lost in conspiracy nuttery once in a while.

First you made the completely irrational "Obama is a Marxist" claim and now you are changing it to "Obama is a Communist" claim. You do realize that these are two very different political systems and that Obama has done nothing to even compare to either. Republican politicians actually tend to lean toward Communist policies more, most of their funding even comes from the strongest and most mob-like labor union. Yet even in light of that, to be truly Communist, note the capital letter, the politician would have to be completely against the US Bill of Rights, of which only the Republican politicians have shown distaste for. To be Marxist you'd have to be completely against corporations, which only the Libertarians like me would fit best. Turn off your TV and stop watching FOX news for facts, avoid Alex Jones, and don't even bother with Rush Limbaugh, you may learn something even in your old age.

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Child? Age has little to do with intelligence, and could only be of import if your education level was beyond high school, even then, you'd have to have been through school prior to last year at the college level of politics and anthropology to match my understanding of both.
The UK "hell" of which you speak is actually a bunch of ramblings from their right wing political party known as the English Defense League, not based on reality at all. In reality they have no problems at all from the Muslims moving there and the only violence that has happened around them has been from anti-Muslim protesters. Try talking to people who live there that are not completely lost in conspiracy nuttery once in a while.
First you made the completely irrational "Obama is a Marxist" claim and now you are changing it to "Obama is a Communist" claim. You do realize that these are two very different political systems and that Obama has done nothing to even compare to either. Republican politicians actually tend to lean toward Communist policies more, most of their funding even comes from the strongest and most mob-like labor union. Yet even in light of that, to be truly Communist, note the capital letter, the politician would have to be completely against the US Bill of Rights, of which only the Republican politicians have shown distaste for. To be Marxist you'd have to be completely against corporations, which only the Libertarians like me would fit best. Turn off your TV and stop watching FOX news for facts, avoid Alex Jones, and don't even bother with Rush Limbaugh, you may learn something even in your old age.

Living in the UK I can verify what you say about the UK ‘hell’. I’d not really taken any notice of the EDL (such small time) as a trouble maker and thought (fed by the media hype) that that most racial troubles were down to the agitation of Nick Griffins BNP hate party (or perhaps the NF). Perhaps they are linked in some way, it is my belief that the BNP was formed to give a little respectability(sic) to the discredited NF.

All are right wing past the point of fascism and very insular in their policies and aims, the EDL focussing on hatred of Moslims and the BNP focussing on hatred of just about anyone they don’t like and the NF just don’t count anymore.

All are very much in the vast minority (thank goodness)

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Technically inaccurate. Most of the companies actually did not make any claim on the health impact at all, they simply stated that they did not have such data at the time, which was correct. A few unscrupulous ones did make the claim but no one else really cared anyway. Later the medical labs had gathered enough evidence, it was one of those things that until it was abundant enough it was an unknown, to prove it the companies that were scrupulous from the start put the warning labels on before the law was even considered. The irony is that these labs finding the health risks were funded by these companies who willingly placed the labels on, a customer dying too quickly is profit lost and was just a wise business decision as well as the right thing to do. The second hand smoke studies though are based on circumstantial evidence, sorry to say. Those specific studies were just based on statistics gathered by the CDC and there is no solid correlation because the increased occurrence of lung cancer in patients exposed to second hand smoke correlates with several air environmental offenders of a much higher concentration, primarily the explosion in the number of fossil fuel burning cars and the sedentary lifestyle. At best the second hand ones are inconclusive, however they should be used to help combat the primary offender of air pollution, the automobile. But that's harder to convince people to cut back on.

Ok - thanks! Where I live, I'd say the biggest contributor to air pollution is garbage incineration.

Bringmedinner wrote:

<quoted text>
This post clearly displays a misunderstanding of learning very much at the core of your thinking.

You are uneducated and not super bright.

Indeed, it was scientific thought thinking the world was flat, not theology.

Impossible. Science wasn't invented until the late 1800's. Stop lying.

When the first human used a club to kill another human, it was scientific thinking that allowed the epiphany.

Erroneous use of the word "science" demonstrating a political motive, or gross ignorance.

The outrageous claim that science wasn't invented until the late 19th century shows you don't understand the most elementary concepts of thought and human development.

Clearly you don't know your history very well or understand what science is.

Applied knowledge based on observed facts has been around since the first man started planting the first crops, etc.

See? That's not science. That's the "applied knowledge based on observed facts." All peoples do this and have done this as long as humans have been around.

It's not science. That's just deductive reasoning and action based on that. Another, simpler way of calling that is "trial and error" learning.

E.g., Semmelweiss was using observation and scientific thought in the 1700s to introduce the concept of germs.

He was not using the scientific method nor publishing in peer reviewed journals. He was not practicing science, but was helping to invent it.

Also, he did not live in the 1700s. He lived in the 1800's - died in 1865. You aren't very good at lying. I suggest stopping.

The incredible arrogance of such thinking is what keeps you ruled by the Peter Principle.

Yes, you are an idiot. Certified.

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
While it was inaccurate to state it the way they had, the scientific method that has allowed for any real advance in science did not exist until the early 1800s, the people who developed it admit as much, the Catholics, and why they also say that there is no science in religious texts. However, the flat Earth was a religious concept, the entire assertion was rooted in religion, not science. Science takes a lot more effort than looking around and saying "this is what I see so that's what is." Science was used to determine the world was round, and this discovery was not even unveiled until much later because of fear of religious persecution, since anyone who even said it was got hanged by the religious leaders at the time. The first people who did discover this fact had actually entered their Dark Ages much sooner than the second time it was observed, but until the scientific method was established it was not proven. The first people to discover this fact were the Middle Easterners, Egypt to be precise. The Middle East had a huge scientific lead to Europe at the time, but when they entered the Dark Age scientific advancement froze until much later, leaving them behind until countries like India regained their drive and reentered the scientific fields. India has since made rather great contributions to medical science.

The man Bringmemydinner used as an example lived from 1818-1865. Not only was Bring wildly and anachronistically applying our understanding of knowledge gathering to past peoples, he was getting his facts wrong.

Thank you for your balanced contribution.

More accurately, those "ways of knowledge production" were not science. They had different ideas guiding their investigations and different ways of understanding their findings. Science - as we know it - has very specific methodologies and ways of conducting its knowledge gathering.

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Have you heard of the primate of all Ireland? From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland... :
"The Catholic primate of all-Ireland [Cardinal Sean Brady] has said that he will not resign as Church leader despite revelations in the BBC's This World programme. It found Cardinal Sean Brady had names and addresses of those being abused by paedophile priest Brendan Smyth. However, he did not pass on those details to police or parents."

hahahaha! Yes, I find it incredibly ironic that they call themselves Primates.