The Geneticist who won the Nobel Prize for mapping human genome is a former atheist who doesn't have a problem reconciling belief in god with Darwin's theory of evolution.
https://youtu.be/pINptKQYviQ

Except that science and faith in god ARE mutually exclusive.

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Except that science and faith in god ARE mutually
> exclusive.

Most scientists (51%) believe in god or a universal spirit/higher power vs. 95% of the general public.

https://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/

Nope . Over 15% of U.S. population are Atheists. You lie yet again !

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nope . Over 15% of U.S. population are Atheists.
> You lie yet again !

Bullshit. You lie.
Read the link I posted. It says 4%.
Liar.

"The Pew Research Center released its 10th annual report on Global Restrictions on Religion as part of the Pew-Templeton Global Religious Futures project, funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts and the John Templeton Foundation" .. Yep, Pew is linked with Templeton and totally religion biased. Your stats are fraudulent.

Also, the poll cited is from 2009. Things MIGHT have changed in 11 years.

How many of us would assert that we are not the same people we were in 2009?

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dave the Atheist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Nope . Over 15% of U.S. population are
> Atheists.
> > You lie yet again !
>
> Bullshit. You lie.
> Read the link I posted. It says 4%.
> Liar.
HEY LET'S KNOCK OFF THE NAME CALLING!!
TO DISAGREE IS ONE THING BUT NAME CALLING DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF THE FORUM

Um, stop yelling.

I didn't see name calling.

Templeton pays for anything that supports god, pretending it is research.
None of the scientists have proven anything to do with gods. What they believe is hopefully compartmentalized so it doesn't impact their day jobs.

Once you accept a supernatural layer to the universe you can't know anything. Anything can be explained with an appeal to the supernatural. You can't know evidence is real or fabricated. There is no differentiation possible.

The positions can't be harmonized.

The criteria to differentiate supernatural influence from scientific observations are?

A large part of the problem is the word, "god", which Collins doesn't bother defining. But I have heard him speak about his belief in Christianity, so it's safe to assume when he uses the word, "god" he means the Judeo Christian, white male God, aka Santa for adults.
I disagree with him.
I do think science has something to say about the existence of god.
Einstein had plenty to say about god.
So did Hawking.
So did Sagan.
So does Kaku.

> I do think science has something
> to say about the existence of god.
> Einstein had plenty to say about god.
> So did Hawking.
> So did Sagan.
> So does Kaku

Unless you believed exactly as one of them, why would their beliefs mean jack-crap to you?

Do you believe that religious scientists change their beliefs when science tells them their beliefs are in error?

What about BYU instructors who know that some STEM classes are at odds with mormonism, got any advice for them?

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > I do think science has something
> > to say about the existence of god.
> > Einstein had plenty to say about god.
> > So did Hawking.
> > So did Sagan.
> > So does Kaku
>
> Unless you believed exactly as one of them, why
> would their beliefs mean jack-crap to you?

I don't agree with any one of them 100%, but I do agree 100% with what they all agree upon, and what they all reject.

> Do you believe that religious scientists change
> their beliefs when science tells them their
> beliefs are in error?

Yes. Einstein and Hawking changed their theories 180degrees, based upon scientific evidence and observations.

> What about BYU instructors who know that some STEM
> classes are at odds with mormonism, got any advice
> for them?

Reconcile your beliefs with reality. Like the Dalai Lama said,"If some scientific discovery is at odds with my beliefs, I need to change my beliefs, even if it was the Buddha himself who said it."

I wonder what near future headline is going to spur your next fervent belief?


         Here's my contribution to guessing a future topic:


Dark Confetti

So did Steve Hawking.
So did Carl "Cosmos" Sagan.
So does a haiku.

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A large part of the problem is the word, "god",
> which Collins doesn't bother defining.
...

> I do think science has something to say about the
> existence of god.

So, to be a bit more precise, you think science has something to say about the existence of a particular version of "God." And you would be correct. Climbing Mount Olympus would have something to say about the existence of a particular version of the existence of Greco-Roman deities as well, I bet.

However, when "God" remains a bit less defined, the possibility also remains that some folks might have conceived a version of deity not in conflict with science. A lot of folks have tried, and many stripes of theist also reject the "white sky-daddy" version found among some shallower, more paternalistic theologies. There are complexities on every side, and more variety among the ideas of people of faith than Bill Maher finds convenient.

Evolution brought man to a point where he will believe anything at all--the weirder the better. This is the only intersection of faith and Darwinism.

I like what scientists say when they are a science-ing.

When they are religioning they don't know sh!t and their OPINIONS in that regard count the same as anyone elses. If they talk religion then they are putting themselves in the same category as Celebs who believe their stardom means their opinions are more valid.


When it comes to religion its all Prattle. Including all your super star scientists who just wanna believe.

> When they are religioning they don't know sh!t and
> their OPINIONS in that regard count the same as
> anyone elses. If they talk religion then they are
> putting themselves in the same category as Celebs
> who believe their stardom means their opinions are
> more valid.

Exactly. If you read Einstein's political writings, as I have, you realize that the man's genius was limited to his scientific endeavors. His political musings are as naive as those of a sixth-grader.

The same is true of his, and the other scientists', views on religion. Those who study Goddamn particles have no advantage when it comes to God.

Why don't you ask ME? Doesn't MY opinion count for anything?

You are *so* 2000 years ago.

I'm willing to shave.

LOL LW

Ha! Hahahaha

Sometimes, you just know the cat is dead. The box is empty, and there are no spooks.

Yes, you can have science and also faith in God. That doesn't make God exist.

Hah!

Does it make you feel better if you can point to your scientist du jour and say, "See? See? Samtysonkakstein sez [whatever]."? You don't need a scientist's permission to believe or not believe in god. Be your own person.

Religion requires faith. Faith allows for mysteries. It encourages accepting things that cannot be explained, and that's fine. If you want to believe, believe. You don't need someone's imprimatur if you want to have faith in the great protractor.

You're making yourself crazy trying to square a circle.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2020 04:50PM by Beth.

It makes me feel good to prove that I'm being gaslit by the vast majority of people on this forum, including you, who've suggested I'm either stupid or crazy for believing what most scientists believe, in god or a universal spirit/higher power.

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It makes me feel good to prove that I'm being
> gaslit by the vast majority of people on this
> forum, including you, who've suggested I'm either
> stupid or crazy for believing what most scientists
> believe, in god or a universal spirit/higher
> power.


I don't think people care what you believe. I think people find your monomaniacal need to constantly preach your belief to us to be problematic.

You don't even understand the true meaning of "gaslighting." Perhaps watch the movie?

You have NOT proven that you are being gas lit. Geez.

People taking you to task and arguing against your opinions is not gas lighting.

I don't care what you believe.

If you want to present an argument for your beliefs, you wold be better served than with testimony which i would think we all learned is not reliable from our time in mormonism.

I believe your children are our future.
Teach them well and let them lead the way.

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It makes me feel good to prove that I'm being
> gaslit by the vast majority of people on this
> forum, including you, who've suggested I'm either
> stupid or crazy for believing what most scientists
> believe, in god or a universal spirit/higher
> power.

You think that's why posters are irritated with you?

HAHAHA!

S.Cat, you're not being gaslit because of your beliefs; posters are annoyed because you keep bringing it up, mentioning your celebrity crushes' opinions, and arguing about it.

Lighten up, reduce the swollen head, or at least pretend you have an opinion that doesn't need celebrity endorsement.

Turn it up a little more and then light the match.

I watched the video and he has a good perspective. "atheists use science to bash with a big club, everyone." Absolutely, need I say more? And "scientists are troubled that other approaches can be made to discover truth about nature." I agree with this quote as well which to me confirms my view about these kinds of people which I'll explain more below.

See the trouble is that there are too many Academians (with scientific credentials some printed off at diploma mills) who are using Science to push an economic agenda that's harmful on the rest of us. An example that springs to mind is global warming. The Academians are telling us that we have to cut carbon emmisions otherwise the planet is doomed, but when we look at the real science it just isn't the case, first off we don't have thermometers all over the Earth to record the temperature changes. Especially in the middle of the Ocean. So we really have no idea if the Earth is even warming at all?

But anyway, I like the video, I agree, and Keep Posting Shrodingerscat! :)

I would feel great exasperation at your diminution of climate science if it were not for the fact that until a week or two ago you were saying the same thing about COVID. Your record, and your lack of facility with basic science, speaks for itself.

We do have an idea that the glaciers are melting, the arctic ocean is open in summer, the polar bears are dying, and Greenland is losing iceinto the ocean. Not any idea that the air and water are warming? Tut tut.