alright! I'm just typing train of though stuff, not saying I'm right like 
I think maybe in the past some of the best stuff was created to be like God? or in reverence to a God. To achieve greatness. It's not like that now, but you can't deny that Religion also has had a positive effect on humans. I'm being Devils advocate here btw.
Scientific discovery was held back for centuries by religious dogma, Galileo was in all sorts of trouble was he not? For pointing out that the powerful religious folk had got a whole load of their facts wrong. Where might we be now if the money spent on art back in medieval times was spent on social and scientific development?
And Unicorns - I mean I have no proof of those but I can make up some outlandish stories riddled with innacuracies if it helps?
Unicorns exist! They're fat and grey, and more commonly known as rhinos.
I have never ever met an intelligent AND educated believer.
I have. Guy at work is one of the most intelligent men I've ever met, knows loads about all aspects of science, is currently learning Russian for fun. He's a Christian. I had a lengthy debate about it, it boils down to compartmentalising.
Don't 90% of Earths population have some sort of religious belief?
Do they? Stats please.
Scientific discovery was held back for centuries by religious dogma
Yeah, look how scientifically advanced those places without the constraints of such religions became.
I dunno the stats Cougar it's just a bit of dialogue I remember from that film "Contact" 😆
Never mind, saved you the bother.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations
Seems it's not far off.
Adherents Percentage of world population
----------------------------------------------
World pop. 6.9 billion
Christianity 2,331,509,000 34%
Islam 1,619,314,000 23%
No religion 1,100,000,000 16%
Hinduism 1,083,800,358 15%
Buddhism 690,847,214 10%
Total 6.8 billion 93%Wow.
[img] 
[/img]
what about all the other cultures that believe in a higher being or something "other". It's the same thing right? It's a belief system. just doesn't have a label? To me, that evidence suggest it's a pretty important part of being Human. Mindless Creationists can go suck a F&*^ though lol.
Peer reviewed double blind tested court admissible evidence?
Not the old 29er vs 26 debate again?
Yeah, look how scientifically advanced those places without the constraints of such religions became.
Well all I'm saying is that Galileo and others were persecuted by the religious powers because they challenged the status quo with reality. It is because the constraints of religion relaxed that scientific development was able to flourish.
That's enough for me for tonight, will this still be going tomorrow? Kind of hope not 🙂
Scientific discovery was held back for centuries by religious dogma, Galileo was in all sorts of trouble was he not?
www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html
Might just be chrisitianity marvin. Islam did pretty well with it.
Cougar, does Sikhism add much to that? Last of the big 5
Where might we be now if the money spent on art back in medieval times was spent on social and scientific development?
Well, I live at sea level. So at a guess 5 meters underwater.
So some scientists believe in God. Good for them. What's that got to do with anything, it's just more people who believe something for no discernible reason other than it makes them feel good. I am pretty sure they didn't organise themselves into a powerful group in order to control the lives of the vast majority though.
Well, I live at sea level. So at a guess 5 meters underwater.
But the hoverboard would have been invented and we would be living on Mars so no worries!
And we would finally, definitively know which tyres were best for all Martian conditions, not to mention the optimal wheel size.
Cougar, does Sikhism add much to that? Last of the big 5
Dunno, I posted the source link above. Sikh and ye shall find, hehehe.
😆
An interesting and telling statistic (if you can find it) might be to compare the level of religious belief in first world countries with a largely educated population, against third world countries.
Found it.
[img] 
[/img]
Telling I think.
Not much for Sikhism, it seems. Less than 1%.
The world maps are really interesting. For instance,
Percentage of people who are / aren't religious, by country (darker = more irreligious):
[img] 
[/img]
EDIT - simultaneous posts.
Note: Will people stop using Wikipedia as a reference. It's shite. They can even spell 'paedia'!
Scientific discovery was held back for centuries by religious dogma
Held back by the Catholic church, you mean.
Did all catholics think the same way? You have no idea.
This is the same old crap. People thinking they are being oh so clever when in fact they are being simple and are too simple to realise how simple they are being.
G'night.
Did all catholics think the same way? You have no idea.
They don't have to, only those in charge matter.
Will people stop using Wikipedia as a reference. It's shite.
... in your opinion.
The 'importance of religion' map they have is based on Gallup data, same as yours.
molgrips you may be right. Only a few of us realize how simple we really are.
... in your opinion.
And a great many others. There are so many glaring errors, some deliberate, some through ignorance.
T'was a general comment, not related to your map.
Is this the longest troll thread ever on stw?
Only a few of us realize how simple we really are.
One only has to look at the wonders found it nature, to see not only how simple we are, but in many ways, how backward.
Held back by the Catholic church, you mean.Did all catholics think the same way? You have no idea.
well there is a big book that tells them what to think, a leader on earth who tells them what to think [ infallibly of course] an organised religion that tells them what to think and a priest who tells them what to think just in case they forget.
This is the same old crap. People thinking they are being oh so clever when in fact they are being simple and are too simple to realise how simple they are being.
I dont get your point nor your strop tbh.
Religion held back science because every time it disagreed with the bible they objected and they had great power
Its not really that debatable tbh.
And a great many others.
As this thread ably proves, a lot of people believing something doesn't make it fact.
There are so many glaring errors, some deliberate, some through ignorance.
So some people say. Never seems to be demonstrable though.
Those maps are interesting in the way that China sticks out as either not surveyed or not religious. I'm thinking not religious= not surveyed!
Those maps are interesting in the way that China sticks out as either not surveyed or not religious. I'm thinking not religious= not surveyed!
... is the correct answer.
Just for Tucker,
[img] 
[/img]
Never seems to be demonstrable though.
You jest surely? I see articles in the news almost weekly where some dozy **** here has copied off Wiki only to find (to their mortal embarrassment) that the information was nonsense.
You should start a new thread on this one, but good luck with that.
Edit: 'Here' meaning UK, not STW.
And a great many others. There are so many glaring errors, some deliberate, some through ignorance.
Probably true of a great many reference works, which have been written by individuals with a specific point of view. At least Wiki is open to review by anyone in the world with computer access. Once a reference book is published, it's accepted as gospel (ha), until someone gets around to doing a critique, by which time the contents may well have been accepted as definitive. Many history books are like that, it's the winners who write them, as a rule. I tend to be somewhat suspicious of political comment in Wiki, especially American, science, tech, and other stuff I accept as being essentially factual.
Eight 'undred!
Sorry, couldn't leave it alone.
Ofqual's (the regulator of qualifications, examinations and assessments in England) advice to English school children says 'Wikipedia can be an excellent starting point for research. However, unlike traditional encyclopaedias anyone can add information on any topic, even you! It may not necessarily be authoritative or accurate. In some cases information may be completely untrue.'
[s]Wikipedia[/s]the internet can be an excellent starting point for research. However, unlike traditional [s]encyclopaedia[/s] books anyone can add information on any topic, even you! It may not necessarily be authoritative or accurate. In some cases information may be completely untrue
[FTFY
FWIW I find it to be pretty good on factual stuff and terrible [ but obvious] on politics opinion pieces
In seriousness, next time you find something, show me?
[s]Wikipediathe internet can be an excellent starting point for research. However, unlike traditional encyclopaedia[/s] books [s]anyone can add information on any topic, even you! It[/s] may not necessarily be authoritative or accurate. In some cases information may be completely untrue
FTFFY.
Any single source can be wrong. It's worth cross-referencing for anything important. For the purposes of discussions on a MTB forum though, it's close enough.
Tucker stay up all night rewriting Wiki pages ...I dare you 😉
Steady there as you are dangerously close to get us back on topic there as we can now discuss whether the biblical account is true or not
A famous example: "Cheryl Tweedy is married to the footballer Ashley Cole. This is clearly a marriage of convenience, as Cheryl is a racist and Ashley is a homosexual". Or, the birth and death of Titian...
Still, it remains the definitive source for information on the Upper Peninsular War.
this is another common misconception. The pope is not generallymconsidered to be infallible. Only when he makes certainkinds of pronouncements, dunno what the term is, but popes do this very very rarely.infallibly of course
Homewrok: find out the last time a pope made such a statement
Those maps are great. Here's the info people. apart from the 1.3 billion over there, we got a blank. If there's no info for China I guess you can't extrapolate any data for a genuine percentage of the Earths population re Religious belief then?
Just a thought I had overnight.
Without doubt Mankind’s greatest attribute is its almost limitless imagination. That very same imagination is also its biggest flaw: Aliens, ghosts, gods, visions, hearings voices (as in schizophrenia amongst other mental illnesses), etc.
Couple that with mankind’s well known and demonstrable fallibility (try the ‘selective attention test’. Read up about the law students who were in a bar for a stage robbery, most of whom then identified completely the wrong ‘suspect’ afterwards. Look into crime witness reports, even where one or more people agree, where it transpires that the witnesses were completely wrong and not even remotely close to the truth) and it’s a recipe for all sort of utter nonsense.
Tucker stay up all night rewriting Wiki pages ...I dare you
I would accept but the CIA change pages (along with many other organisations that deal with propaganda). Quite often anything disparaging (but 100% true) about certain companies or individuals get changed.
And at the end of the day it's a US website. And the US is out of kilter with the rest of the world on a great many things. And I'll give an example.
Measurements (in developed countries).
Imperial (Commonwealth: remnants of the British Empire )
Metric (rest of the world, indeed most of the world)
US system (Imperial, but with different values for many units. Um, just the US)
And then there's the language barrier.
If I has a pound for every time someone had quoted wiki to back-up their poor English I'd be a wealthy man indeed.
I liken quoting wiki to someone saying 'My mate Dilbert down the pub said...'
