The vast majority of scientists (99.99999%) recognize the truth of evolution and the falsehood of religion. When you talk to a scientist about religion, you often get a response which deserpately tries to avoid condescending language while talking to a person of substantially lesser intelligence. Its not easy.
I dont advocate any limitation on the freedoms of religious people (with the exception of maybe Muslims) but If humanity is to move forward, I think its important for the scientific community to finally grow a pair and declare religion a position of the dumb.
2007-06-26 02:43:25 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They won't get funds for research if they spoke out all the truth.
Remember, churches are tax-free, not scientists.
*oops*
2007-06-26 02:45:40 · answer #1 · answered by X Theist 5 · 2⤊ 6⤋
It would be incorrect. First of all I would like to see some reliable statistics for your claim. Where did you get your figure from? And if scientists declared religion for the "dumb" then Isaac Newton and many other scientists would have to be in the "dumb" category as well. I should also note that it would display a shocking amount of ignorance about brain function and psychology to dismiss all of it so readily. Both Julian Jaynes and Carl Jung have varying explanations for the religious impulse which do not include "ignorance" and "dumbness".
Next, believing in evolution does not mean that you cannot be a Christian, nor does disbelieving automatically make you a scientist.
If you really want to accumulate any sort of "proof" for your bigoted claims, I suggest you go about it scientifically by comparing the achievements of non-theists with theists and with comparing I.Q. scores. So far all you have is opinion . . . if this is the way your idea of a scientist goes about doing things, you need to go back to school and learn what an experiment is.
And what "prejudice" means.
2007-06-26 02:52:36 · answer #2 · answered by Runa 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You don't seem to understand the nature of science nor do you seem to understand religion.
1) Evolution is a theory.
2) Even if true, the Evolution theory is not incompable with religion and cannot disprove God.
3) Concluding that everybody who disagrees with a prevailing scientic theory is ignorant is definitely NOT a scientic conclusion. Einstein blew apart some of the prevailing scientific (note: not religious) theories of his day, and no one would argue that he is ignorant for that.
As more evidence comes in a better theory than Macro-evolution may come into being - maybe even a theory that supports the notion of a God or God-like figure. Scientific theories change as new evidence emerges.
Concluding that a theory is absolute fact is not a scientific conclusion.
btw... "98% of all satistics are made up... on the spot."
2007-06-26 02:54:10 · answer #3 · answered by Wondering 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Religious people are wrong about their religious beliefs.
All of us are wrong about something.
In light of those facts, there's nothing particularly "ignorant" about being religious.
Scientists do not make a habit of declaring groups of people "ignorant". That's got nothing to do with science, as a whole. In addition, while you're right that the vast majority of scientists recognize that evolution is true, a significant percentage of scientists are nonetheless religious. Sure, it's a minority (depending on which science you're talking about), but it's not something like .000001%, as you suggest.
Besides, science is not as politically powerful as religion. If science were to stand up to religion, science would be the loser. Just look at the stem cell research thing.
2007-06-26 02:46:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Too bad somebody forgot to tell these scientist that belief in "God" was ignorant.
Albert Einstein, physicist, scientific genius
Issac Newton, physicist, mathematican, one of the greatesr scientist of all time
Willian Herchel, atronomer
Galileo Galilei, astronomer
Louis Agassiz, naturalist, geologist
Geroge-Louis Leclerc de Buffon, naturalist
Nicholas Butler, educator
George Washington Carver, chemist
Alfred Whitney Griswood, educator, historian
Stephen Hawking, physicist
Maria Mitchell, astronomer
Johannes Kepler, astronomer
Loius Agassiz, geologist
Blaise Pascal, mathematician
Rene Descartes, mathematician, philosopher
Robert Boyle, chemist
Michael Faraday, father of electricity
Gregor Mendel, founder of genetics
William Thomson Kelvin, physicist
Max Planck, inventor of quantum mechanics
Charles Darwin, naturalist
Loius Pasteur, microboilogist
Antoine Laurent Lavoisier, chemist
Aristotle, philosophy
Euclid, mathematician
Nicolaus Copernicus, asrtonomy, catholic
priest
James Watt, steam engine inventor
James Clerk Maxwell, physicist, electromagnism
Wright brothers, aviation
James Dalton, chemist, physicist
Thomas Edison, inventor
Antony van Leeuwenhhoek, invented microscope
Plato, philosophy
Alexander Graham Bell, invented telephone
Jospeh Lister, used Bible to discover modern antiseptics
Edward Jenner, vaccination for samllpox
Wilhelm Roentgen, x-rays
Enrico Fermi, father of the atom bomb
Gregory Pinuc, endocrinologist, invent birth control pill
Henry Ford, inventor
Francis Bacon, philosopher, established modern scientific method
Robert Jastrow, founder of NASA
I have spend enough time working in the physics and biology sections of several universities to know that 99.99999% of all scientist do NOT recognize the falsehood of religion. They tend to average about the same as the general population in their religious beliefs.
2007-06-26 02:48:21 · answer #5 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Making up statistics is what most of the "Scientist" supporters seem to do...
Not making them up? how about yours.. 99.99999%.. how many scientists did YOU poll to get that figure?
I would guess that greater than 1% of scientists are CHRISTIAN and believe in Creation...
What you state is that 1 scientist in 10 million does not recognize evolution... are there 10 million scientists in the world?.. and if there are.. not even ONE of them denounces evolution? hmm... then why do they seem to argue about it all the time amonst themselves?...
Why could animals not have started evolving AFTER they were created?.. and after man messed with genetics?
Were you BORN old? no.. you aged after you were born...
Were you born educated?.. no.. you learned after you were born...
I know of more than 2 scientists that believe in Creation.. Myself as one of them (actually I probably know a lot more)...
Giving false statistics does not help the scientific research nor further knowledge.. it only serves to confuse people that do not have the time to think about your lies.
2007-06-26 02:55:12 · answer #6 · answered by ♥Tom♥ 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I believe you are referring to being p a t r o n i s i n g - suppose i could try to put across my arguments in a stimulating intellectual format but i really cant be bothered. How about we try not everything in life is about being intelligent and intellectual. I don't really care if you understand better than me the intricate forces that were at work seconds before the 'big bang' or that I can only understand the simplified version of string theory why try to enlighten the less academic of us we are to stupid to begin with.
I have spent my time doing useless things like raising money for people in Africa so they can better themselves and not have to die so young, trying to understand how I feel about the world, my place in it and the possibility of any deity that might exist. I am happy with what time i give to my brain to doing these things - why can't you be happy for me that it pleases me.
2007-06-26 02:53:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I am a Christian (Catholic) and I accept all science, including evolution. True Christianity has no issues with science, and the idea that 99.9% of scientists are not religious is simply false. 99.9% of scientists may disagree with the fundies that say the earth is 10,000 years old, but that's a different issue. I disagree with them too.
2007-06-26 02:53:54 · answer #8 · answered by Thom 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I actually believe that the book of Genesis somewhat can be parallel with the theory of evolution. There are missing links in the evolution theory, however. It is ok to explore, just do not be so open minded that your brains fall out.
2007-06-26 03:16:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the alternative of atheism isn't faith. this is theism, or the assumption in God. faith is how some human beings pick to particular that concept and worship their view of God. yet faith isn't had to have faith in God and a faith would not could comprise the worshiping of a deity. Take Buddhism, as an occasion. What you're fairly asserting is that theism and atheism are the two incorrect, that's impossible. the two there's a deity, a God, or there is not any longer.
2016-10-03 04:01:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Personally I think its ignorant to think this world and everything in it "evolved" and there is nothing in control of life. Some of the stupidest people on Earth are educated. Plus its not about a religion its about your relationship with God.
2007-06-26 02:51:39 · answer #11 · answered by Tamm 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋