Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are putting it in black/white and this/that terms. its just not true trans.
we lean toward believers of work hard, earn your keep, you are responsible for your actions, and help when you can. They are the base axioms. They are far better than "I believe religion is so dangerous .. rant on, rant no, no more rant on.
That just seems to line up with most people's understanding about how things work. it tends to line up with middle of the road believers.
Over organized religion is on the decline in the states. due to the fact that common sense is not.
She probably won't, since, given that some kind of opinion poll can be taken, it would be irrelevant. People believe what they are told - either by science or religion, and they trust the source: science or religion. Thus you check with the source and find what their evidence is. You don't take a democratic note of whether evolution or Genesis is true. You look at the evidence.
you do worse. You change, shun, minimize science that doesn't support your belief statement of "religion is so dangerous I am justified in denying, changing, and minimizing how the universe seems to work." just like them.
Thanks. This is all interesting input for the general overview. It's always possible to Interpret the evidence to suit. Young people less interested in Church. Is that because they are wising up (as I hope is the case) or because they get more serious (and religious) as they get older?
What I find somnewhat astonishing (as a Brit.) is how often the religious debate turns onto Big Buisiness. It's alien. If you get into a discussion of religion here, you get the usual - decline in the conduct of Young people, but raving about the pharmaceutical companies would be considered irrelevant.
I rather get the impresssion that one side will link this with "science is in the pocket of capitalists, therefore they say what they are paid to say, therefore you can't trust science, therefore Genesis is true". And this is one of the three pillars of religious fundamentalism in the Us - "You Can't trust Science. - it's anti -Bible"
On the other hand, the link between Big Money, Authority and and the religion/political Right seems much more obvious and true. The 'science is paid by big business to lie' is overdrawn surely, and if so, in American big Business is more likely to be chummy with the Authority control of religion than with Liburl atheism: Them gpddam commies and their pesky asking questions and concern for people's rights.
Well, here's one "fake science by an industry, Transponder.
Quote:
Tong conducted a computerized search involving millions of pages of tobacco-industry materials, including memos, letters and scientific reports. The documents are publicly available as part of several major legal settlements in recent years. Of the 5,000 documents ultimately reviewed, she identified 47 closely tied to secondhand smoke and cardiovascular disease issues. Co-author Glantz, a professor of medicine in the cardiology division at UCSF and director of the university's Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, helped analyze the information and develop a detailed picture of tobacco-industry practices.
The documents show how tobacco companies funded epidemiological and biological research that was designed to support claims that secondhand smoke posed little or no harm.
And just plain lying in their advertising is even more prominent
Quote:
14 FALSE ADVERTISING SCANDALS
In advertising, there's a big difference between pushing the truth and making false claims. Is a product really "scientifically proven," and are "results guaranteed"?
Federal decision makers need access to the best available science in order to craft policies that protect our health, safety, and environment.
Unfortunately, censorship of scientists and the manipulation, distortion, and suppression of scientific information have threatened federal science in recent years.
This problem has sparked much debate, but few have identified the key driver of political interference in federal science: the inappropriate influence of companies with a financial stake in the outcome.
A new UCS report, Heads They Win, Tails We Lose, shows how corporations influence the use of science in federal decision making to serve their own interests.
Just saying that anyone trusting corporations to "do the right thing" is an outright fool.
There is definitely corporate funded "research" deliberately biased to a predetermined outcome. But that wouldn't be following the scientific method and peer review.
There is definitely flawed peer review designed to protect tenure and vested interests even outside of corporate funding. But that wouldn't be following the scientific method and peer review.
I don't think anyone is denying that in certain areas there is flawed and even contrived science being done, and that beyond that, the media often confuses association with cause in the interest of a headline, thus misrepresenting even good science. These are all valid concerns that need addressing. But this does not invalidate the scientific method or call all of science into question, anymore than a corrupt televangelist by himself invalidates 100% of religion.
My critique of religion rests not on the quality of the religious practice nor on the quality of science that is or isn't being done. It's based on the fundamental differences in the underlying theory of knowledge between the two (epistemology). No matter how well or poorly religion is practiced or science is performed, the starting point couldn't be more contrasted:
* Religion: Start with a conclusion and look for (and cherry pick) evidence to support it.
* Science: Start with evidence and follow it to a conclusion -- or, lacking sufficient evidence to arrive at a conclusion, then wait until you do.
Religious faith is a failed epistemology regardless of how well or poorly some science is practiced.
paragraph one of your own link in the opening post
101,000 people polled, out of 323.1 million population USA = they polled 3.13% of the population.
that is not a very large sample now is it?
Actually, as polling goes, it's quite significant.
And ironically, when you found a poll you liked...just one thread later you praised that poll that only surveyed 4,248 people.
That is the best example of cherry picking I've ever seen.
Actually, as polling goes, it's quite significant.
Not only is it significant, it can be mathematically demonstrated that it's accurate to within some specific margin of error. Polling by definition does not poll 100% of everyone. It is based on a sufficient sample such that if you hypothetically COULD poll 100%, you would not get a substantively different result.
Just saying that anyone trusting corporations to "do the right thing" is an outright fool.
you are more than just saying.
you would call limiting the taking from one person to pay for another wrong. so I am not sure if I can trust you either. yes, I would limit business to a tri state area and pull back from global markets. Let the people in other countries kill themselves if they want to.
Also, you never put any responsibility on the person smoking. People born before 1985, ok, I kind of give them a pass ... kind of. People that smoke after 1985 should lose government assistance.
did you ever list the signs of socialism taking over? yeah, you did fascism, but what are the signs of socialism? did I miss you addressing that?
The American religious landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation. White Christians, once the dominant religious group in the U.S., now account for fewer than half of all adults living in the country.
There is definitely corporate funded "research" deliberately biased to a predetermined outcome. But that wouldn't be following the scientific method and peer review.
There is definitely flawed peer review designed to protect tenure and vested interests even outside of corporate funding. But that wouldn't be following the scientific method and peer review.
I don't think anyone is denying that in certain areas there is flawed and even contrived science being done, and that beyond that, the media often confuses association with cause in the interest of a headline, thus misrepresenting even good science. These are all valid concerns that need addressing. But this does not invalidate the scientific method or call all of science into question, anymore than a corrupt televangelist by himself invalidates 100% of religion.
My critique of religion rests not on the quality of the religious practice nor on the quality of science that is or isn't being done. It's based on the fundamental differences in the underlying theory of knowledge between the two (epistemology). No matter how well or poorly religion is practiced or science is performed, the starting point couldn't be more contrasted:
* Religion: Start with a conclusion and look for (and cherry pick) evidence to support it.
* Science: Start with evidence and follow it to a conclusion -- or, lacking sufficient evidence to arrive at a conclusion, then wait until you do.
Religious faith is a failed epistemology regardless of how well or poorly some science is practiced.
wow, you did it again ... exposed yourself.
you do the exact same thing you accuse religion of doing. You don't care about how the universe works. You are not out to describe what is going on around us. You are out for religious people genocide.
You told me to hide and/or deny science that does not help you promote atheism.
If you are talking about religion, why are you mentioning the color of their skin?
I didn't realize "white" was a religion???
.
yeah, remember "anti religion" is just a cover sometimes. They have other agendas, that's why they are confused when facts are brought up that don't support "deny everything". They revert to name calling, shunning, and other tactics.
"premise", they don't have the same "premise" as some of us. The middle of the roader just wants to do the best we can with what we got. And to help when we can. unfortunately we all don't play by the same rules.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
