🚀 go-pugleaf

> The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our time have
> not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of man that God
exists.
> In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED, not
> decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and insignificant
> minority in the world today.
>
> Why?
>
> -- Brian

Theists have bigger families?

libby, it is quite obvious who your "god" is.  And you are as weak as they
come..  It is really not surprising you dont accept the living God of
creation, as your reserve your worship for your self.  tsk tsk.

The Ghost In The Machine <ew...@lexi.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in message
news:slrn8ktk0n.om5.ewill@lexi.athghost7038suus.net...
> In talk.atheism, Libertarius
> <The_Truth_The_Whole_Truth_@Nothing_But_The.Truth>
> wrote on Mon, 19 Jun 2000 16:21:49 -0600
> <394E9CFC.E1DE9EF2@Nothing_But_The.Truth>:
> >seaotter wrote:
>
> [somebody wrote]
>
> >
> >> > The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our
> >> > time have not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of
> >> > man that God exists.
> >> > In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED,
> >> > not decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and
> >> > insignificant minority in the world today.
> >> >
> >> > Why?
> >> >
> >> > -- Brian
> >>
> >> Theists have bigger families?
> >
> >===>In fact ALL those your classify "theists" are, in reality,
> >ATHEISTS -- with respect to the "Gods" of religions other than
> >their own.
> >        So, "atheists" must be the absolute MAJORITY!
>
> Indeed; I for one can't tell why I should prefer one deity
> over another. :-)
>
> I've also pointed out in the past that, given the choice between
> universal happiness and a ham sandwich...no, wait, that's another
> joke.
>
> Given the choice between everlasting gratitude of a deity
> and a toaster, when I'm hungry, I'll take the toaster.  Or
> perhaps a better example would be a bread oven and the fixings
> for baking a loaf of bread.
>
> Note: no God is required to bake a loaf of bread.  Maybe lots
> of water, sunshine, wheat/rye/whatever seeds, soil, and such. :-)
>
> (One might quibble about the soil, though; apparently, we haven't
> figured out how to make synthetic soil yet.  Or have we?)
>
> [.sigsnip]
>
> --
> #191, ew...@aimnet.com -- insert random misquote here

A lot more atheists would believe in God if you would do away with the
ridiculous God of the Bible and replace Him/Her/It with a Universal Mind
that came into existence when the universe erupted during the big bang.
This Mind was/is responsible for guiding the subsequent development of
all there is.

"Brian Kelly" <brian_k...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:394de790_1@nebula.superior.net...
> We all know the logical tenet of "argumentum ad numerum." The number of
> people who believe something is not proof of its truth. And it makes
perfect
> sense.In the history of science, we see a correlation between scientific
> discoveries and the number of people who believe something.
>
> For instance, since it was discovered that the earth is not at the center
of
> the universe, the number of people who believe that the earth is the
center
> of the universe has dwindled to very near zero. Likewise, since it has
been
> discovered that the earth is round, the number of people who believe the
> earth is flat has dwindled to near zero.
>
> But when we look at belief in God, we see that despite the continuous
> discoveries of science, the number of people in the entire world who
profess
> to be atheists has GONE DOWN -- from a high of about 4 percent in the
1960s,
> to about 2.5 percent today (source -- Encyclopedia Britannica).
>
> The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our time have
> not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of man that God
exists.
> In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED, not
> decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and insignificant
> minority in the world today.
>
> Why?
>
> -- Brian
>
>

Your posting does not jibe with what is happening in the UK. Please see:

http://www.eclipse.co.uk/thoughts/nss.htm#January

Martin

Brian Kelly wrote:
>
> We all know the logical tenet of "argumentum ad numerum." The number of
> people who believe something is not proof of its truth. And it makes perfect
> sense.In the history of science, we see a correlation between scientific
> discoveries and the number of people who believe something.
>
> For instance, since it was discovered that the earth is not at the center of
> the universe, the number of people who believe that the earth is the center
> of the universe has dwindled to very near zero. Likewise, since it has been
> discovered that the earth is round, the number of people who believe the
> earth is flat has dwindled to near zero.
>
> But when we look at belief in God, we see that despite the continuous
> discoveries of science, the number of people in the entire world who profess
> to be atheists has GONE DOWN -- from a high of about 4 percent in the 1960s,
> to about 2.5 percent today (source -- Encyclopedia Britannica).
>
> The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our time have
> not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of man that God exists.
> In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED, not
> decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and insignificant
> minority in the world today.
>
> Why?
>
> -- Brian

Well, there are also 12.8 percent who are "nonreligious". That makes a
total of 15.3 percent who have no need of gods. (Source:  ENCYCLOPÆDIA
BRITANNICA, Worldwide Adherents of All Religions by Six Continental
Areas, Mid-1999,
http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/single_table/0,5716,367839,00.html)

According to the Britannica (in this context), atheist are "persons
professing atheism, skepticism, disbelief, or irreligion, including
antireligious (opposed to all religion)", and nonreligious are "persons
professing no religion, nonbelievers, agnostics, freethinkers,
dereligionized secularists indifferent to all religion" (I like that
word "dereligionized"!). The definitions provided in this reference
seems to be overlapping a little.

However, I could not find the article (table) on religious belief in the
1960's. It would be helpful if you could post it here. Thank you.

What I *did* find was that the number of atheists in the USA has
increased from an estimated 1000 persons in 1900 (~0 percent) to more
than a million persons today (0.4 percent). The number of nonreligious
has in the same time increased from 1,000,000 persons in 1900 (1.3
percent) to more than 25 million today (9.0 percent). (Source:
ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA, Religious Adherents in the United States of
America, AD 1900-2000,
http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/single_table/0,5716,367840,00.html)

Until you can provide a reference to the number of atheists/believers in
the 1960's, it is my conclusion that the number of religious people are
declining (in percent).


// Magnus

msh wrote in message <394E055D...@emw.ericsson.se>...
>Brian Kelly wrote:
>>
>> We all know the logical tenet of "argumentum ad numerum." The number of
>> people who believe something is not proof of its truth. And it makes
perfect
>> sense.In the history of science, we see a correlation between scientific
>> discoveries and the number of people who believe something.
>>
>> For instance, since it was discovered that the earth is not at the center
of
>> the universe, the number of people who believe that the earth is the
center
>> of the universe has dwindled to very near zero. Likewise, since it has
been
>> discovered that the earth is round, the number of people who believe the
>> earth is flat has dwindled to near zero.
>>
>> But when we look at belief in God, we see that despite the continuous
>> discoveries of science, the number of people in the entire world who
profess
>> to be atheists has GONE DOWN -- from a high of about 4 percent in the
1960s,
>> to about 2.5 percent today (source -- Encyclopedia Britannica).
>>
>> The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our time have
>> not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of man that God
exists.
>> In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED, not
>> decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and insignificant
>> minority in the world today.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> -- Brian
>
>Well, there are also 12.8 percent who are "nonreligious". That makes a
>total of 15.3 percent who have no need of gods.

Please provide proof for your claim that someone who says they are
non-religious has no need of God. I know many, many people who do not adhere
to any particular religion, but who are deeply spiritual, who believe in God,
and who pray on a regular basis.

Non-religious is NOT atheism, or even agnosticism.

Brian






(Source:  ENCYCLOP�DIA
>BRITANNICA, Worldwide Adherents of All Religions by Six Continental
>Areas, Mid-1999,
>http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/single_table/0,5716,367839,00.html
)
>
>According to the Britannica (in this context), atheist are "persons
>professing atheism, skepticism, disbelief, or irreligion, including
>antireligious (opposed to all religion)", and nonreligious are "persons
>professing no religion, nonbelievers, agnostics, freethinkers,
>dereligionized secularists indifferent to all religion" (I like that
>word "dereligionized"!). The definitions provided in this reference
>seems to be overlapping a little.
>
>However, I could not find the article (table) on religious belief in the
>1960's. It would be helpful if you could post it here. Thank you.
>
>What I *did* find was that the number of atheists in the USA has
>increased from an estimated 1000 persons in 1900 (~0 percent) to more
>than a million persons today (0.4 percent). The number of nonreligious
>has in the same time increased from 1,000,000 persons in 1900 (1.3
>percent) to more than 25 million today (9.0 percent). (Source:
>ENCYCLOP�DIA BRITANNICA, Religious Adherents in the United States of
>America, AD 1900-2000,
>http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/single_table/0,5716,367840,00.html
)
>
>Until you can provide a reference to the number of atheists/believers in
>the 1960's, it is my conclusion that the number of religious people are
>declining (in percent).
>
>
>// Magnus

Because the ARE small and insignificant

Brian Kelly <brian_k...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:394de790_1@nebula.superior.net...
> We all know the logical tenet of "argumentum ad numerum." The number of
> people who believe something is not proof of its truth. And it makes
perfect
> sense.In the history of science, we see a correlation between scientific
> discoveries and the number of people who believe something.
>
> For instance, since it was discovered that the earth is not at the center
of
> the universe, the number of people who believe that the earth is the
center
> of the universe has dwindled to very near zero. Likewise, since it has
been
> discovered that the earth is round, the number of people who believe the
> earth is flat has dwindled to near zero.
>
> But when we look at belief in God, we see that despite the continuous
> discoveries of science, the number of people in the entire world who
profess
> to be atheists has GONE DOWN -- from a high of about 4 percent in the
1960s,
> to about 2.5 percent today (source -- Encyclopedia Britannica).
>
> The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our time have
> not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of man that God
exists.
> In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED, not
> decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and insignificant
> minority in the world today.
>
> Why?
>
> -- Brian
>
>
>
>
>
>

seaotter wrote:

> > The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our time have
> > not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of man that God
> exists.
> > In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED, not
> > decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and insignificant
> > minority in the world today.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > -- Brian
>
> Theists have bigger families?

===>In fact ALL those your classify "theists" are, in reality,
ATHEISTS -- with respect to the "Gods" of religions other than
their own.
        So, "atheists" must be the absolute MAJORITY!

        Libertarius
        *DON'T CONFUSE FICTION WITH REALITY*

Laocmo <lao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Ydp35.11135$ds.318315@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> A lot more atheists would believe in God if you would do away with the
> ridiculous God of the Bible and replace Him/Her/It with a Universal Mind
> that came into existence when the universe erupted during the big bang.
> This Mind was/is responsible for guiding the subsequent development of
> all there is.
>

And what is so hard about a Universal Mind that was in existence before the
Big Bang, and who communicates with mankind?

Tina

"solbuckshot" <solbu...@email.msn.com> wrote:

> libby, it is quite obvious who your "god" is.

It is far more obvious who *your* "god" is.  YOUR "god" is arrogance
because it allows you to be a holier-than-thou shithead.

--
The Deadly Nightshade
http://deadly_nightshade.tripod.com/
http://members.tripod.com/~deadly_nightshade/

|-----------------------------------|
|"I, too, believe in fate...        |
|the fate a man makes for himself." |
|Lord Soth  ("Time of the Twins")   |
|-----------------------------------|

In talk.atheism Brian Kelly <brian_k...@yahoo.com> wrote:

: Please provide proof for your claim that someone who says they are
: non-religious has no need of God. I know many, many people who do not adhere
: to any particular religion, but who are deeply spiritual, who believe in God,
: and who pray on a regular basis.

If his interpetation of the data as all nonreligious are nontheist is
flawed, so is your interpetation that they are all theists.  There isn't
enough information given to divide up that group into theists and
non theists.

: Non-religious is NOT atheism, or even agnosticism.

How do you think an agnostic would answer the survey since there
was presumably no choice explicitly for agnosticism, hmm?


--
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------
 Steven L. Mading  at  BioMagResBank   (BMRB). UW-Madison
 Programmer/Analyst/(acting SysAdmin)  mailto:mad...@bmrb.wisc.edu
 B1108C, Biochem Addition / 433 Babcock Dr / Madison, WI 53706-1544

--------------AC808103D0CE57A295DCB726
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tina Line wrote:

> Laocmo <lao...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:Ydp35.11135$ds.318315@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > A lot more atheists would believe in God if you would do away with the
> > ridiculous God of the Bible and replace Him/Her/It with a Universal Mind
> > that came into existence when the universe erupted during the big bang.
> > This Mind was/is responsible for guiding the subsequent development of
> > all there is.
> >
>
> And what is so hard about a Universal Mind that was in existence before the
> Big Bang, and who communicates with mankind?
>
> Tina

How about the fact that the only "evidence" for its existence existence exists
only in the minds of "believer's".  How's this for a hypothesis; this Universal
consciousness is in fact the "believer's" own brain function. This reminds me
of a trick you can do with some animals and even the odd human. Put them in
front of a mirror and they will react as though they are looking at something
other than themselves.

 Genesis Nemesis



--------------AC808103D0CE57A295DCB726
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" link="#FF0000" vlink="#800080" alink="#0000FF">
Tina Line wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Laocmo <l...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
<br><a href="news:Ydp35.11135$ds.3...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net">news:Ydp35.11135$ds.3...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net</a>...
<br>>
<br>> A lot more atheists would believe in God if you would do away with
the
<br>> ridiculous God of the Bible and replace Him/Her/It with a Universal
Mind
<br>> that came into existence when the universe erupted during the big
bang.
<br>> This Mind was/is responsible for guiding the subsequent development
of
<br>> all there is.
<br>>
<p>And what is so hard about a Universal Mind that was in existence before
the
<br>Big Bang, and who communicates with mankind?
<p>Tina</blockquote>
How about the fact that the only "evidence" for its existence existence
exists only in the minds of "believer's".  How's this for a hypothesis;
this Universal consciousness is in fact the "believer's" own brain function.
This reminds me of a trick you can do with some animals and even the odd
human. Put them in front of a mirror and they will react as though they
are looking at something other than themselves.
<p> <a href="http://www.connect.usq.edu.au/students/q9920223/">Genesis
Nemesis</a>
<br> 
<br> 
</body>
</html>

--------------AC808103D0CE57A295DCB726--

Demographics of religion is tricky business.  There are a LOT of people who
don't give a rat's ass about God or religion but won't call themselves atheists
for fear of what the neighbors would think.  Depending on where they live, their
fear may be justified.

Look for people hitting the "nonreligious button."  For instance, Adherents.com
counts only 240 Million atheists, but 1.16 Billion "nonreligious" worldwide.
See
http://www.adherents.com/Na_361.html#2836  Combined, this is fully 22% of the
world's population.

Here are the nonreligious stats for North America and the US by year:


		N.A.		US
1900		1.2%		 1.3%
1925		1.9
1950		2.8
1957				 2.7
1957				 3
1960				 5
1970				 4.9
1972				 7.0
1975		4.4
1980				 7.0
1985				 9.0
1989				10
1990				 7.5
1990				 8.3
1990				11
1990				 7.5
1992				11
1992				  5
1992				  7
1995		8.6
1996		7.2
1996		9
'93-'00			7.4 (average of 18 surveys)

Certainly up from the early part of the century but seems level over the last 20
years.

The other demographic element relevant to your question (why doesn't the advance
of science increase atheism) is to look at who the atheists are.  They tend to
be better educated and from more advanced and culturally sophisticated regions.
Scientists (who are the ones who would best appreciate the implications of
science) are much more likely to identify themselves as atheists than the
general public.

Again from adherents.com look at these interesting percentages for
"nonreligious" by geographic region.  (Disclaimer:  these are non-randomly
selected stats.  Culture is probably the biggest influence on this matter.
Survey techniques vary greatly and complicate comparisons. These are just some
interesting examples of the information on this enormous data base.  I recommend
anyone interested in this matter to check it for themselves.)


USA
  East		  7%
  Midwest		  6%
  South
  West		14%

California		13%
Maine		10%
Alabama		  4%
Louisiana 		 3%

Haiti 		 1%
Japan		70%
Sweden		35%
Taiwan		24%
Vietnam		30%
Canada		11%

Hong Kong	58%

Illinois		 7%
Chicago		 8%

New York (state) 6.4%
NYC			  7.4

Africa		 0.4%
North America	  8%
Europe		 12%
Asia			 21%




On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 05:39:32 -0400, "Brian Kelly" <brian_k...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>We all know the logical tenet of "argumentum ad numerum." The number of
>people who believe something is not proof of its truth. And it makes perfect
>sense.In the history of science, we see a correlation between scientific
>discoveries and the number of people who believe something.
>
>For instance, since it was discovered that the earth is not at the center of
>the universe, the number of people who believe that the earth is the center
>of the universe has dwindled to very near zero. Likewise, since it has been
>discovered that the earth is round, the number of people who believe the
>earth is flat has dwindled to near zero.
>
>But when we look at belief in God, we see that despite the continuous
>discoveries of science, the number of people in the entire world who profess
>to be atheists has GONE DOWN -- from a high of about 4 percent in the 1960s,
>to about 2.5 percent today (source -- Encyclopedia Britannica).
>
>The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our time have
>not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of man that God exists.
>In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED, not
>decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and insignificant
>minority in the world today.
>
>Why?
>
>-- Brian
>
>
>
>
>

solbuckshot wrote:
>
> libby, it is quite obvious who your "god" is.  And you are as weak as they
> come..  It is really not surprising you dont accept the living God of
> creation, as your reserve your worship for your self.  tsk tsk.
>
Don't you understand. There is not god. Therefore, there is no living
god. There is no worship of god or self.
Bob

In talk.atheism, Libertarius
<The_Truth_The_Whole_Truth_@Nothing_But_The.Truth>
wrote on Mon, 19 Jun 2000 16:21:49 -0600
<394E9CFC.E1DE9EF2@Nothing_But_The.Truth>:
>seaotter wrote:

[somebody wrote]

>
>> > The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our
>> > time have not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of
>> > man that God exists.
>> > In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED,
>> > not decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and
>> > insignificant minority in the world today.
>> >
>> > Why?
>> >
>> > -- Brian
>>
>> Theists have bigger families?
>
>===>In fact ALL those your classify "theists" are, in reality,
>ATHEISTS -- with respect to the "Gods" of religions other than
>their own.
>        So, "atheists" must be the absolute MAJORITY!

Indeed; I for one can't tell why I should prefer one deity
over another. :-)

I've also pointed out in the past that, given the choice between
universal happiness and a ham sandwich...no, wait, that's another
joke.

Given the choice between everlasting gratitude of a deity
and a toaster, when I'm hungry, I'll take the toaster.  Or
perhaps a better example would be a bread oven and the fixings
for baking a loaf of bread.

Note: no God is required to bake a loaf of bread.  Maybe lots
of water, sunshine, wheat/rye/whatever seeds, soil, and such. :-)

(One might quibble about the soil, though; apparently, we haven't
figured out how to make synthetic soil yet.  Or have we?)

[.sigsnip]

--
#191, ew...@aimnet.com -- insert random misquote here

In talk.atheism, solbuckshot <solbu...@email.msn.com>
 wrote on Mon, 19 Jun 2000 21:22:06 -0700 <#4MKt8m2$GA.182@cpmsnbbsa07>:
>libby, it is quite obvious who your "god" is.  And you are as weak as they
>come..  It is really not surprising you dont accept the living God of
>creation, as your reserve your worship for your self.  tsk tsk.

What a quaint notion.

Perhaps I've been steeped too long in the theories of interstellar
physics, computer operation, and mathematics, but I for one see no
need for a "living God of Creation".  Certainly not in the Biblical
sense.

He may be weak...but so are you. :-)  I'm not Libertarius.

Followups drastically cut back.

>
>The Ghost In The Machine <ew...@lexi.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in message
>news:slrn8ktk0n.om5.ewill@lexi.athghost7038suus.net...
>> In talk.atheism, Libertarius
>> <The_Truth_The_Whole_Truth_@Nothing_But_The.Truth>
>> wrote on Mon, 19 Jun 2000 16:21:49 -0600
>> <394E9CFC.E1DE9EF2@Nothing_But_The.Truth>:
>> >seaotter wrote:
>>
>> [somebody wrote]
>>
>> >
>> >> > The fact is that all the wonderful scientific discoveries of our
>> >> > time have not reduced by ONE IOTA the near-universal intuition of
>> >> > man that God exists.
>> >> > In fact, the number of people who believe in God has INCREASED,
>> >> > not decreased.  Despite science, atheists remain a small and
>> >> > insignificant minority in the world today.
>> >> >
>> >> > Why?
>> >> >
>> >> > -- Brian
>> >>
>> >> Theists have bigger families?
>> >
>> >===>In fact ALL those your classify "theists" are, in reality,
>> >ATHEISTS -- with respect to the "Gods" of religions other than
>> >their own.
>> >        So, "atheists" must be the absolute MAJORITY!
>>
>> Indeed; I for one can't tell why I should prefer one deity
>> over another. :-)
>>
>> I've also pointed out in the past that, given the choice between
>> universal happiness and a ham sandwich...no, wait, that's another
>> joke.
>>
>> Given the choice between everlasting gratitude of a deity
>> and a toaster, when I'm hungry, I'll take the toaster.  Or
>> perhaps a better example would be a bread oven and the fixings
>> for baking a loaf of bread.
>>
>> Note: no God is required to bake a loaf of bread.  Maybe lots
>> of water, sunshine, wheat/rye/whatever seeds, soil, and such. :-)
>>
>> (One might quibble about the soil, though; apparently, we haven't
>> figured out how to make synthetic soil yet.  Or have we?)
>>
>> [.sigsnip]
>>
>> --
>> #191, ew...@aimnet.com -- insert random misquote here
>


--
#191, ew...@aimnet.com -- insert random misquote here