View Full Version : Scientists' Belief in God
TexasDevilDog
08-11-2005, 02:18 PM
http://www.livescience.com/othernews/050811_scientists_god.html
About two-thirds of scientists believe in God, according to a new survey that uncovered stark differences based on the type of research they do.
The study, along with another one released in June, would appear to debunk the oft-held notion that science is incompatible with religion.
Those in the social sciences are more likely to believe in God and attend religious services than researchers in the natural sciences, the study found.
The opposite had been expected.
Nearly 38 percent of natural scientists -- people in disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology -- said they do not believe in God. Only 31 percent of the social scientists do not believe.
In the new study, Rice University sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund surveyed 1,646 faculty members at elite research universities, asking 36 questions about belief and spiritual practices.
"Based on previous research, we thought that social scientists would be less likely to practice religion than natural scientists are, but our data showed just the opposite," Ecklund said.
Some stand-out stats: 41 percent of the biologists don't believe, while that figure is just 27 percent among political scientists.
In separate work at the University of Chicago, released in June, 76 percent of doctors said they believed in God and 59 percent believe in some sort of afterlife.
"Now we must examine the nature of these differences," Ecklund said today. "Many scientists see themselves as having a spirituality not attached to a particular religious tradition. Some scientists who don't believe in God see themselves as very spiritual people. They have a way outside of themselves that they use to understand the meaning of life."
Ecklund and colleagues are now conducting longer interviews with some of the participants to try and figure it all out.
poopnut2
08-11-2005, 04:26 PM
Ok.:confused:
lowthreeohz
08-11-2005, 05:37 PM
All that proves is nearly 2/3 of scientists in the feild are sheep too. :confused:
DFWminis
08-12-2005, 05:19 PM
everyone follows somthing.....so we are all sheep ...
46Tbird
08-15-2005, 11:17 AM
All that proves is nearly 2/3 of scientists in the feild are sheep too. :confused:Sheep? :confused:
Maybe they see a design in their disciplines that they can't explain away.
And who are you calling sheep as though they are ignorant? Wouldn't you agree that they are smarter than you? :)
TexasDevilDog
08-15-2005, 11:38 AM
The reason I posted this was to refute past and future attempts to say only ignorant people and people that don't understand science are believers in god. Someone had posted before that most scientist are atheist, which is total wrong by this study.
Hollywood
08-15-2005, 01:34 PM
Ignorant, no. Weakminded, yes.
46Tbird
08-15-2005, 03:43 PM
Ignorant, no. Weakminded, yes.Are you saying you can become a credible scientist by simply accepting what you are told?
Hollywood
08-15-2005, 06:54 PM
Are you saying you can become a credible scientist by simply accepting what you are told?
No, i'm saying that just because an individual is book smart, does not mean he or she is invulnerable to human psychology.
TexasDevilDog
08-15-2005, 08:45 PM
No, i'm saying that just because an individual is book smart, does not mean he or she is invulnerable to human psychology.
Like believing by faith that there is no god?
Hollywood
08-15-2005, 09:08 PM
Like believing by faith that there is no god?
Weak minded individual=can be convinced by a person or persons to believe in a god strictly on faith with no evidence whatsoever. Kinda like believing in the Loch Ness monster...but I guess thats just silly.
TexasDevilDog
08-15-2005, 09:27 PM
Weak minded individual=can be convinced by a person or persons to believe in a god strictly on faith with no evidence whatsoever. Kinda like believing in the Loch Ness monster...but I guess thats just silly.
Why are you limiting your statement to, "to believe in a god" and not allow more encompassing "to believe in anything"?
I am trying to understand this "weak mindedness". So, is "weak minded" a mental disorder or psychosis? Are people born weak minded? Can people work to over come weak mindedness? Do people learn to be weak minded? Do you have any evidence of people being weak minded or are you believing in weak mindedness strictly on faith?
Hollywood
08-15-2005, 09:56 PM
Why are you limiting your statement to, "to believe in a god" and not allow more encompassing "to believe in anything"?
I am trying to understand this "weak mindedness". So, is "weak minded" a mental disorder or psychosis? Are people born weak minded? Can people work to over come weak mindedness? Do people learn to be weak minded? Do you have any evidence of people being weak minded or are you believing in weak mindedness strictly on faith?
You're not trying to understand anything, you're patronizing me...already.
Stating the reasons behind my remarks is a waste of time. I could have proof of human evolution, you'd still reject the argument at hand. Besides, I have no desire to listen to that condescending tone, find someone else to argue with, i'm not in the mood this week.
TexasDevilDog
08-15-2005, 10:08 PM
You're not trying to understand anything, you're patronizing me...already.
Stating the reasons behind my remarks is a waste of time. I could have proof of human evolution, you'd still reject the argument at hand. Besides, I have no desire to listen to that condescending tone, find someone else to argue with, i'm not in the mood this week.
No, no, don't be like that. Show me your evidence of weak mindedness. Is it a scientific study or a university research project? Do you have a link to the information? I will look at it. I have an open mind.
46Tbird
08-16-2005, 09:29 AM
I could have proof of human evolution, you'd still reject the argument at hand. I believe in human evolution AND God... so how do you classify me? :confused:
Natural Laws
In a 1997 survey in the science journal Nature, 40 percent of U.S. scientists said they believe in God—not just a creator, but a God to whom one can pray in expectation of an answer. That is the same percentage of scientists who were believers when the survey was taken 80 years earlier.
But the number may have been higher if the question had simply asked about God's existence. While many scientists seem to have no problem with deism—the belief that God set the universe in motion and then walked away—others are more troubled with the concept of an intervening God.
(http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1018_041018_science_religion_2.html)
How you ask the question makes all the difference.
TexasDevilDog
08-17-2005, 08:57 AM
Natural Laws
In a 1997 survey in the science journal Nature, 40 percent of U.S. scientists said they believe in God—not just a creator, but a God to whom one can pray in expectation of an answer. That is the same percentage of scientists who were believers when the survey was taken 80 years earlier.
But the number may have been higher if the question had simply asked about God's existence. While many scientists seem to have no problem with deism—the belief that God set the universe in motion and then walked away—others are more troubled with the concept of an intervening God.
(http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1018_041018_science_religion_2.html)
How you ask the question makes all the difference.
The number of people that believe in the existence of god, is higher than the people that believe in god.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
It must be a paradox.
The number of people that believe in the existence of god, is higher than the people that believe in god.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
It must be a paradox.
That seems reasonable to me. The definition of "God" can vary in the scientific (or other) community from a Holy Deity to a theme.
Example: If I believe that you believe in God then I’ve given “God” some intangible value in that belief but I may still not believe in “A God” as you do.
TexasDevilDog
08-17-2005, 10:26 AM
That seems reasonable to me. The definition of "God" can vary in the scientific (or other) community from a Holy Deity to a theme.
Example: If I believe that you believe in God then I’ve given “God” some intangible value in that belief but I may still not believe in “A God” as you do.
I believe that god exsists but I don't believe in god. ;)
I believe that god exsists but I don't believe in god. ;)
Exactly. ;)
What is a "social scientist"? If they just study the way people live, it is not the same as "science" in my book.
What is a "social scientist"? If they just study the way people live, it is not the same as "science" in my book.
Yeah, I tend to think of "scientist" as chemist, physicist and the like. There are lots of “touchy feely sciences” I don’t really credit as true science. This further lends to the subjective nature of poll like this.
89 drop top stang
08-18-2005, 09:37 PM
I believe in human evolution AND God... so how do you classify me?
that makes three of us I guess :D
that makes three of us I guess :D
What are your thoughts on the Bible then?
TexasDevilDog
08-19-2005, 12:07 PM
that makes three of us I guess :D
I believe in a universe by design and ever changing universe.
Neiladin
08-20-2005, 12:35 PM
What are your thoughts on the Bible then?
The Bible is a story, and a good one, but I dont believe one word of it. I believe in God, but I do not believe that he created human beings, but I do believe that he created life in general. This whole "life giving acid" or whatever they attribute life to now is ridiculous.
SVT93Style
08-21-2005, 10:44 PM
I believe in God, but I do not believe that he created human beings, but I do believe that he created life in general.
Just out of curiousity, how did you arrive at this belief.
The Bible is a story, and a good one, but I dont believe one word of it. I believe in God, but I do not believe that he created human beings, but I do believe that he created life in general. This whole "life giving acid" or whatever they attribute life to now is ridiculous.
Interesting.
Neiladin
09-03-2005, 02:06 PM
Just out of curiousity, how did you arrive at this belief.
well, its actually a long story. its kind of a belief i came to realize on my own. after being raised unitarian, and going to all different denominational churches, i found that they all have different views of the big picture. i tried my hand at atheism, to see how it would sink in, try and fund my "place" but i just couldnt wrap my head around the fact that something as miraculous as life just HAPPENED. also i find it hard to believe in a story that was passed down by mouth for hundreds of years before it was written down by another person or persons who themselves had their own viewpoints.
wc3611
09-12-2005, 10:43 PM
I think the bottom line in all this is that following with blind faith talk is something that evolutionist should not preach about. The simple facts here are this, life comes from life, it cannot be measured in watts, volts, ounces, litres... and so on. In other words, it is non quantitative. Life either exists or it doesn't. There is no chemical difference between a live person or a dead body. In all the science has been able to do, it cannot create life from where it wasn't to start with.
We can put all the chemicals together that can create a single cell of protein, we can make it bond using electricity and we can proclaim to have built a cell! It would not have and DNA and would not be able to support life.
Scientists cannot use the "scientific method" to establish the origin of life, they have theories, the one theory that actally fits the evidence is the theory of intelligent design. If you need proof of God's existance, all you have to do is look around you. The evidence is everywhere. You see it takes a lot of faith to believe in something that is impossible to happen. That is the definition of blind faith.
In order for me to believe in evolution, it would take being able to believe in a volcano spewing out molten iron ore that cooled and formed an internal combustion engine, the engine would have to be running, and would be able to reproduce and find it's own fuel. That sounds crazy to me, but if we are talking about the simplest life form that could have evolved, it would still have to have DNA, an ability to eat and reproduce. And another thing, the whole idea of creating organic material from inorganic material is problematic. You can add inorganic material to organic material, but what if you don't have any to start with?
I admire the faith that evolutionist posses, it make sense the scientist are starting to see the errors of evolutionist thinking.
wc3611
09-12-2005, 10:52 PM
The Bible is a story, and a good one, but I dont believe one word of it. I believe in God, but I do not believe that he created human beings, but I do believe that he created life in general. This whole "life giving acid" or whatever they attribute life to now is ridiculous.
I understand your point, however, the Bible is much more than a story book, it has a lot of credibility from a historic standpoint. The most important aspect of the Bible is it's prophetic components. The Bible contains many prophecies that have been fulfilled and many that haven't. If a book contains prophecies that are thousands of years old and those prophecies come to pass, is that dumb luck or divine intervention?
The study of prophecy is a very indepth one, but it is a very interesting one.
TK_Blown98_GT
09-15-2005, 01:28 PM
I understand your point, however, the Bible is much more than a story book, it has a lot of credibility from a historic standpoint. The most important aspect of the Bible is it's prophetic components. The Bible contains many prophecies that have been fulfilled and many that haven't. If a book contains prophecies that are thousands of years old and those prophecies come to pass, is that dumb luck or divine intervention?
The study of prophecy is a very indepth one, but it is a very interesting one.
It's called "chance". How could it be intervention if the event was already going to happen anyways??? No intervention needed.
There are no prophecies anywhere in the bible that predict the future at all.
The bible is a historic document written by at least 12 different men and composed & rewritten by hundreds. There are also 4-5 books of the bible that are or were removed early on by facist kings to suit there needs as eaders. Your bible is not the true Bible as was written in 0 A.D. None of it is "gods" words. These are ideals from a famished, changing world of man with no course for good and evil. Slavery was rampant, war was a way of life and people were murdered for anything.
Religion is a control mechanism for man to follow and live by. We tried hundreds of times to civilize ourselves with 100's of other religions/faiths/ideals (sumerians, greeks, romans, indians, chinese, japaneese, arabic, etc...)
Remember, greek mythology lasted for 4000+ years or so and failed/got replaced. Egyptian religion was around for 10,000 years.......and died!
Christianity has only been around for 2005 yrs. Something "new" will replace christianity in the future.............you will all see...
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.