In other news, the sky is blue!

Suck on that, Jesus!

Why worry about the consequences of your actions in this life when Jesus will forgive them in the next life anyway? I've known many thieves with this mentality.

realy a socity full of unquestoining people that suspend resoin and base all there belives on athourative merit alone is likely to be worse of than a free thinking open minded questoining resnable soucity.

>> ^walkingshark:
In other news, the sky is blue!

In related news, my balls are the same color.

(also, religion sucks)

File this in the "shit I already knew" folder.

>> ^westy:
realy a socity full of unquestoining people that suspend resoin and base all there belives on athourative merit alone is likely to be worse of than a free thinking open minded questoining resnable soucity.

do you just mash the keyboard with your forehead or have half of your fingers been smashed by sledge hammers?

So, a reputable study undermines the conservative claim that putting more God into our educational system and more God into our government will translate into a more moral society.

I'm sure the conservatives will redact their claims any minute now.

>> ^rottenseed:
>>^westy:
realy a socity full of unquestoining people that suspend resoin and base all there belives on athourative merit alone is likely to be worse of than a free thinking open minded questoining resnable soucity.

do you just mash the keyboard with your forehead or have half of your fingers been smashed by sledge hammers?


While he does appear to write with his face, he does have a good point. At times I wonder if he is really that shit-poor at typing / writing, or if he runs a filter to mangle his words as a sort of test to see what comes of relatively good statements written in painfully bad typing / english.

>> ^colt45:
>> ^rottenseed:
>> ^westy:
realy a socity full of unquestoining people that suspend resoin and base all there belives on athourative merit alone is likely to be worse of than a free thinking open minded questoining resnable soucity.

do you just mash the keyboard with your forehead or have half of your fingers been smashed by sledge hammers?

While he does appear to write with his face, he does have a good point. At times I wonder if he is really that shit-poor at typing / writing, or if he runs a filter to mangle his words as a sort of test to see what comes of relatively good statements written in painfully bad typing / english.


Maybe choggie is his hero?

I thought he had a good point though.

Yes, but the United States is also supposed to be 75% or more "Christian" and that's bullshit right there. Plenty of people will mark down *insert religion here* without ever knowing what that means or believes. That alone pretty much negates this study.

>> ^colt45:
>> ^rottenseed:
>> ^westy:
realy a socity full of unquestoining people that suspend resoin and base all there belives on athourative merit alone is likely to be worse of than a free thinking open minded questoining resnable soucity.

do you just mash the keyboard with your forehead or have half of your fingers been smashed by sledge hammers?

While he does appear to write with his face, he does have a good point. At times I wonder if he is really that shit-poor at typing / writing, or if he runs a filter to mangle his words as a sort of test to see what comes of relatively good statements written in painfully bad typing / english.

Could it be that Westy is dyslexic, or just a non-native English speaker? At least you can still understand what he means, and he makes a valid point.

Westy could you enlighten us?

I asked the same question of westy along time ago ... back in the day 2006 before I even had a star.. and still had a P.

I believe he wrote that it was a disorder.

It happens, but it i no way makes his opinion any less important.

This is from 2005 apparently.
Times Article

The paper itself.

bullshit patchwork science.

"the more faithful a nation is, the more likely to have bad shit there"

that's nothing to do with the title.

"on the strict terms of what he wrote, simply showing a corelation, the study holds up"

SOOO.... off you go, kneejerk atheists, expand that very limited conclusion into something it isn't. How scientific of you.

"science guy" is gonna make a lot of money on that book. nice.

Ya, I would like to see what metric they use for a "person of faith" vs non-faith. Like someone mentioned above, many people that claim to have faith here is more of a social event and not a religious one. As far Christianity is concerned, if someone can say that the golden rule will lead to imorality, I would find that hard to believe

Would be an interesting study to get a hold of though to see what he clasifies as a religion to begin with...like, isn't really Budism a religion but more of a moral phylosophy. I would be just as hisitant to believe crazy stuff about generalized studies on "all" agnostics or "all" athiests. If you look at polling and statistics you would be just as skeptical as I am (I do polling results for a living mostly)

Anyway, IM sure he is getting some negative personal attacks which sux but it is a subject of a lot of interest no doubt. But back on topic, I doubt very much that this study is a real indicator of anything signficant as there are at least 5 other studies that "show" the exact opposite so it is just the battle of who can dig up what numbers from where game to show their pet point. Go to any place in your own life were you were perfect to your own morality for instance

>> ^MINK:
SOOO.... off you go, kneejerk atheists, expand that very limited conclusion into something it isn't. How scientific of you.


Well, this atheist knows that statistics can be (and usually are) complete bullshit. Even if the study is accurate in the broadest terms, correlation is not causation.

It is just as likely that a society that has a lot of social chaos would lead more people to place their faith in a god as an escape from the cruelty of their surroundings.

It's a stress reliever and emotional crutch that can help take your mind off reality. Works pretty well, as far as that goes.

On the other hand, the study could be useful in the fight against fundamentalists who are trying to inject more of their religion into the government.

It seems likely that high crime and poor living conditions would cause more religious faith rather than the faith causing the crime? Hardship is a very strong reason for seeking a blissful afterlife.

That would certainly fit the findings of the study. He never really suggested causation.

>> ^Psychologic:
Wouldn't it be more likely that high crime and poor living conditions would cause more religious faith rather than the faith causing the crime? Hardship is a very strong reason for seeking a blissful afterlife.
That would certainly fit the findings of the study. He never really suggested causation.



I quote from Quirkology by Richard Wiseman (an awesome read, by the way): Chapter 3 "Believing six impossible things before breakfast: Psychology enters the twilight zone.", pg 102-103

"By the middle 1920s, inflation in Germany was so high that paper money was carried in shopping bags, and people were eager to spend any money the moment that they had it, for fear that it would be severely devalued the following day. By 1932, almost half of the population were unemployed. In 1982, Vernon Padgett from Marshall Universty and Dale Jorgenson from the California State University published a paper comparing the number of articles on astrology, mysticism, and cults, appearing in the major German magazines and newspapers between the two world wars, and the degree of economic threat each year.* Articles on gardening and cooking were also counted as controls. An index of economic threat was calculated on the basis of wages, percentage of unemployed trade union members, and industrial production. When people were suffering an economic downturn, the number of articles on superstition increased. When things were going better, they decreased. The strong relationship between the two factors caused the authors to conclude that:

'... just as Trobriand islanders surrounded their more dangerous deep sea fishing with superstitions, Germans in the 1920s and 1930s became more superstitious during times of economic threat.'

The authors link their findings with much broader social issues, noting that in times of increased uncertainty, people look for a sense of certaintity and this need can cause them to support strong leadership regimes, and believe in various irrational determinants of their fate, such as superstition and mysticism."

*V.R. Padgett & D.O. Jorgenson - 'Superstition and economic threat: Germany, 1918-1940', Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin #8, pages 736-74. 1982.

I guess you could look at the above study, and then look at what may occur within areas of the United States during this coming time of harsh economic crisis as well. Will it create an increase in religious belief/ferver and a higher degree of trust into other areas of superstition, the supernatural, and mysticism?

When times are hard, which I'm sure they are in some of the countries used in the study conducted which is discussed in the video, more people will want some sort of "control" in their out-of-control lives. They find that sense of "comfort" in handing control over to forces they believe to be "more powerful" than just mortal men and women.

>> ^MINK:
bullshit patchwork science.
"the more faithful a nation is, the more likely to have bad shit there"
that's nothing to do with the title.
"on the strict terms of what he wrote, simply showing a corelation, the study holds up"
SOOO.... off you go, kneejerk atheists, expand that very limited conclusion into something it isn't. How scientific of you.
"science guy" is gonna make a lot of money on that book. nice.



You say "bullshit patchwork science", Mink. Did you read the paper? Are you quite well versed in Statistics? What parts of the study are "bullshit" or, otherwise, do not agree with what should be deemed "proper science"?

I almost hate to get myself kicked in the chin here, but, you appear to be pulling a "kneejerk deist" (and I say "deist" because you've noted several times in other threads that you're not really a "theist" by any definition of the word) reaction to merely what was said in the short interview.

It's bad enough that the news isn't the news anymore (and by that I mean, told to us with impartiality) but can we stop with the quick edits and splices? While I hold true the belief that what this report stated was accurate, it certainly doesn't help it's cause by interjecting insert edits throughout the report that could be interpreted as trickery by people who don't share the same opinion.

I think it's not that religion causes crime, but that stupid people are more likely to believe in God and are more likely to commit crimes.

Flame away...

Thanks for trying Raigen.

My attack on this is based in science (i did Alevel statistics if that helps you, i'm no expert but i learnt the basics, i.e. statistics are bullshit)

This study says he found more religion where there was more "bad social conditions" or however you want to summarise it.

That proves nothing, he doesn't even suggest causation, because he proved nothing.

However, many comments here are saying "i already knew that religion was retarded/violent/counterproductive"... and that's not what the study showed.

However I expect the "Scientist" here will make a lot of money by digging for more evidence and presenting a pseudoscience book which is controversial and which atheists will cling to in their droves.

I am not a kneejerk deist, although i wouldn't be too insulted if you called me that.

In my own exposure to statistics, statisticians are keenly aware of the difference between causation and correlation. It is often the case that an initial study will find a correlation, and the people behind the study will use that correlation as a basis for further study. That is exactly what was said in this interview. The fact that the paper doesn't claim a causation is purposeful.

So in the comments here, I am observing people leaping to the conclusion that religion = bad society (which is not what the paper is saying... merely that those two conditions tend to coexist), and someone saying the paper is useless because it doesn't show a causation... which is also untrue. This scientist is essentially saying "Hey guys, I noticed something interesting... These two conditions tend to happen together. Let's look into it further."

It just so happens that the two conditions are things that set a lot of people off, so you will see a lot more emotion injected into the commentary than you would if the two conditions were things like 'smooth rocks tend to exist near water," or something.

It's an interesting study from a political perspective, but it's rather a no-brainer conclusion. It's trivial to show that unplanned pregnancy, criminality(at least the violent kind) and religiosity inverse correlate with affluence, so the fact that they correlate with each other is nearly a mathematical certainty.

Causation cannot be linked directly to one source (as a general principle), but I don't think that's what this guy was trying to support.

I haven't read his work, so I can't judge directly, but I can imagine that his idea of religion in a society was that of fundamentalist morality guided by the hand of something superhuman, set apart from human intervention.

He is not chastising various forms of Christianity or Islam or Shintoism, but rather the idea that our laws are based upon religious dogma rather than intelligent discourse.

In a society that prefers the laws of God, the laws will not be ratified by intelligent and rational theists, but by the lowest common denominators--the fundamentalists. The reason for this is simple. Rational, intelligent people, regardless of their religious affiliation, will only support a morality based on human ideas of the social contract. As in, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." is not a religious idea, but a human idea. Atheists don't want to be murdered or raped or have their items stolen, either. It's just a simple idea of humanity.

The line is drawn when fundamentalists start nitpicking and defining when life begins and when it ends. Then you have laws against abortion, even in cases of incest or rape, because it's "murder." And you have laws against assisted suicide, because only God can decide when your life ends. This is when God's law takes precedence over any human debate.

I think his study finds that there are more cases of crime in a society where fundamentalism has shifted the discourse from human laws to dogmatic Godly laws, where everything is black and white. And in a viable society, no law can be black and white, because that disallows debate over methodology and punishment options.

^yeah something like that. i am not saying his study is totally useless, it's just useless at answering the question posed in the title, and people who jump from corelation to causalification really get on my tits.
this is the sift, i clicked the title, and got bullshit, so y'know, downvote.

^(good comment from 'Hanns')

"Unwed pregnancies" a marker of social pathology, huh?
I'm not convinced.

nobody who is sane really believes in jesus. if someone really believed that after death they have a 50/50 chance of burning in agonizing hell for all time, they would be out in the streets screaming to the sky. they would be in their friends and families faces 24 hours a day trying to convert them.

there wouldn't be any of this "yeah I go to church on easter" or "yeah I believe in the bible, but I think its open to interpretation". people would be in church 7 days a week sacrificing goats in fire pits.

why would anyone mourn infant mortality? wouldn't people be going on non-stop skydiving trips? wouldn't everyone be trying to get into heaven as soon as possible, rather than risk slipping up and winding up in hell?

people would be going batsh*t insane if they really believed in jesus.

religion is not a source of morality, the culture which created it is. for proof, just open up the bible to a random page and try to use what it says as a moral guide and see how long it takes for you to wind up in jail. for extra fun, read the whole bible and try to use that as a moral guide and see how long it takes for you to receive the death penalty.

Go take a Logic Class this is "Appeal to Authority and the People"
So many Fallacy's I can shake a stick at!

I love science and everything but a paleontologist making a vague study about religion, and moraity? I rather wait until a sociologist with expertise on ethics does it.

From wikipedia:

"Gary F. Jensen of Vanderbilt University is one of the scientists who criticizes the methods used by Paul, including that "Paul’s analysis generates the 'desired results' by selectively choosing the set of social problems to include to highlight the negative consequences of religion". In a response [6] to the study by Paul, he builds on and refines Paul's analysis. His conclusion, that focus only in the crime of homicide, is that there is a correlation (and perhaps a causal relationship) of higher homicide rates, not with Christianity, but with dualistic Christian beliefs, something Jensen defines as the strong belief in all of the following : God, heaven, devil and hell. Excerpt: "A multiple regression analysis reveals a complex relationship with some dimensions of religiosity encouraging homicide and other dimensions discouraging it."

imstellar you read too much modernist bullshit. seriously. i love you for it, but you do.

He's a palaeontologists? Hmm. Wanna read my paper on quantum physics? I did some research.

Wait- There's something wrong with teen pregnancy?

Where's your Messiah now?

And yet the societies that actively ban(ned) religion are/were all run by atrocious tyrants, dominating a citizenry through fear.

>> ^quantumushroom:
And yet the societies that actively ban(ned) religion are/were all run by atrocious tyrants, dominating a citizenry through fear.


I don't think any sane person would want to ban religion these days.

Besides, these societies that actively force(d) religion are/were all run by atrocious tyrants, dominating their citizens through fear. FEAR OF BURNING IN HELL, OR AT THE STAKE.

And while I know better than to get dragged into QM's fantasy land, I just had to point that out.

*teens

Adding video to channels (Teens) - requested by alien_concept.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by jonny.