It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

4 in 10 Americans Believe God Created Earth 10,000 Years Ago

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

That is what I meant by saying "unbelievable" and "stumped". "Incredible" would also apply.

"Ridiculous" is as good as any. Those stats are just the tip of the iceberg. The reality is that there is still a whole lot of ignorance in this world. In 2014. I find it sad, to be brutally honest.




posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 11:40 AM
link   
and they are all here on ATS as members......"embrace ignorance", the new motto



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: SonoftheSun

While I find the study sad and disappointing, I have to add a little caution.

Many will post/have posted from a sense of arrogance.

We may know more than we did, but we don't know everything. Just because we can look back from a higher knowledge base, doesn't mean we've reached the pinnacle of intelligence.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
I have a feeling that the "age of religion" is winding down. I hypothesize that in the next several hundred years there will be a paradigm shift towards science. If we want to reach the stars, we have to crawl out of our caves and put our mythical invisible sky-god away.


You have no idea how I wish you are right !!!

Unfortunately, none of us will be there to see it though.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: SonoftheSun

But A day to god is like 1000 of our years so it could be based on his days or years. Peter 3:8

If that is true that sounds about right, but I agree it is billions of years in our years.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 11:59 AM
link   
To bad that the number of people that actually asked these things, isn't representing enough people to actually back up the percentage presented here. They didn't ask everyone, did they ?

Basically I think most people are idiots. This thread is proof enough.

I don't know much, but I do know it's BS to ignore actual facts and evidence, and believe hocus pocus and other crap instead.

You're welcome.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: solomons path
Im in Canada, Vancouver area..actually we had one friend who got married to this crazy woman and he went right off the deep end with her in this regard, they had a couple of kids..they couldnt do the things most kids do..watch cartoons for example as they are "satanic"..lol, denyed the existence of dinosaurs ..etc. He finally regained some equalibrium and rejoined the real world many years ago. In my whole life thats one that i know for a time believed this kind of stuff..i guess whatever their church was telling them.
I know alot who believe in a higher power not affiliating themselves with any organized religeon and probably the same amount who believe nothing in that regard.
Cheers



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: SonoftheSun

They didn't poll Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhist, paganism, satanism?

of course not, since Christianity is always the main target, and I don't know a single person that believes this.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: SonoftheSun
a reply to: vonclod



That is what I meant by saying "unbelievable" and "stumped". "Incredible" would also apply.



"Ridiculous" is as good as any. Those stats are just the tip of the iceberg. The reality is that there is still a whole lot of ignorance in this world. In 2014. I find it sad, to be brutally honest.

We also need to remember that a statistic is only as good as the statician..lol, often they are skewed in favour to the result they are looking for..if it is true i would be shocked..maybee a little scared..lol



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Even though I'm only in my late 20's, gonna kick into old-man mode for a second: I blame the Internets.

We now live in the age of (excessive) information, however: this, like many things, is a double-edged sword. We as a society have traded valuable, in-depth knowledge for (mostly) worthless information.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
I'd like to comment that there's a very strong relationship between low IQ and fundamentalist religious views. Those people who take the bible literally probably have a double digit IQ. In fact the average fundie has an IQ in the high eighties. They certainly don't understand stuff like astronomy, geology or biology. Just read the pro creation posts on ATS as an example.

Basically about 1/5th of the population is pretty dumb and only has enough processing power to cope with basic day to day stuff. Expecting them to have an interest in things not directly relevant to survival is a bit unfair: science is hard and has a lot of maths. These people can barely run their own lives (and many can't). Cut them some slack, just don't let them breed.

www.godandscience.org...



Abstract
High levels of religiosity have been linked to lower levels of intelligence in a number of recent studies. These results have generated both controversy and theoretical interest. Here in a large sample of US adults we address several issues that restricted the generalizability of these previous results. We measured six dimensions of religiosity (rather than just one or two), along with a multi-scale instrument to assess general intelligence. We also controlled for the influence of the personality trait openness on facets of religious belief and practice. The results indicated that lower intelligence is most strongly associated with higher levels of fundamentalism, but also modestly predicts central components of religiosity such as a sense of religious identification and private religious practice. Secondly, we found that a higher level of openness – often assumed to lead to lower religiosity – is weakly associated with reduced fundamentalism but with increased religious mindfulness, private religious practice, religious support, and spirituality. These new results provide a framework for understanding the links between reasoning and faith



See, not making it up.Stupid people are more religious and way more likley to take the bible literally.
edit on 6-6-2014 by Antigod because: adding links



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: CloudsTasteMetallic
I blame the Internets.

We now live in the age of (excessive) information, however: this, like many things, is a double-edged sword. We as a society have traded valuable, in-depth knowledge for (mostly) worthless information.


You could be right. Miley's antics and Kim K's wedding being more important that googling to see if the Earth revolves around the Sun or if it's the opposite.

When it comes to religions though, I mean...if they tell you that the Earth and Mankind just snapped into existence 10,000 years ago, or how about muslims? where they believe that 72 virgins are waiting for you when you die...I mean...

No one is questioning and just take it as truth? I don't get it. There IS tons of information out there for someone who looks for it. Intellectual laziness perhaps?



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx
and they are all here on ATS as members......"embrace ignorance", the new motto


That is so mendacious, because I have read many post over the years and there are very few that believe that.

I don't believe science and faith are mutually exclusive, in fact just the opposite.



I present to you the Rev. Dr. Sir John Polkinghorne, a world-renowned mathematical and quantum physicist, as well as an Anglican priest. He is no ordinary scientist. He received a PhD in Physics from Trinity College of Cambridge University in 1955. After that, he went on to teach mathematical physics and received a ScD (Doctorate of Science) in 1974. During his extensive career in physics, he received many awards and taught physics for many years. One of the most amazing aspects of his career is his contribution to the discovery of "quarks." He later went on to become the President of Queen's College at the University of Cambridge. - See more at: theologicalgraffiti.com...


he has written 26 books on the relationship between faith he has also written 26 books on the relationship between faith.


“I don’t have to choose between the answers to those questions,” declares Polkinghorne. “In fact, in order to understand the mysterious event of the boiling kettle, I need both those kinds of answers to tell me what’s going on. So I need the insights of science and the insights of religion if I’m to understand the rich and many-layered world in which we live.”

Seeing the world from both the perspective of science and the perspective of religion is something Polkinghorne describes as seeing the world with “two eyes instead of one.” He explains: “Seeing the world with two eyes—having binocular vision—enables me to understand more than I could with either eye on its own.”

How does Science relate to Faith?

youtu.be...



What would you ask God?

youtu.be...



Maybe the atheist are the ones with the closed minds.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: SonoftheSun
a reply to: vonclod

That is what I meant by saying "unbelievable" and "stumped". "Incredible" would also apply.

"Ridiculous" is as good as any. Those stats are just the tip of the iceberg. The reality is that there is still a whole lot of ignorance in this world. In 2014. I find it sad, to be brutally honest.



We got to always pick on the creationist... like their beliefs and faith is the only thing to make the headlines as some level of ignorance.

The truth is I find about 50% of Americans as really ignorant in very non-religious ways. Hell walk down the street and just listen to the people around you, its like they are sub-human and only look like us.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Antigod
No God is fine with me I'm 115 as of 2 years ago.Of course my opinion was solidified under an artillery barrage,I don't really NEED you to believe.It isn't a high priority on my "FAITH" list.Reality has it's way of evening things out FOR us all.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777


Well done, you found one of the high IQ religious people in existence. He studies maths not science, as science is brutally incompatible with a literal belief in the bible.

The averge IQ of the seminary students was lower than the normal college students.

Only about 0.03% of scientists disagree with evolution..




Maybe the atheist are the ones with the closed minds


No, they have the higher IQ, better educated, more familiar with science minds.

Science (seeing measurable facts) is just not compatible with a literal belief in ancient texts that get contradicted by what you can personally check. Scientists are religious, just not usually in a scripture quoting way.



During public lectures about the study, the question inevitably asked first is: Do the professors you studied believe in God? When asked their beliefs about God, nearly 34 percent of academic scientists answer “I do not believe in God” and about 30 percent answer “I do not know if there is a God and there is no way to find out,” the classic agnostic response. This means that over 60 percent of professors in these natural and social science disciplines describe themselves as either atheist or religiously agnostic. In comparison, among those in the general U.S. population, about 3 percent claim to be atheists and about 5 percent are religiously agnostic.9 When it comes to affiliation with particular religions, scientists are also vastly different from members of the broader society. About 52 percent of scientists see themselves as having no religious affiliation when compared to only 14 percent of the general population. Scientists who are not religious justify their inattention to religion through language that stresses the irrelevance of science to religion. Those not raised in religious homes, the case for the majority of scientists without religious affiliation, also emphasize their lack of experience with religion. When comparing scientists who do have a religious


the difference an eeducation makes to most.
edit on 6-6-2014 by Antigod because: adding text



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Antigod




I'd like to comment that there's a very strong relationship between low IQ and fundamentalist religious views. Those people who take the bible literally probably have a double digit IQ.

According to 100 Years of Nobel Prizes a review of Nobel prizes award between 1901 and 2000 reveals that (65.4%) of Nobel Prizes Laureates, have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference.[1]
List from 313 A D, through today



List of Christian thinkers in science
en.wikipedia.org...
just a small section of the list,

Physics and Astronomy

Charles Hard Townes (born 1915): In 1964 he won the Nobel Prize in Physics and in 1966 he wrote The Convergence of Science and Religion.[244]
Antony Hewish (born 1924): Antony Hewish is a British Radio Astronomer who won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1974 (together with Martin Ryle) for his work on the development of radio aperture synthesis and its role in the discovery of pulsars. He was also awarded the Eddington Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1969. Hewish is a Christian.[245] Hewish also wrote in his introduction to John Polkinghorne's 2009 Questions of Truth, "The ghostly presence of virtual particles defies rational common sense and is non-intuitive for those unacquainted with physics. Religious belief in God, and Christian belief ... may seem strange to common-sense thinking. But when the most elementary physical things behave in this way, we should be prepared to accept that the deepest aspects of our existence go beyond our common-sense understanding."[246]
Walter Thirring (born 1927): Austrian physicist after whom the Thirring model in quantum field theory is named. He is the son of the physicist Hans Thirring, co-discoverer of the Lense-Thirring frame dragging effect in general relativity.
Antonino Zichichi (born 1929): Italian nuclear physicist and former President of the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare. He has worked with the Vatican on relations between the Church and Science.[247]
John Polkinghorne (born 1930): British particle physicist and Anglican priest who wrote Science and the Trinity (2004) ISBN 0-300-10445-6. Winner of the 2002 Templeton Prize.[248]
Owen Gingerich (born 1930): Mennonite astronomer who went to Goshen College and Harvard. Mr. Gingerich has written about people of faith in science history.[249]
Russell Stannard (born 1931): British particle physicist who has written several books on the relationship between religion and science, such as Science and the Renewal of Belief, Grounds for Reasonable Belief and Doing Away With God?.[250]
Michał Heller (born 1936): He is a Catholic priest, a member of the Pontifical Academy of Theology, a founding member of the International Society for Science and Religion. He also is a mathematical physicist who has written articles on relativistic physics and Noncommutative geometry. His cross-disciplinary book Creative Tension: Essays on Science and Religion came out in 2003. For this work he won a Templeton Prize. [note 9][251]
Robert Griffiths (born 1937): A noted American physicist at Carnegie Mellon University. He has written on matters of science and religion.[252]
George Francis Rayner Ellis (born 1939): Professor of Complex Systems in the Department of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics at the University of Cape Town in South Africa. He co-authored The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time with University of Cambridge physicist Stephen Hawking, published in 1973, and is considered one of the world's leading theorists in cosmology. He is an active Quaker and in 2004 he won the Templeton Prize.
Joseph H. Taylor, Jr. (born 1941): American astrophysicist and Nobel Prize in Physics laureate for his discovery with Russell Alan Hulse of a "new type of pulsar, a discovery that has opened up new possibilities for the study of gravitation."[253]
Colin Humphreys (born 1941): He is a British physicist. He is the former Goldsmiths’ Professor of Materials Science and a current Director of Research at Cambridge University, Professor of Experimental Physics at the Royal Institution in London and a Fellow of Selwyn College, Cambridge. Humphreys also "studies the Bible when not pursuing his day-job as a materials scientist."[254]
Christopher Isham (born 1944): Theoretical physicist who developed HPO formalism. He teaches at Imperial College London. In addition to being a physicist, he is a philosopher and theologian.[255]
Frank J. Tipler (born 1947): Frank Tipler is a mathematical physicist and cosmologist, holding a joint appointment in the Departments of Mathematics and Physics at Tulane University. Tipler has authored books and papers on the Omega Point, which he claims is a mechanism for the resurrection of the dead. His theological and scientific theorizing are not without controversy, but he has some supporters; for instance, Christian theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg has defended his theology,[256] and physicist David Deutsch has incorporated Tipler's idea of an Omega Point.[257]
J. Richard Gott (born 1947): Gott is a professor of astrophysical sciences at Princeton University. He is known for developing and advocating two cosmological theories with the flavor of science fiction: Time travel and the Doomsday argument. When asked of his religious views in relation to his science, Gott responded that "I’m a Presbyterian. I believe in God; I always thought that was the humble position to take. I like what Einstein said: “God is subtle but not malicious.” I think if you want to know how the universe started, that’s a legitimate question for physics. But if you want to know why it’s here, then you may have to know—to borrow Stephen Hawking’s phrase—the mind of God."[258]
William Daniel Phillips (born 1948): 1997 Nobel Laureate in Physics (1997) who is a founding member of The International Society for Science and Religion.[259]
John D. Barrow (born 1952): English cosmologist who did notable writing on the implications of the Anthropic principle. He is a United Reformed Church member and Christian deist. He won the Templeton Prize in 2006. He once held the position of Gresham Professor of Astronomy.[260]
Stephen Barr (born 1953): Physicist who worked at Brookhaven National Laboratory and contributed papers to Physical Review as well as Physics Today. He also is a Catholic who writes for First Things and wrote Modern Physics and Ancient Faith. He teaches at the University of Delaware.[261]
Karl W. Giberson(born 1957): Canadian physicist and evangelical, who has published several books on the relationship between science and religion, such as The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions and Saving Darwin: How to be a Christian and Believe in Evolution.
Andrew Pinsent (born 1966): Fr. Andrew Pinsent, a Catholic priest, is the Research Director of the Ian Ramsey Centre for Science and Religion at Oxford University.[262] He is also a particle physicist, whose previous work contributed to the DELPHI experiment at CERN.[263]
l



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
What this means is that modern man walked alongside dinosaurs.

Why didn't anyone make pets out of em?? My dogs would love a velociraptor buddy.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Just as many believe that we were once monkeys. What is your point?



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: SonoftheSun

The truth is NO ONE knows how old the earth is.

The bible don't say.
Carbon dating doesn't know the age.
Scientists think they know all, but don't really know the age.

So it really comes down to "each to their own opinion"



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join