Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Pakistan's late Nobel-winning physicist who predicted the Higgs particle is a national hero. Just kidding; he's been erased from their textbooks for not being Islamic enough   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 192
    More: Asinine, atoms, higgs particles, Nobel, Pakistan, Islamic, Standard Model, god, other nations  
•       •       •

8553 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jul 2012 at 6:19 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



192 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-09 09:44:02 AM  

Joe Blowme: Ahh, the ole justifying present day retardation by pointing to centuries old retardation.
The classic " but mommy, Billy did it too!!!!"


"Justify"?

My friend, religion is in no way "justified." Neither by the facts, nor by the evidence, nor even by the bible. I can list no less than three ways in which the bible falls flat on its face.
 
2012-07-09 09:47:19 AM  

Malik Sardonis: It's his own fault. If he had used his scientific knowledge to contribute to the Pakistani nuclear weapons program, like all the other good scientists, he would have been a hero too.


you know how i know you didn't comprehend the article
 
2012-07-09 09:49:43 AM  
SteamingPile - When I was involved in the church they just prayed for people and never threatened to kill anyone, but yeah they are the same.


Just like every denomination and every church is the same, right?

Your church may have been like that, but certainly not every congregation's pews and pulpits are filled with those who would pray "for" people.

Plenty are filled with those who would do things like forcibly banish homosexuals to some fenced in concentration camp and deprive them of food until they were all dead. Some would whip up a frenzy calling for the death of abortion providers and then run and hide when one of their followers actually starts killing doctors and nurses and plants booby traps in an effort to kill first responders. While other churches may be filled with those who still oppose a racially integrated society and engage in practices related to the KKK.

I'm sure the church you belong/belonged to wasn't filled with such people, but let's not bury our heads in the sand and act like such "Christian" based churches don't exist.
 
2012-07-09 09:50:59 AM  
Neil deGrasse Tyson made a chilling point about fundamentalism.

The Arabs' names for 2/3rds of the stars, not to mention algebra and many other innovations, are used to this day because Islam was the center for scientific and cultural enlightenment for 300 years. People came in from all over the world (read: immigration) and discovered shiat (science). Then an "Intelligent Design" nutbag took over and the region hasn't recovered in NINE HUNDRED YEARS.

Science: It works, biatches.
 
2012-07-09 09:53:51 AM  
doglover:
steamingpile:


www.prosebeforehos.com

If you follow the disjointed, contradictory "philosophy" of Bronze-Age goat herders, you might be mentally deficient, and that's not good for anyone.
 
2012-07-09 09:54:58 AM  

doglover: SoothinglyDeranged: This is the sad reality of our world. The persecution of some of our most brilliant minds because *insert religious bullshiat here*

see:
Alan Turing
Galileo Galilei
et alia


Yes, blame all religions. Giovanni Caselli, Rene Descartes, Michael Faraday, and Issac Newton were all worthless and contributed nothing to the world because of their religious practices. Oh wait, the opposite of that.

Religion is like a sport for your mind. A Buddhist monk can focus on one thing so powerfully he doesn't even make a peep if you light him on fire with gasoline. I doubt most people could give themselves a blister on the stove while meditating without crying out in pain. Other religions have their merit, as well.

The problem isn't religion as a whole, but rather the people who take it too seriously. Just like everything else, moderation is the key. The Muslims in America are the guys who show up in the jerseys and root for the home team. The Muslims in Pakistan are the guys who start the football riots where people die. They need a serious dose of lighten the fark up in their lives.


Religion has contributed nothing. Except misery. What does being able to set yourself on fire accomplish?

Some people who were/are religious have done worthwhile things, but not because of god(s) or religion.

Religion has caused a lot of misery and conflicts, tho.
 
2012-07-09 09:55:16 AM  

HAMMERTOE: Joe Blowme: Ahh, the ole justifying present day retardation by pointing to centuries old retardation.
The classic " but mommy, Billy did it too!!!!"

"Justify"?

My friend, religion is in no way "justified." Neither by the facts, nor by the evidence, nor even by the bible. I can list no less than three ways in which the bible falls flat on its face.


I really dont care about the bible, im not religious but to say "but but but christains killed people too!!!" when confronted with the fact that islam remains an extreme and violent death cult today as it was centuries ago is IMHO, is dumb. Maybe you are not justifying it or defending it but it sure sounds like it. My aplogies if i have misinterpreted your point.
 
2012-07-09 09:58:05 AM  

doglover: Your rational thinking probably isn't as rational or well thought out as you think it is. A rabbi would eat you up and spit you out in a debate. Ever wonder why so many jews seem to be lawyers? Seems like half their religion is learning god's law by heart and the other half is finding way around it.


If a rabbi pwns you in a debate, you should have prepared better. Rabbis aren't special, they're just well-versed in Judaism (and hopefully a little psychology and family studies as well). They shouldn't be able to convince you of anything, or convert you from a belief - that's the sign of a weak mind, IMO.

Theologically, yeah - they should have an answer for every question. The good philosophical debates have come with the rabbis that were well-versed in philosophy, and the insights into culture and observance have (generally) not. The scene in Gran Torino where Walt takes down the priest is a really great example of what I mean - earning your frock don't make you any smarter just like earning an MD doesn't make you a better surgeon.

I've also met MDs that were teabaggers and lawyers that are hippies. The world is a weird place.
 
2012-07-09 10:11:55 AM  
Scanning the thread, I see the usual from the smug liberals of fark.com - i.e. leaping to the defense of islam and attacking Christianty. Liberals love 'em some islam, there's no doubt.


And I see the usual 'Fark Four' as well: The crusades (neglecting the ORIGINAL muslim one, of course), witch burnings, spanish inquisiotion and - naturally - that scourge which plagues our land.... 'the abortion bombings'. That's fine. Despising and mocking Christians is nothing new, it's not clever, modern or anything else. They did the same thing to Jesus when he was walking around! Yep, they had smug, self-satisfied idol-worshippers 2,000 years ago too.

Bottom line: Here's all you need to know about islam vs Christianity in 2012.
 
2012-07-09 10:12:00 AM  

Joe Blowme: HAMMERTOE: Joe Blowme: Ahh, the ole justifying present day retardation by pointing to centuries old retardation.
The classic " but mommy, Billy did it too!!!!"

"Justify"?

My friend, religion is in no way "justified." Neither by the facts, nor by the evidence, nor even by the bible. I can list no less than three ways in which the bible falls flat on its face.

I really dont care about the bible, im not religious but to say "but but but christains killed people too!!!" when confronted with the fact that islam remains an extreme and violent death cult today as it was centuries ago is IMHO, is dumb. Maybe you are not justifying it or defending it but it sure sounds like it. My aplogies if i have misinterpreted your point.


People feel uncomfortable talking about Islam so they talk about a different religion whos followers are less likely to behead them for bad mouthing their beliefs.

/the power of religion
 
2012-07-09 10:18:02 AM  

steamingpile: SoothinglyDeranged: This is the sad reality of our world. The persecution of some of our most brilliant minds because *insert religious bullshiat here*

see:
Alan Turing
Galileo Galilei
et alia

I was surprised it took someone this long to lump Christian in with this, it par for Fark, any religious mental cases are immediately compared to the west's religions. If its Christians trying to pass local laws to be stupid then that's just as good as Muslims killing people for not being "Muslim" enough. There is one widespread religion who still feels the need to take up weapons to use violence to prove their religion is the one true religion and does it more than any other religion.

When I was involved in the church they just prayed for people and never threatened to kill anyone, but yeah they are the same.


It will take only one post for people to start telling you that Christians would physically torture and beat you if they thought they could get away with it.
 
2012-07-09 10:18:40 AM  

Inflatable Rhetoric: Religion has contributed nothing. Except misery. What does being able to set yourself on fire accomplish?


To be fair, religion was the best guess at how things worked when humanity was starting out. Similar to the alchemy example a few posts up, though as our understanding develops religion got outmoded.

I'll give a pass to the ancient Greeks, the Latins, the Sumerians, and so on, because given the (lack of) data 'invisible man in the sky' makes as much sense as, and possibly more than "equalization of friction-driven atmospheric charge through the path of least resistance".

If you're talking any period after the rise of Athens and then Rome in the west, or the first Chinese empire in the east, though, no. No excuse. Religion since then has been maintained entirely to retain the institution's worldly powers. I have a beef with Christianity specifically because the rise of the religion involved a very intentional rejection of rational thought in favor of library-burning and suppressing discovery. At least things like Buddhism and Islam developed in regions before science (well, it's precursors empiricism and organized observation and logic, but still) wasn't really a developed, and were just never particularly comfortable with change. Christianity kind of deserves the abuse it gets because it started in a region full of half-developed science and great minds and specifically set about smashing all of the former and slaughtering all of the latter whenever they popped up. It goes a step beyond just being wrong and counterproductive and enters the realm of the outright malicious from the get-go.

//First person to say "but the monks preserved the knowledge of Rome" wins a free internet punch to the face, they preserved a few scraps of poetry and the works of like two philosophers who agreed largely with church teachings. Why those two? Because the church intentionally hunted down and destroyed the writings of the others.
 
2012-07-09 10:22:15 AM  

Sgt Stubby: Bottom line: Here's all you need to know about islam vs Christianity in 2012.


"You are going to hell, the man told her. You are living in darkness."

Funny that Aftab's religion would tell that man the exact same thing.
 
2012-07-09 10:27:07 AM  

Jim_Callahan: Inflatable Rhetoric: Religion has contributed nothing. Except misery. What does being able to set yourself on fire accomplish?


To be fair, religion was the best guess at how things worked when humanity was starting out. Similar to the alchemy example a few posts up, though as our understanding develops religion got outmoded.

I'll give a pass to the ancient Greeks, the Latins, the Sumerians, and so on, because given the (lack of) data 'invisible man in the sky' makes as much sense as, and possibly more than "equalization of friction-driven atmospheric charge through the path of least resistance".

If you're talking any period after the rise of Athens and then Rome in the west, or the first Chinese empire in the east, though, no. No excuse. Religion since then has been maintained entirely to retain the institution's worldly powers. I have a beef with Christianity specifically because the rise of the religion involved a very intentional rejection of rational thought in favor of library-burning and suppressing discovery. At least things like Buddhism and Islam developed in regions before science (well, it's precursors empiricism and organized observation and logic, but still) wasn't really a developed, and were just never particularly comfortable with change. Christianity kind of deserves the abuse it gets because it started in a region full of half-developed science and great minds and specifically set about smashing all of the former and slaughtering all of the latter whenever they popped up. It goes a step beyond just being wrong and counterproductive and enters the realm of the outright malicious from the get-go.

//First person to say "but the monks preserved the knowledge of Rome" wins a free internet punch to the face, they preserved a few scraps of poetry and the works of like two philosophers who agreed largely with church teachings. Why those two? Because the church intentionally hunted down and destroyed the writings of the others.


www.madtomatoe.com
 
2012-07-09 10:27:58 AM  

Giltric: People feel uncomfortable talking about Islam so they talk about a different religion whos followers are less likely to behead them for bad mouthing their beliefs.


Actually, I don't talk more about Islam because, frankly, you can see examples of its hatred, violence and just plain ignorance in the news on a daily basis. This, and the fact that I am largely unacquainted with most of its teachings. I stick to the subject I know best. I have tried a great majority of the Christian religions. Every last one is so hypocritical as to be a cartoon. They pray to their god to heal them, not thinking for once that their god gave them whatever affliction they're praying to get healed in the first place. This indicates that they feel they are "smarter" than their god, and seek to bring god around to their way of thinking. The Catholics I am acquainted with best, having attended catholic schools through the 9th grade. Catholicism = militarism + christianity. (Stand now. Sit now. Kneel now. Chant this invocation now.)
 
2012-07-09 10:28:20 AM  
Jim_Callahan, though you obvious intellect is dazzling, St. Paul was definitely a well-educated man. His home town of Tarsus was a center for higher-learning in his day. He was intelligent enough to know sh*t from shinola, and so were a great many others in that time.

Your condescending mocking of Christianity doesn't set you apart as being particularly bright or original. They mocked and spit upon Jesus while he died on the cross. In time, just about all the apostles were beaten to death, beheaded or whatever as well.

You're not saying anything 'new' that wasn't new 2,000 years ago.


/the only difference is that you don't have the freedom to spit on muslims in a muslim country, like you do with Christians here. Notice the difference?
 
2012-07-09 10:28:27 AM  

Jim_Callahan: Inflatable Rhetoric: Religion has contributed nothing. Except misery. What does being able to set yourself on fire accomplish?


To be fair, religion was the best guess at how things worked when humanity was starting out. Similar to the alchemy example a few posts up, though as our understanding develops religion got outmoded.


That's fair.
But, religion was wrong then, and is wrong now, and is a parasite on humanity.
 
2012-07-09 10:31:27 AM  

doglover: Ever wonder why so many jews seem to be lawyers? Seems like half their religion is learning god's law by heart and the other half is finding way around it.


You apparently don't know many Jewish lawyers if you think that many care about the old rules.
 
2012-07-09 10:31:28 AM  
They are just upset that a Muslim predicted something that is essential for Catholicism. After all, you can't have Mass without Higgs bosons.
 
2012-07-09 10:32:23 AM  
Religion is proof of our evolutionary relationship to poo-flinging apes.
 
2012-07-09 10:33:26 AM  

TheotherMIguy: I still blame the British though. Without them, the sub-continent would be a vastly different place right now: Richer, probably more religiously tolerant, and less nuke happy.


I blame Gandhi. If the British had stayed in control of India, it would be a much nicer place than it is now.
Same with all the new African countries. The end of Colonialism was what turned them into the mess they are today.
 
2012-07-09 10:35:00 AM  

Sgt Stubby: And I see the usual 'Fark Four' as well: The crusades (neglecting the ORIGINAL muslim one, of course), witch burnings, spanish inquisiotion and - naturally - that scourge which plagues our land.... 'the abortion bombings'. That's fine. Despising and mocking Christians is nothing new, it's not clever, modern or anything else. They did the same thing to Jesus when he was walking around! Yep, they had smug, self-satisfied idol-worshippers 2,000 years ago too.


Oh boo farking hoo. Go try to sell your repressed faithful act somewhere else. We aren't buying it here.
 
2012-07-09 10:39:17 AM  

Sgt Stubby: Jim_Callahan, though you obvious intellect is dazzling, St. Paul was definitely a well-educated man. His home town of Tarsus was a center for higher-learning in his day. He was intelligent enough to know sh*t from shinola, and so were a great many others in that time.

Your condescending mocking of Christianity doesn't set you apart as being particularly bright or original. They mocked and spit upon Jesus while he died on the cross. In time, just about all the apostles were beaten to death, beheaded or whatever as well.

You're not saying anything 'new' that wasn't new 2,000 years ago.


/the only difference is that you don't have the freedom to spit on muslims in a muslim country, like you do with Christians here. Notice the difference?


st. Augustine stated that curiosity was a waste of time, because it kept you from reflecting on the glory of God.

Granted, he already had his party days when he decided to put the kibosh on everyone else.
 
2012-07-09 10:41:37 AM  

lawboy87: Plenty are filled with those who would do things like forcibly banish homosexuals to some fenced in concentration camp and deprive them of food until they were all dead. Some would whip up a frenzy calling for the death of abortion providers and then run and hide when one of their followers actually starts killing doctors and nurses and plants booby traps in an effort to kill first responders. While other churches may be filled with those who still oppose a racially integrated society and engage in practices related to the KKK.


HOLY CRAP that sounds terrible. Try a methodist church instead. We have coffee!
 
2012-07-09 10:55:31 AM  
Egoy3k: Go try to sell your repressed faithful act somewhere else. We aren't buying it here.


I'm not 'selling' anything, and neither was Jesus. So save the righteous indignation.

I was trying to make a point, which is obviously lost on the angry liberals of fark.com. The point is simply that if I lived in Pakistan, I'd have acid thrown in my face, have my house burned down or just be killed outright (more or less what people like you did to early Christians). In fact, the same thing would happen to me in ANY muslim sh*thole on earth were I to practice Christianity openly.

Oddly, muslims are free to build mosques and pray to allah in any christian country. But to the liberals of fark.com, there is no difference and Christians are still FAR worse. Simply amazing...
 
2012-07-09 10:59:23 AM  

fireclown: lawboy87: Plenty are filled with those who would do things like forcibly banish homosexuals to some fenced in concentration camp and deprive them of food until they were all dead. Some would whip up a frenzy calling for the death of abortion providers and then run and hide when one of their followers actually starts killing doctors and nurses and plants booby traps in an effort to kill first responders. While other churches may be filled with those who still oppose a racially integrated society and engage in practices related to the KKK.

HOLY CRAP that sounds terrible. Try a methodist church instead. We have coffee!


And doughnuts
 
2012-07-09 11:07:01 AM  

Sgt Stubby: Scanning the thread, I see the usual from the smug liberals of fark.com - i.e. leaping to the defense of islam and attacking Christianty. Liberals love 'em some islam, there's no doubt.


Who in this thread was "leaping to the defense of islam and attacking Christianty"?
 
2012-07-09 11:19:21 AM  
What's in their textbooks, other than "God is Great?"
 
2012-07-09 11:30:17 AM  
This is the same country that Abdul Sattar Edhi has to worry about being car bombed for providing free hospital service to everyone. Seriously fundies, stop being dicks
 
2012-07-09 11:50:26 AM  
i50.tinypic.com

It's easy. Try it.
 
2012-07-09 11:54:37 AM  
well, having your discovery nicknamed "the god particle" is gonna help your popularity in pakistan and mississippi about as much as having it nicknamed "the hitler particle" would in germany and israel.
 
2012-07-09 11:56:16 AM  

Sgt Stubby: I'm not 'selling' anything, and neither was Jesus. So save the righteous indignation.

I was trying to make a point, which is obviously lost on the angry liberals of fark.com. The point is simply that if I lived in Pakistan, I'd have acid thrown in my face, have my house burned down or just be killed outright (more or less what people like you did to early Christians). In fact, the same thing would happen to me in ANY muslim sh*thole on earth were I to practice Christianity openly


You are coming awfully close to comparing yourself with Jesus. I'm pretty sure that is kind of offensive to christians.

You don't know me or anything about me. Don't presume to state what 'people like me' would or would not have done to you. You aren't persecuted, pretending that you are isn't going to win an argument. Nobody made any claims about christianity being worse than islam, that's like arguing that it's worse to die of AIDS than it is to die of cancer. Both are bad enough, and debating shades of awful isn't a worthwhile exercise.
 
2012-07-09 11:58:03 AM  
Islam. We Hate Everything, Including Each Other™
 
2012-07-09 12:01:23 PM  

yourdogwantsplacenta: fireclown: lawboy87: Plenty are filled with those who would do things like forcibly banish homosexuals to some fenced in concentration camp and deprive them of food until they were all dead. Some would whip up a frenzy calling for the death of abortion providers and then run and hide when one of their followers actually starts killing doctors and nurses and plants booby traps in an effort to kill first responders. While other churches may be filled with those who still oppose a racially integrated society and engage in practices related to the KKK.

HOLY CRAP that sounds terrible. Try a methodist church instead. We have coffee!

And doughnuts


You talking to me?
 
2012-07-09 12:11:09 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: doglover: Religion is like a sport for your mind.

Lots of brain damage from repeated collisions?


I lol'd.
 
2012-07-09 12:49:07 PM  

Sgt Stubby: The point is simply that if I lived in Pakistan, I'd have acid thrown in my face, have my house burned down or just be killed outright (more or less what people like you did to early Christians). In fact, the same thing would happen to me in ANY muslim sh*thole on earth were I to practice Christianity openly.


Look, if you want a plane ticket to the Middle East, do a Kickstarter project. Much as I'd like, I can't throw in on any air fare.
 
2012-07-09 12:52:10 PM  

doglover: Yes, blame all religions.


I do.

Religion is the blind acceptance of and adherence to dogma, even when it is directly contradicted by observed fact.

Science is the acceptance of observed fact, even when it directly contradicts a previously-held position.

They are completely opposite world views.
 
2012-07-09 12:59:36 PM  

Sgt Stubby: Egoy3k: Go try to sell your repressed faithful act somewhere else. We aren't buying it here.


I'm not 'selling' anything, and neither was Jesus. So save the righteous indignation.

I was trying to make a point, which is obviously lost on the angry liberals of fark.com. The point is simply that if I lived in Pakistan, I'd have acid thrown in my face, have my house burned down or just be killed outright (more or less what people like you did to early Christians). In fact, the same thing would happen to me in ANY muslim sh*thole on earth were I to practice Christianity openly.

Oddly, muslims are free to build mosques and pray to allah in any christian country. But to the liberals of fark.com, there is no difference and Christians are still FAR worse. Simply amazing...


Yes, Islam today is where Christian culture was 500 years ago. Our culture progressed and gradually became more tolerant, while Islam seems to be regressing if anything.

What you fail to consider is that the progress made by western culture happened IN SPITE of opposition from the religious establishment. The great thinkers and reformers often faced fierce resistance from the religious authorities who rightly saw rational inquiry as a threat to their domination of the minds and bodies of their fellow men.

The scientists, statesmen, philosophers, and academics never-the-less persevered, and dragged our culture forward, despite the kicking and screaming of the religious elites. Thus we got the Age of Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, and so on. Sadly Islam has as yet not experiences a like phenomenon. (Or perhaps one could say it was occurring, and then was somehow snuffed out.)

Today we enjoy a style of government and cultural tolerance that owes everything to the great revival of rational thought that finally put an end to the religious ignorance of the dark ages. Yet it's an ongoing struggle with the forces of ignorance, because religion itself never changed. Today's faithful fervently believe the exact same holy text that their ancestors venerated 1000 years ago.

Today the "liberals" still seem to generally have the upper hand, but the tide appears to be turning in places like Texas and Kansas, where they are altering their textbooks in exactly the same way as Pakistan. They are doing it for the same reason, too; to minimize the accomplishments of key historical figures (like Thomas Jefferson and Charles Darwin) whose views are not considered "orthodox" by the increasingly fanatical religious majority.

Those of us who cherish our personal freedoms and have no desire to submit to religious domination find this trend very disturbing. Pakistan serves as a grim reminder of where this slide into ignorance could leave us, if the religious/political movement continues to gain ground.
 
2012-07-09 12:59:48 PM  

clyph: doglover: Yes, blame all religions.

I do.

Religion is the blind acceptance of and adherence to dogma, even when it is directly contradicted by observed fact.

Science is the acceptance of observed fact, even when it directly contradicts a previously-held position.

They are completely opposite world views.


Yup. It's a pure binary, all right. No shades of gray here, my friend - you're either a toga-wearing, goat farming, blind adherent to 2000 year old dogma or you're a bright-eyed, labcoat-wearing, degree-holding, nuclear physicist/astronomer/chemist/sociobiologist (with a minor in paleobotany and sociozoology).

If there weren't 3 examples proving you wrong from within my own nuclear family, I might take umbrage to your statement.
 
2012-07-09 01:01:59 PM  

Sgt Stubby: Bottom line: Here's all you need to know about islam vs Christianity in 2012.


Really?
 
2012-07-09 01:08:06 PM  

sithon: SoothinglyDeranged: This is the sad reality of our world. The persecution of some of our most brilliant minds because *insert religious bullshiat here*

see:
Alan Turing
Galileo Galilei
et alia

Darwin could be added to that list.


no worries the blindly religious still defend him, everyone knows the cambrian explosion never really happened

stewpid creationists
 
2012-07-09 01:13:59 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Yup. It's a pure binary, all right. No shades of gray here, my friend - you're either a toga-wearing, goat farming, blind adherent to 2000 year old dogma or you're a bright-eyed, labcoat-wearing, degree-holding, nuclear physicist/astronomer/chemist/sociobiologist (with a minor in paleobotany and sociozoology).


To be fair here, there are tons of people living massive amounts of cognitive dissonance regarding their religion and the real world.

They say they believe all the laws from sky dad are just and moral. Even the source of all just and moral laws.

At the same time, they ignore the bits about how to buy, sell and treat slaves.

So the shades of grey people your talking about, are either ignorant about their religion, or just cherry picking.
 
2012-07-09 01:26:50 PM  

Dr Dreidel: It's a pure binary, all right. No shades of gray here, my friend - you're either a toga-wearing, goat farming, blind adherent to 2000 year old dogma or you're a bright-eyed, labcoat-wearing, degree-holding, nuclear physicist/astronomer/chemist/sociobiologist (with a minor in paleobotany and sociozoology).


People are quite capable of embracing different approaches to different topics. The majority of scientists consider themselves religious. The scientific and religious approaches, however, are mutually exclusive. In particular, there is no mention of any religious influence on any well-established scientific theory -- yes, that includes evolution. Neil Tyson referred to this (more specifically "intelligent design") as "God of the Gaps". Wherever the religious approach is applied, all progress on knowledge stops. A nuclear physicist who happens to be an "intelligent design" nutcase won't bother to learn a lick of biology. What's the incentive? Religion has all the answers for questions that are never asked. The most frightening manifestation of religion, however, is the destruction of existing knowledge. The only way you get a chemist to believe in intelligent design is to replace a biology text with a Bible.

Now, there are plenty of scientists that believe in a vague "higher power" that Christians happily count as one of their own in anecdotes, polls and surveys, but to call them "religious" is an overstatement. I suppose if you believe in God and go to church you're a Christian, but that's not far off from a Deist who just honors traditional customs. At that point we need to clarify the line between a faith and a cultural community. Invariably, the first defense of religion is the arbitrary standard used to determine what a "real" follower is. The standards swing dramatically when a religion is trying to pad its numbers or purging those they view lacking in faith.
 
2012-07-09 01:30:56 PM  

Raharu: To be fair here, there are tons of people living massive amounts of cognitive dissonance regarding their religion and the real world.


This^

I drunk what: no worries the blindly religious still defend him, everyone knows the cambrian explosion never really happened


lulz almost simulpost :D

Raharu: At the same time, they ignore the bits about how to buy, sell and treat slaves guidelines that only applied to jews under the Old Law


ftfy

Raharu: So the shades of grey people your talking about, are either ignorant about their religion, or just cherry picking.


Raharu: Dr Dreidel: Yup. It's a pure binary, all right. No shades of gray here, my friend


*snerk*
 
2012-07-09 01:31:51 PM  

Raharu: Dr Dreidel: Yup. It's a pure binary, all right. No shades of gray here, my friend - you're either a toga-wearing, goat farming, blind adherent to 2000 year old dogma or you're a bright-eyed, labcoat-wearing, degree-holding, nuclear physicist/astronomer/chemist/sociobiologist (with a minor in paleobotany and sociozoology).

To be fair here, there are tons of people living massive amounts of cognitive dissonance regarding their religion and the real world.

They say they believe all the laws from sky dad are just and moral. Even the source of all just and moral laws.

At the same time, they ignore the bits about how to buy, sell and treat slaves.

So the shades of grey people your talking about, are either ignorant about their religion, or just cherry picking.


Assuming that religion is both an all-or-nothing proposition, and a top-down hierarchy.

I realize it's trite, but saying "these are the rules" doesn't mean "these are all the rules I follow to the letter". There are also (at least in Judaism) myriad interpretations of what any given rule means.

It also may mean that there are people who accept the basic tenets of the faith (read up on Maimonedes' 13 Principles of Judaism - nothing about slaves or subjugation there, and very little metaphysics beyond "God as judge/lawmaker" and "messiah") and not some of the more oppressive rules. You can call it cherry-picking; I just call it "the evolution of socioreligion".

Because the Christianity practiced today looks very little like Christianity of even 200 years ago. Ditto Islam. Ditto Judaism. Things change depending on social mores and zeitgeist - I suspect the focus on a single Levitical line Christianity uses today will, in a generation or two, be thought as quaint as not eating meat on Fridays used to be.

// and the rules about slaves don't require you to own one
// they're also somewhat surprising - slaves must sleep on beds as good as the household's, can't be injured, must be fed/watered appropriately
 
2012-07-09 01:38:53 PM  

dragonchild: Dr Dreidel: It's a pure binary, all right. No shades of gray here, my friend - you're either a toga-wearing, goat farming, blind adherent to 2000 year old dogma or you're a bright-eyed, labcoat-wearing, degree-holding, nuclear physicist/astronomer/chemist/sociobiologist (with a minor in paleobotany and sociozoology).

People are quite capable of embracing different approaches to different topics. The majority of scientists consider themselves religious. The scientific and religious approaches, however, are mutually exclusive. In particular, there is no mention of any religious influence on any well-established scientific theory -- yes, that includes evolution. Neil Tyson referred to this (more specifically "intelligent design") as "God of the Gaps". Wherever the religious approach is applied, all progress on knowledge stops. A nuclear physicist who happens to be an "intelligent design" nutcase won't bother to learn a lick of biology. What's the incentive? Religion has all the answers for questions that are never asked. The most frightening manifestation of religion, however, is the destruction of existing knowledge. The only way you get a chemist to believe in intelligent design is to replace a biology text with a Bible.

Now, there are plenty of scientists that believe in a vague "higher power" that Christians happily count as one of their own in anecdotes, polls and surveys, but to call them "religious" is an overstatement. I suppose if you believe in God and go to church you're a Christian, but that's not far off from a Deist who just honors traditional customs. At that point we need to clarify the line between a faith and a cultural community. Invariably, the first defense of religion is the arbitrary standard used to determine what a "real" follower is. The standards swing dramatically when a religion is trying to pad its numbers or purging those they view lacking in faith.


Funny you mention chemistry.

My dad holds a PhD in the subject - and every Friday night/Saturday, he's in synagogue (OK, not *every* week). He's also a big deGrasse Tyson fan (they both went to Bronx Science).

You can believe without believing in the god of the gaps. My dad's thesis, for example (on the arrangement of free radicals in organic crystals, IIRC), doesn't devolve to "...and from there, we can see the influence of the almighty." You can believe that the universe is complex and believe that it was created by god without believing that there is some level of detail which we cannot observe because that's where god lives.

In fact, I'd wager that what drives believers to be scientists is what drives a person to be a watch repairman or electrician - you want to figure out how something that complex works. For all the people that improved on natural processes (the inventor of SCUBA, for example), I don't think they believed they were "usurping" god's role in creation/as creator; merely adding to it.

// not a believer
// just get really cheesed off when people think they know how believers think
// 9/10 times, you're seeing an asshatty form of Christianity and extrapolating outward
 
2012-07-09 01:42:34 PM  

dragonchild: The most frightening manifestation of religion, however, is the destruction of existing knowledge. The only way you get a chemist to believe in intelligent design is to add a biology text with a Bible.


and for them to use just a fraction of their given IQ

the only way you get a butthurt atheist to believe in scientific evidence is to replace the god delusion with a biology text

/and some creme to sooth the cramping
//linked text for bonus lulz

we need to make a new macro that rallies support for the poor oppressed atheistic-darwin evolutionists

i suggest a pacman shaped pie graph
 
2012-07-09 02:13:47 PM  

Dr Dreidel: My dad holds a PhD in the subject - and every Friday night/Saturday, he's in synagogue (OK, not *every* week). He's also a big deGrasse Tyson fan (they both went to Bronx Science).

You can believe without believing in the god of the gaps. My dad's thesis, for example (on the arrangement of free radicals in organic crystals, IIRC), doesn't devolve to "...and from there, we can see the influence of the almighty." You can believe that the universe is complex and believe that it was created by god without believing that there is some level of detail which we cannot observe because that's where god lives.


But where did his noption of god come in? Is it something he came up with all on his own in his path of studies? Or is it a holdover of something was taught as fact as a child?

Herein lies another problem... everyone has their own definition of god. I would imagine your PhD father might not hold the same definition as a bible literalist, but they use the same words and try to refer to the same thing.
 
2012-07-09 02:18:26 PM  

stonicus: Dr Dreidel: My dad holds a PhD in the subject - and every Friday night/Saturday, he's in synagogue (OK, not *every* week). He's also a big deGrasse Tyson fan (they both went to Bronx Science).

You can believe without believing in the god of the gaps. My dad's thesis, for example (on the arrangement of free radicals in organic crystals, IIRC), doesn't devolve to "...and from there, we can see the influence of the almighty." You can believe that the universe is complex and believe that it was created by god without believing that there is some level of detail which we cannot observe because that's where god lives.

But where did his noption of god come in? Is it something he came up with all on his own in his path of studies? Or is it a holdover of something was taught as fact as a child?

Herein lies another problem... everyone has their own definition of god. I would imagine your PhD father might not hold the same definition as a bible literalist, but they use the same words and try to refer to the same thing.


Religion is a personal set of beliefs, some of which come from values instilled at a young age, some of which are dogmatic, and some are derived from personal observations made throughout life?

You don't farking say.

// my parents don't have the same religious/metaphysical views
// both are Jewish, both are Orthodox, both are postgraduate-degree holders from NY
 
2012-07-09 02:37:15 PM  

lohphat: Ever notice that countries that are "hell holes" are so due to conservative ideology, while more liberal and tolerant countries seem to be more advanced?


Like Best Korea and China? ;-)
 
Displayed 50 of 192 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report