Quote:
Originally Posted by Skye Ephémérine  Are medical practioners not scientists to you? If you have an MD or a PhD next to your name you are still considered a doctor?.. further though PhD holders make up 1% of the population doctors are even less than that! |
It's not a matter of my personal opinion, doctors of medicine are not trained to be scientists, they're trained to practice medicine. Obviously there's a spectrum and there are multidisciplinary skills involved but doctors are not trained to be fully fledged researchers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skye Ephémérine The study you posted doesn't mention all the values that come on top that tell you of the pool of subjects, where from, conducted by whom, for what purpose, etc .. there is really nothing to criticize.. I'd find it ludicrous to take the time to address something that isn't even on the map! |
I'll admit I'm relying on Nature's good reputation in this matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skye Ephémérine ? |
Code:
All Psych
Prot 39 27
Cath 22 10
Jew 13 29
None 10 17
Tot 84% 83%
Rest 16% 17%
I wasn't sure where the 39% came from in your post. As it stands physicians don't need any doctored statistics (sorry) about religion, 3/4 isn't a bad turn out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skye Ephémérine You haven't conducted a study on a pool of scientests to see whether or not they agree with above findings.. my feeling is, most people keep their spirituality/religion and personal interest private.. until you actually select a group of randomized scientests from all backgrounds and all religious or non-religious affiliations giving them the above finds to see if they are in agreement with its content can you speak with the authority of numbers on what they believe or don't believe.. People in the same scientific institutions and of very like mind and similar education don't agree of things that you think you have mastered with such deftness, how can you sit and speak for 90% of them and with such bravado? This is simply not applicable! |
It is not my own personal claim of these figures, it is the work of people more competent in organising a survey and has been published in one of the world's foremost scientific journals.
I'm sure if you have some desire to prove that this work is flawed then you could write to the author at the address provided and question his methods yourself.