Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

[ranma1/2]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

you can't be 'an well educated'-- that is an oxymoron right there.. like 'deafening silence'... hilarious

let's start with basics all right just for believability' sake then work our way up.. if English is your first language, then master the linguistics first, then eventually graduate to the sciences...

cheers

ah the p3rf3c7 ness of your p3r50nal 4774ck5.

seriously SE take any typos with a grain of salt. your typical attitude is to do personal attacks and it reflects on you. nowz if id care that muhc abuot my gramer n spellun id bauda wit it mores.

im n ur brain eatn ur hamburgz.

 

[ranma1/2]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

Wrong, education strengthens faith. Whether or not you are properly educated or properly understand the true religion is your own problem. We look at a paining and see the meaning and purpose, you see the colors and material its made out of and deny the purpose.

It's all what you make of it. WHy are there so many religious scientists and educated believers?

and? why are there so many of different religions? i personally see them as seperating their religion and their science. Of course many bend whatever they see to fit their faith.

It is foolish to say education is anti faith or science is anti faith. Science is not an absolute thing that reaches across time. It is the level of development we have at that point in time. Soon it will catch up to religion, the true religion Islam.

catch up? you mean what exactly? Faith is based on ignorance. If you know something you cant have faith. If you have evidence that god exists you cant have faiththat he exists.


To end this discussion, all that is needed is the Prophet's (SAW) advice.
im not sure how that relates.

"To listen to the words of the learned, and to instill into others the lessons of science, is better than religious exercises."


Science + Religion = Stronger faith
Religion = Strong Faith
Science = Dead end

huh?

I believe it was Sir Francis Bacon who said that a little science makes an atheist, a lot of science makes a BELIEVER.
and so what? i got many a scientists named steve that disagree.

i disagree, i think science may strengthen your belief in your religion but faith is strictly believeing in something without evidence.

If you know god exists you cant have faith that he exists.

If you know you have 5 bucks in your pocket you cant have faith you have 5 bucks in your pocket.

 

[------]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

ah the p3rf3c7 ness of your p3r50nal 4774ck5.

seriously SE take any typos with a grain of salt. your typical attitude is to do personal attacks and it reflects on you. nowz if id care that muhc abuot my gramer n spellun id bauda wit it mores.

im n ur brain eatn ur hamburgz.

SE actually does have a point, to be honest.

 

[ranma1/2]

what? his point is to point out i made typos and be a grammar nazi? oh my... i must not have an edumacation....

 

[------]

I meant

you can't be 'an well educated'-- that is an oxymoron right there.. like 'deafening silence'... hilarious

.

And he's a she lol

 

[جوري]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

ah the p3rf3c7 ness of your p3r50nal 4774ck5.

seriously SE take any typos with a grain of salt. your typical attitude is to do personal attacks and it reflects on you. nowz if id care that muhc abuot my gramer n spellun id bauda wit it mores.

im n ur brain eatn ur hamburgz.

Actually if you have ever had anything of substance to impart, you wouldn't be the subject to a battery of insults from everyone not just my person!.. In general you have the mental capacity of a 12 year old, and that is being very generous.

I don't think you are in my brain at all, you see the proctologist has just called.. Alas they have found your head!

cheers

 

[------]

:salamext:

I do wish you would speak simple english sister

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

Wrong, education strengthens faith. Whether or not you are properly educated or properly understand the true religion is your own problem. We look at a paining and see the meaning and purpose, you see the colors and material its made out of and deny the purpose.

It's all what you make of it. WHy are there so many religious scientists and educated believers?

and? why are there so many of different religions? i personally see them as seperating their religion and their science. Of course many bend whatever they see to fit their faith.


If you are asking why there are so many religions with THAT many posts under your belt, you must be good at typing blind. The false religions have problems and science illuminates them, hence the Prophet SAW telling us to listen to the learned too.

It is foolish to say education is anti faith or science is anti faith. Science is not an absolute thing that reaches across time. It is the level of development we have at that point in time. Soon it will catch up to religion, the true religion Islam.

catch up? you mean what exactly? Faith is based on ignorance. If you know something you cant have faith. If you have evidence that god exists you cant have faiththat he exists.

Yet again, faith is not based on ignorance. The Prophet SAW said that the likeness of a learned beliver compared to the ignorant believer is like the moon above all the stars. He also said that a learned beliver is harder on the devil than 1000 ignorant ones. You keep calling faith ignorance. Sour grapes? You can't bring yourself to follow Allah and then slander faith. Childish but predictable. YOU are in ignorance and to say that we are because we have discovered a truth that you dont like is asinine.

To end this discussion, all that is needed is the Prophet's (SAW) advice.
im not sure how that relates.

Simply stating that even the Prophets say that learning about science will strengthen our faith and show us that they go hand in hand.

"To listen to the words of the learned, and to instill into others the lessons of science, is better than religious exercises."


Science + Religion = Stronger faith
Religion = Strong Faith
Science = Dead end
huh?

See above.

I believe it was Sir Francis Bacon who said that a little science makes an atheist, a lot of science makes a BELIEVER.
and so what? i got many a scientists named steve that disagree.

I know people who disagree with the earth being rounded, Hurray!! we BOTH know ignorant people!

i disagree, i think science may strengthen your belief in your religion but faith is strictly believeing in something without evidence.

If you know god exists you cant have faith that he exists.

If you know you have 5 bucks in your pocket you cant have faith you have 5 bucks in your pocket.


Wow you like to go in circles don't you? I can see where this is going, you don't get it do you? Allah has put SIGNS in the earth, faith is based on recognizing, reflecting upon, and beliving in those signs. If you could PROVE empirically that Allah existed, then there would be no faith. This life is a test to see who works towards Allah and who doesnt, the signs when properly understood, amount to much more than enough evidence to follow Allah.

 

[ranma1/2]

faith is believeing in something without evidence.

 

[------]

Nope. There's plenty of evidence...if you choose not to believe it, thats up to you..

 

[Azy]

I'll use USA as an example because there is plenty of demographic info available.

Around 90% of Americans are religious.
92% of American scientists are atheist or agnostic.

This says a couple of things to me...

If the Quran contained genuine scientific 'miracles' then scientists all over the world would invariably be muslims and not overwhelmingly atheist/agnostic as they are.

If the testimony of scientists on religious matters is valid then you've just shot yourself in the foot because most of them disagree with you.

 

[جوري]

your above study isn't an accurate assessment of the religious devotions of scientists, I have posted plenty of opposite studies on this very forum and this very section (health and science).. use the search engine third from your anatomical right..

You need to know first and fore most how to conduct a legitimate study, how to free it from confounders, how to randomize it, set important variables and get a large enough population so that it is legitimate.

if I post this study

In 2003, to learn about the contribution of religious factors on physicians' clinical practices, Curlin and colleagues surveyed 1,820 practicing physicians from all specialties, including an augmented number of psychiatrists; 1,144 (63%) physicians responded, including 100 psychiatrists.

The survey contained questions about medical specialties, religion, and measures of what the researchers called intrinsic religiosity--the extent to which individuals embrace their religion as the "master motive that guides and gives meaning to their life."

Although 61 percent of all American physicians were either Protestant (39%) or Catholic (22%), only 37 percent of psychiatrists were Protestant (27%) or Catholic (10%). Twenty-nine percent were Jewish, compared to 13 percent of all physicians. Seventeen percent of psychiatrists listed their religion as "none," compared to only 10 percent of all doctors.

which was conducted by the university of chicago medical center
http://www.uchospitals.edu/news/2007/20070903-psychiatrists.html

You'd formulate the idea that psychiatrists are mostly atheists, fact is I can already spot a couple of confounder with this study right off the bat.. they have excluded the other 39% of physicians who didn't fall into the Judeo-Christian category and who in fact might be devoutly religious-- the other is 1,820 isn't a statistically significant number...
That is using numbers to mislead people!

other than that, I find it sort of ridiculous to believe or not believe based on an appeal to authority..

It is neither careful nor judicious.. it is actually rather sad!
and that goes from both ends!

cheers

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

I'll use USA as an example because there is plenty of demographic info available.

Around 90% of Americans are religious.
92% of American scientists are atheist or agnostic.

This says a couple of things to me...

If the Quran contained genuine scientific 'miracles' then scientists all over the world would invariably be muslims and not overwhelmingly atheist/agnostic as they are.

If the testimony of scientists on religious matters is valid then you've just shot yourself in the foot because most of them disagree with you.

Nope, people are people. They can ignore stuff if they want to. You make out scientists to be somehow above normal people in your post. Scientists are just regular people, they can be ignorant too.

So what does your article tell me? That you havent looked into it much at all.

ZOMG 92% Atheist OMG OMG SCIENCE RULES OUT RELIGION

Foolish if you ask me, here take a look a this.

http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html

This tells me a bunch of interesting thing, such as:

Ecklund says, "It appears that those from non-religious backgrounds disproportionately self-select into scientific professions. This may reflect the fact that there is tension between the religious tenets of some groups and the theories and methods of particular sciences and it contributes to the large number of non-religious scientists."


Let me get this straight, according to your logic, we could say this:

African-Americans comprise approximately 79% of NBA rosters, 65% of NFL line ups, and 18% of MLB teams

ZOMB being BLACK RULES OUT PLAYING BASEBALL!!! L@@K SO FEW BLACK PEOPLE PLAY BASEBALL!!!! THEREFORE THEY ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE!!!!

 

[Azy]

your above study isn't an accurate assessment of the religious devotions of scientists, I have posted plenty of opposite studies on this very forum and this very section (health and science).. use the search engine third from your anatomical right..

Do they all include medical practitioners and not scientists?

You need to know first and fore most how to conduct a legitimate study, how to free it from confounders, how to randomize it, set important variables and get a large enough population so that it is legitimate.

if I post this study

Are you going to criticise the methodology of the study I actually posted or just one you picked yourself?

You'd formulate the idea that psychiatrists are mostly atheists, fact is I can already spot a couple of confounder with this study right off the bat.. they have excluded the other 39% of physicians who didn't fall into the Judeo-Christian category and who in fact might be devoutly religious-- the other is 1,820 isn't a statistically significant number...
That is using numbers to mislead people!

They're not the only ones it seems, if you came up with 39% excluded then one of us must be reading those numbers incorrectly.

other than that, I find it sort of ridiculous to believe or not believe based on an appeal to authority..

It is neither careful nor judicious.. it is actually rather sad!
and that goes from both ends!

Well at least we agree on something.

Scientists are just regular people, they can be ignorant too.

They can but people who research the workings of the world are probably in a better position to testify about it.

ZOMG 92% Atheist OMG OMG SCIENCE RULES OUT RELIGION

It seems you haven't really understood my point. I'm not saying that science excludes religion, since by most accounts science cannot explain something which is not of the natural world.
What science can do is support or refute religious scripture relating to matters of the natural world, and the original poster seems to be appealing to the authority of scientists in order to do this.
My point is that most scientists do not endorse these views, which kind of renders the 'appeal to authority' factor a bit pointless, why select only the opinions of respected scientists who happen to believe in a miraculous Quran and ignore the majority who do not.

 

[barney]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

, why select only the opinions of respected scientists who happen to believe in a miraculous Quran and ignore the majority who do not.

Err.. To lend weight to scripture?

 

[Whatsthepoint]

your above study isn't an accurate assessment of the religious devotions of scientists, I have posted plenty of opposite studies on this very forum and this very section (health and science).. use the search engine third from your anatomical right..

You need to know first and fore most how to conduct a legitimate study, how to free it from confounders, how to randomize it, set important variables and get a large enough population so that it is legitimate.

if I post this study


which was conducted by the university of chicago medical center
http://www.uchospitals.edu/news/2007/20070903-psychiatrists.html

You'd formulate the idea that psychiatrists are mostly atheists, fact is I can already spot a couple of confounder with this study right off the bat.. they have excluded the other 39% of physicians who didn't fall into the Judeo-Christian category and who in fact might be devoutly religious-- the other is 1,820 isn't a statistically significant number...
That is using numbers to mislead people!

other than that, I find it sort of ridiculous to believe or not believe based on an appeal to authority..

It is neither careful nor judicious.. it is actually rather sad!
and that goes from both ends!

cheers

Unlike other scientists medical doctors deal with disease, death, pain, pretty depressing stuff, so it makes sense that they're more religious than the rest. Psychiatrists don't deal with death and physical suffering all that much, so this could account for the slightly higher percentage of atheists in their ranks.

 

[aamirsaab]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles


I missed the time when we could all sit and marvel at the awesomeness of a thread title. You know, sort of ponder on it and the content of the first post for hours and sometimes even days.

Nowdays, everyone wants a freakin debate about it. And I'm not just talking about LI, mind you.

Oh well.

 

[جوري]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

Do they all include medical practitioners and not scientists?

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!

Are you going to criticise the methodology of the study I actually posted or just one you picked yourself?

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!

They're not the only ones it seems, if you came up with 39% excluded then one of us must be reading those numbers incorrectly.

?

Well at least we agree on something.

What a great day this is...

They can but people who research the workings of the world are probably in a better position to testify about it.
It seems you haven't really understood my point. I'm not saying that science excludes religion, since by most accounts science cannot explain something which is not of the natural world.
What science can do is support or refute religious scripture relating to matters of the natural world, and the original poster seems to be appealing to the authority of scientists in order to do this.
My point is that most scientists do not endorse these views, which kind of renders the 'appeal to authority' factor a bit pointless, why select only the opinions of respected scientists who happen to believe in a miraculous Quran and ignore the majority who do not.

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!


cheers

 

[جوري]

Re: Scientists’ Comments on the Scientific Miracles

Unlike other scientists medical doctors deal with disease, death, pain, pretty depressing stuff, so it makes sense that they're more religious than the rest. Psychiatrists don't deal with death and physical suffering all that much, so this could account for the slightly higher percentage of atheists in their ranks.

Maybe I don't know..My feeling is people don't choose a career because it supports their after life views, rather because they enjoy it?

a very small percentage of the population can afford that level of a higher education.. it isn't simply very time consuming but also financially draining...

I personally haven't conducted a study on who believes in what.. my personal experience is with my colleagues and preceptors who have been very religious people.. the only atheists I encountered were two philosophy and one English professor... the philosophy folks just enjoyed going into endless mazes.. it bewilders me how they can prove their own existence with some of their theories.. be that as it may..

Scientests come in all shapes colors and sizes, they are hindu, they are Muslim, they are Jews, they are Jainist, they are atheists, some of them religious, some of them not, no different than the rest of the population... They are not demi Gods.. they are people who studied a bit more.. it has no bearing on ones ability to reason.. just perhaps think in more abstract terms without needing to cite their convictions from wikipedia all the time..

peace

 

[Azy]

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.

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.

?

	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.

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.