The Positively Atheist Thread

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I remember a bit of Bill Burrs standup where he says he first heard of Scientology he laughed his tits off and thought mad bastards but still holding on to the sheer ludicrousness of his own religion, he said the reason he found Scientology so absurd is because he heard it for the first time when he was an adult, life, experience and just logic highlighted the absurdity of it but Christianity was shoved down his throat from a young age when he believed in santa and the easter bunny. Shit can stick if rubbed in enough. I have no idea how people can hold onto a book of religion thats been transcribed changed and politicised so many times over hundreds upon hundreds of years by the powerful and the unscrupulous for their own ends and still see these books as the word of god. Maybe faith in what we can achieve as a species would best serve us now rather than faith that theres something better after this.. honest guv.

Amen, Brother!

[razor]

68% of US believe in heaven

58% of US believe in hell and Satan

 

I have no reason to doubt these figures, but they have little relevance to the point I was making.  Christians would argue that God is for life not just the afterlife.  It's not an insurance policy, it's part of their everyday lives.

[Rico1304]

It's funny, we are constantly reminded that's it's 'not all X,Y,Z who are crazy' but massive generalisations are allowed coming back the other way.

 

If nearly 60% of people think they will be roasted for eternity you don't think that'll influence them? A lot?

[skend04]

I remember a bit of Bill Burrs standup where he says he first heard of Scientology he laughed his tits off and thought mad bastards but still holding on to the sheer ludicrousness of his own religion, he said the reason he found Scientology so absurd is because he heard it for the first time when he was an adult, life, experience and just logic highlighted the absurdity of it but Christianity was shoved down his throat from a young age when he believed in santa and the easter bunny. Shit can stick if rubbed in enough. I have no idea how people can hold onto a book of religion thats been transcribed changed and politicised so many times over hundreds upon hundreds of years by the powerful and the unscrupulous for their own ends and still see these books as the word of god. Maybe faith in what we can achieve as a species would best serve us now rather than faith that theres something better after this.. honest guv.

Exactly how it should be but its definitely not something atheists could get on board with as it has the word 'faith'. Definitely an agnostic post this.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

It's funny, we are constantly reminded that's it's 'not all X,Y,Z who are crazy' but massive generalisations are allowed coming back the other way.

 

If nearly 60% of people think they will be roasted for eternity you don't think that'll influence them? A lot?

You can suppose that. Or you could, y'know, talk to people and realise that promises of the unknown future are not their greatest day-to-day concern.

[Rico1304]

You can suppose that. Or you could, y'know, talk to people and realise that promises of the unknown future are not their greatest day-to-day concern.

You can talk to maybe 20-30 people - or take a poll of 1000's. I'll remember the anecdotal evidence arguments for future debates.

[zigackly]

Yes, this "after I'm dead" bit is a tad misleading.  I would wager most Christians aren't thinking about the afterlife when they become Christians.  They are entering into a relationship with a living God there and then for what they see as a better life NOW.  This is my experience, anyway.

 

Sure, I have a great relationship with Kelly Brook in my head so I can understand this.

[Rico1304]

I think this site has been hacked, just had the Jehovah's witnesses round!

[skend04]

You can talk to maybe 20-30 people - or take a poll of 1000's. I'll remember the anecdotal evidence arguments for future debates.

A survey of a few thousand is still one millionth of 1% of all Muslims. So is it really representative or just a snapshot? How accurate are polls anyway? We were heading for a dead heat in the GE and the Tories walked away with a majority. So I can confidently say based on the fact all the British Electionpolls were wrong that Pew polls might not be accurate of the religion as a whole.

[Rico1304]

A survey of a few thousand is still one millionth of 1% of all Muslims. So is it really representative or just a snapshot? How accurate are polls anyway? We were heading for a dead heat in the GE and the Tories walked away with a majority. So I can confidently say based on the fact all the British Electionpolls were wrong that Pew polls might not be accurate of the religion as a whole.

Ha ha ha, ok pal. Ok.

[Stu Monty]

A survey of a few thousand is still one millionth of 1% of all Muslims. So is it really representative or just a snapshot? How accurate are polls anyway? We were heading for a dead heat in the GE and the Tories walked away with a majority. So I can confidently say based on the fact all the British Electionpolls were wrong that Pew polls might not be accurate of the religion as a whole.

 

You seem to be getting being wrong by a couple of percent mixed up with being of almost no worth at all (which is what your anecdotal evidence is). 

 

It is funny how usually it's only on the issue of religion that people seem to totally throw out the very idea of polling people to understand what they think. It might not be perfect but there's a reason why billions of pounds is spent on it: because it's very, very useful.

 

You can give away a 20% error margin on some of the issues and still be left with a majority of horrible responses (that's also if you're being generous and not wondering if the margin of error is actually taking responses in the wrong direction, not the right one).

[Sugar Ape]

Polling is extremely accurate on the whole and has shown as much over decades. Using the few polls where they get it wrong to discredit all the others is silly in my opinion.

 

You can have a look here at the US presidential elections going back decades to see how accurate they are.

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/9442/election-polls-accuracy-record-presidential-elections.aspx

[AngryOfTuebrook]

You can talk to maybe 20-30 people - or take a poll of 1000's. I'll remember the anecdotal evidence arguments for future debates.

With a poll of thousands you are still talking about a sample of one in a million.

 

Still, feel free to post a link to a poll showing that people live their life their way because of their fear of Hell or hope for heaven.

[Rotpeter]

Polling is extremely accurate on the whole and has shown as much over decades. Using the few polls where they get it wrong to discredit all the others is silly in my opinion.

 

You can have a look here at the US presidential elections going back decades to see how accurate they are.

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/9442/election-polls-accuracy-record-presidential-elections.aspx

Polling has also been shown to be susceptible to being wrong under circumstances of:

 

1/ Getting the sample wrong.

2/ The wording of the question

3/ The context (physical and emotional) of the question etc.

4/ Expectancy

5/ Etc

[Rico1304]

Polling has also been shown to be susceptible to being wrong under circumstances of:1/ Getting the sample wrong.2/ The wording of the question3/ The context (physical and emotional) of the question etc.4/ Expectancy5/ Etc

 

Are you suggesting this has happened in this poll?

[setreal]

Polling can be accurate but it is also extremely difficult and extremely tedious.

[Rico1304]

With a poll of thousands you are still talking about a sample of one in a million.

Still, feel free to post a link to a poll showing that people live their life their way because of their fear of Hell or hope for heaven.

http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/

 

Here you go, knock yourself out.

[Rotpeter]

Are you suggesting this has happened in this poll?

Are you suggesting none of those factors were at play?

[Rico1304]

Are you suggesting none of those factors were at play?

I'm not sure what you want me to do, there's the link, the questions are there, the sample size is there...if you think there's something wrong I'm sure the Pew Foundation would be interested to hear from you.

[Sugar Ape]

Polling has also been shown to be susceptible to being wrong under circumstances of:

 

1/ Getting the sample wrong.

2/ The wording of the question

3/ The context (physical and emotional) of the question etc.

4/ Expectancy

5/ Etc

 

On the whole, would you say most polls are fairly accurate; or it's right to discard them because a few have got the results wrong? It's the first one for me and I think it's stupid to discount them on the basis of some of the last general election ones being incorrect.

 

Polls will generally include the questions asked and you can come to your own decision on whether they are misleading or not.

[Rico1304]

As Stu has pointed out several times ( and been ignored every time) the numbers are that large that even a huge error margin still makes them frightening. Although imagine if people underplayed their real thoughts...

[Rotpeter]

On the whole, would you say most polls are fairly accurate; or it's right to discard them because a few have got the results wrong? It's the first one for me and I think it's stupid to discount them on the basis of some of the last general election ones being incorrect.

 

Polls will generally include the questions asked and you can come to your own decision on whether they are misleading or not.

Never trust a poll you haven't falsified yourself, It is surprisingly easy. Take the poll in miami vs. New York and you'll see what I mean. BTW that's nthing on this poll, I know nothing about it.

[Rotpeter]

As Stu has pointed out several times ( and been ignored every time) the numbers are that large that even a huge error margin still makes them frightening. Although imagine if people underplayed their real thoughts...

Are you even aware that percentages and people are differeent things?

[Rotpeter]

On the whole, would you say most polls are fairly accurate; or it's right to discard them because a few have got the results wrong? It's the first one for me and I think it's stupid to discount them on the basis of some of the last general election ones being incorrect.

 

Polls will generally include the questions asked and you can come to your own decision on whether they are misleading or not.

If a physicist did a poll, I'd be inclined to believe it. A sociologist ... and you have to factor in whether the photograph of eating a bacon sandwich has been published yet!

 

Seriously though, instead of worrying about trying to characterize uncertain knowledge about beliefs, I think you'd better off addressing the issue of resulting behaviors.

[Rico1304]

Are you even aware that percentages and people are differeent things?

No, no I'm not aware. You've already proved you're a genius pal, no need to rub it in. Surprised you have time to waste on us.