Printer's Devil on 15/1/2007 at 21:36
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Presumably, Dawkins (like me) sees religion as one of the biggest threats to humanity we face today.
Considering the most destructive conflicts and atrocities of the 20th century were driven by combinations of extreme political ideology and ethnic nationalism, that statement falls pretty flat. Even in the 21st century, regional territorial conflicts have claimed far more lives than the handful of (admittedly media-savvy) terrorist attacks that
claim some sort of religious mantle.
Pyrian on 15/1/2007 at 21:52
Quote Posted by Convict
I'm not an expert or anything but from a 5 second glance at wikipedia (which is surely enough) could you compare the existence of God to the existence of dark matter in that you can't prove their existence (can you disprove dark matter?)?
Well, exotic dark matter is a hypothesis to explain galactic motion. There are specific observations that are not explained by normal (baryonic) matter and its gravity, i.e., there simply isn't enough of it. Where that additional attractive force is coming from has, in fact, had multiple competing hypotheses, most notably exotic dark matter (obviously) versus the suggestion that our equations of how gravity works are too simple and don't work the same at large scales. I'll call that the modified gravity equation theory, or MGE.
Until recently those theories were indistinguishable by the evidence, but more recent evidence has come in in favor of exotic dark matter over MGE. If the observation had been opposite, the opposite would have occurred, with frankly a great deal more upheaval since MGE was not popular. Nonetheless, dark matter
is falsifiable and may yet be falsified, in the same way that MGE recently was.
For the record, the observation was that when two galaxies collided, gravitational lensing demonstrated that a significant portion of the mass of the galaxies passed right through each other, and that portion was dark. This satisfies quite precisely the definition of WIMPS - weakly interacting massive particles - in that they passed right through large amounts of matter (and each other) and clearly have gravitational mass in that they cause lensing. It cannot be satisfied with any previously existing MGE that I'm aware of.
Of course, there will be new competing hypotheses, I'm sure, quite possibly as simple as a modified MGE. We may yet live to see the day in which the existence of exotic dark matter is disproven.
EDIT: BTW, if you want to find an example of an unfalsifiable theory in science, I recommend String Theory.
SD on 15/1/2007 at 22:33
Quote Posted by Printer's Devil
Considering the most destructive conflicts and atrocities of the 20th century were driven by combinations of extreme political ideology and ethnic nationalism, that statement falls pretty flat. Even in the 21st century, regional territorial conflicts have claimed far more lives than the handful of (admittedly media-savvy) terrorist attacks that
claim some sort of religious mantle.
I wasn't necessarily talking about wars - I'd be the first to admit they have a wide range of motives, some religious and some not - but other things religion poses a threat to. Including, but not limited to, such things as scientific advancement (stem cell research), human rights (gay marriage and adoption, sexual equality), freedom of speech ("religious hate" legislation), education ("intelligent" design)... the list goes on and on. Wars are only a part of it.
Quote Posted by Convict
Ah yes, Dawkins thinks religion caused 9/11. Oh if only more people were as brilliantly intelligent as him. No wonder he is admired so.
Convict, no offence buddy, but you're hardly in a position to be aiming that kind of sarcasm at anyone, least of all an Oxford professor who is renowned as one of the most brilliant minds of his generation.
And we could argue about the motives behind 9/11 for days, but to try and pretend that the clash of fundamentalist Islam and fundamentalist Christianity was entirely unrelated to the atrocity is real head-in-the-sand stuff.
Shoshin on 15/1/2007 at 23:05
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
And we could argue about the motives behind 9/11 for days, but to try and pretend that the clash of fundamentalist Islam and fundamentalist Christianity was entirely unrelated to the atrocity is real head-in-the-sand stuff.
If it was fundamentalist Islam attacking fundamentalist Christianity, why did they hit the World Trade Center, and not, say, Oral Roberts University?
fett on 15/1/2007 at 23:22
I don't know that I'd frame it as 'Muslims vs. Christians' as much as 'Muslims vs. Christians supporting Israel'. Not to split hairs or anything but the former is a little too simplistic, whereas the latter explains exactly why they hit the Trade Center, as well as every other target.
Scots Taffer on 15/1/2007 at 23:54
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Presumably, Dawkins (like me) sees religion as one of the biggest threats to humanity we face today.
I've been following this thread vaguely with a somewhat detached amusement, as I don't consider myself particularly religious, but this insidious quote is very striking as one of the most offensive things I have read as a believer in any faith.
Evil, which lurks inside the hearts of men be they religious or athiest, is what has always been, and will remain to be, the greatest threat to humanity and it takes form wherever it is found - evil people in the Catholic Church were responsible for the Crusades, evil people in Nazi Germany were responsible for the Holocaust, evil people in Islamic fundamentalism were responsible for 9/11, evil people who willingly murder the weak and innocent do so largely without regard for religion. It is evil that you should be worried about Stronts, not the 90% of church-goers who just do it as a penance and duty to avoid the eternal fires they were told about when they were young. It's evil, that is what I worry most about as a threat to humankind - because you can be sure it'll be an evil person who presses a button that wipes out a country and a billion lives, not a church on sunday person, and those people exist. If living on this foul, polluted earth has taught me one thing, it's that there is a depthless evil in some people that I find unfathomable and truly terrifying, and it's not driven by religion.
SD on 16/1/2007 at 00:08
Oh come on Scots. Sure, where we come from, the tea-drinking country vicar is the typical non-threatening stereotype, and people like you cause no serious harm. But you can't honestly believe that people like the Taliban or the followers of Pat Robertson are like that because they're inherently evil? We're talking about massive numbers of people here, people who have been brainwashed to think a certain way. A very small proportion of them are evil, the rest are hopelessly deluded.
Scots Taffer on 16/1/2007 at 00:14
Even if some of them are hopelessly deluded, aren't they in themselves a minority? Aren't brainwashed fundamentalists always a minority and prove to be a risk wherever they go? The same goes for people who are inherently evil; yes, they are in the minority but they cause just as much damage (I would say considerably more) than religious fundamentalists.
Realise this, especially when it comes to matters such as gay marriage and so on, progress is unstoppable - even large numbers of religious (and pseudo-religious) people are not opposing gay marriage or even, gay adoption. You won't perhaps see that progress in the Middle East, but then they're still chopping off hands for stealing in Saudi Arabia aren't they?
Your point is still somewhat vacant.
SD on 16/1/2007 at 00:33
I think you underestimate just how many millions of people we're talking about here, and the extent to which fundamentalist religion grips even Western countries like the USA. Only 47% of American people say they would vote for a person who was openly atheist - that's plain scary.
And how is my point vacant when you just basically acknowledged that it applied to Saudi Arabia, a state founded on fundamentalist Islam?
Pyrian on 16/1/2007 at 00:40
Hmm. I don't think the problem isn't so much evil people or believers - it's believers who believe in evil people.
I don't really think we can entirely get rid of selfishness or faith - they're both rooted in human nature. We can, however, teach critical thinking, which I think will help in the long run.
