So your of the opinion that if you read a history book that says "Christopher Columbus couldn't get people to fund his voyage because people thought he was going to fall off the earth."

You also aren't going to believe World War 2 happened.

I'd like to see that stat sourced.

Can't find the article, all I can find is random articles about atheist physisists converting to religions and various physists who don't believe in any religous dogma, but also believe their is a "purpose" behind the universe.

Like Roger Penrose.  Who is an "atheist", but believes the above and believes not all things can be converted into matter... with consiousness somehow existing in a different "dimension".  Which isn't really atheism so much as it is a non belief in the "advertised" gods.

Really when i've seen the stats, the largest concentration of atheists were Evolutionary Biologists, and it wasn't near 95%. (around 80% i believe)  Though evolutionary biology does make the most sense to have the most amount of atheists, since evolutionary biolgy basically rejects true consiousness and free will.  (Yet, i think most of them believe in free will.  Though that's largely a definition of how you define free will.  "Sure you have the choice to say no, but you never would!")

i dont believe in any but i do dislike any that force its self into society by forcing people to change to believe there ways and live there lives. believe all you want, but dont force people to. 

Whoa

Muslim v Christians. Both bad at each other in there own rights. But terrorists both Chirstian and Muslim killing people for there "god" despite there "god" telling them not to are the worst people ruining faith for many others. 

An solution to all the hate would be for all the regilons in the world especially Christian and Muslims to bound together and remove the radicals on both sides. An that all migiants no matter what reglion or cultural background going into another country never ever try to enforce them to stop what they are doing and if you dont like it leave. 

I would rather all just ditch these old reglions and pray to nature so that we stop destroying it and start fixing the world. 

But we are all most likely not going to change and continue to kill each other by any means possible just like how more money is spent on how to kill each other then save each other. 

Though I don't see where much of your post was going, I searched hard for the study I referenced.  I eventually found an article that was similar, but from 1998.  You were right about biologists, but off on your numbers.

6% of biological scientists believe in God and 7% of physicists believe in God.

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html

If I read a book that said it was the absolute truth, but also said that 2 plus 2 equals 5, then I would deny it being the book of absolute truth.

A) You do realize that believing in god =/= atheism.   So you were wrong.

B)  The problem you have listed in that study is it's "Personal belief"  "Personal Disbelief" or Agnostic. 

Which as more recent polls have found skews towards disbelief because...

"A primary complaint of scientists who answered the earlier polls was that the concept of God was limited to a "personal God." Leuba considered an impersonal God as equivalent to pure naturalism and classified advocates of deism as nonbelievers. We designed the current study to distinguish theism from deism—that is to day a "personal God" (theism) versus an "impersonal God" who created the universe, all forces and matter, but does not intervene in daily events (deism). An evolutionist can be considered religious, in our poll, if he calls himself a deist. ..."

In otherwords, Deists were classfied as atheits.

Which was actually largely my point.   I mean, that should of been obvious based on the fact that more people believed in Immortality then god.  I mean that didn't stand out and make you go... "huh?"  You've got to have a more scientific thought process when reading this stuff.  Note the 78% as Naturalists (about 80%) and the rest leaving at least some room for theism and/or deism.

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2007/06/evolutionary-biologists-flunk-religion.html

(Note that the URL is saying that scientists are flunking religion, not that scientists have flunked on the case of religion.)

It's funny that the study you quoted ended up being the exact study that was cited by the articles I found as one that was primarily flawed and needed reworking.

I didn't vote

I think it may be a bit over the top to say that 90% scientists in certain scientific fields are atheists. Everything I've read shows about 50% being non-religious (which in itself is far larger then the average population in most countries and is quite remarkable). In a few books I've read it also seems to be that the  scientests that are considered the most accomplished and recognised by their peers (which in the books was the people that were accepted into the Royal societies in England and other equivalent organisations across the world) had even high levels of non-religion (athiesm, agnosticism and deism etc, with rough breakdowns I can't remember).

Being a scientist doesn't mean you have to be an athiest, but it certainly seems more likely then in the normal population by a large margin.

And even if a scientist does believe in some kind of God or life force or something, it seems likely that it would be a very different one to the one people think of in the street, it'd be more abstract and probably far less anthropic and less interventionist. Or it would probably be some kind of pantheistic notion. Just speculating here of course.

Sorry for the lack of sources, its all in books that I can't find atm since I'm still unpacking from a move.

@pizzahut451:

I'm tired of this conversation, so I'l just adress some points quickly.

Atheism is intolerant, it claims all religions are wrong. see what i did there ???

Atheism means not beleiving in religions. When a religion teaches that it's the only right one, it's followers will try to eliminate all other religions (Christians have been very good at doing this).

And NO WHERE does jesus nor God say that other religions are evil, again, its just your hate speech, nothing more

It's hate speech that come from Christians, not me. Study about Christian's attitudes towards other religions throughout time.

Buddhism isnt real religion. Its a spiritual lifestyle

No, Buddhism is a religion.

Yes, because in countries like Germany, France, Sweden and Denmark, christians are very intolerant of muslim imigration minority there, despite their behaviour...Yup, thre is some hardcore extermination of muslims here...

That's thanks to secularism, not Christianity (not to mention that those countries are not particularly religious). And muslims are very little trusted in those countries FTR.

H SWEET MOTHER OF GOD, WHAT THE HELL HAVE I JUST READ??????????????? Spain stealing lands that belong to muslims? Are you fucking serious? I cant believe you just wrote that...

Maybe you should read your own links. And maybe you should educate yourself more on this subject. There was no Kingdom of Spain when the Moors came. There were Visigoths who ruled the Iberian Peninsula, and they were terrible rulers who lost the Peninsula due to theri incompetence. The Moors were not radicals, and were tolerant of Christians and Jews. They built the most civilized and advanced state of Medieval Europe, and without them and their preservation of knowledge (like works of tyhe Greek philosophers, plus their own studies in fields like mathematics, astrology or medicine) Christian Western Europe would've never had a Reneissance (Christians had given up on things like education and literacy and hygene). The only intolerant muslims weren't moors, but radical Islamic mercenaries they at one point had to hire from North Africa to protect themselves against the invading Chrisitans (they actually didn't have a good military force, as they were more interested in knowledge then warfare, which led to internal conflicts and the fragmentation of their empire).

By comparison the Spanish Christians led a campaign of ethnic clensing that wiped out the millions of muslim who lived in the Iberian Peninsula (deportions, forced conversion, and killing). The Moors never resorted to those things, as most people willingly converted to Islam when they invaded the Peninsula.

For more information watch the documentary When the Moors Ruled in Europe. I'll reccomend books to you if you want, when my Intercultural Communication teacher gives us our reading list (she's a devout Christian FTR, so she has no pro-muslim/anti-christian bias).

As for inquisition, you didnt provide any arguments there...

The Inquisition was itself a process of eliminating everything that Chrisitans though were dangerous to their beleif system (sects which they deemd as heretics, Jews, Muslims, witches etc.). If they didn't find these groups dangerous, why would they persecute them and attempt to wipe them out?

Oh that's most definitly the case.  Deism is extremly high, though often classfied as "atheist" because the term usually used to describe god is a "personal god."

The definition of a personal god is a god that can be related to, as a person.  One who has emotions, gets angry... etc.

Using the correct definition of "Personal God" a lot of Hinduists would come up as atheists because not all branches come up with a "Personal god".  Buddism I think would also show up as atheists, but honestly I don't know that much about Buddhism... I get the general concept, but then they also seem to have their versions of spirits and angels that kept their personalities after death, like Guan Yu being a Buddhist Spirit.  So I don't know enough about it to be certain.

A good example of the impersonal god is the Holy Spirit... depending on your interpretation of the Holy Spirit in Christianity.  Basically a powerful being who created everything who human's can't hope to understand.

Yes and happiness is just a chemical reaction in the brain.