People Who Believe in God Less Likely to Believe in Extraterrestrials


Recommended Posts

FloatingFatMan

 Scientists are the creation of satan? Well ****. To think that I thought that all those fancy medicines that help cure diseases were wonderful things.

 

Turns out that by taking medicine we are all ultimately consuming creations of the devil.

 

:| 

 

Not sure if serious, or totally missing HawkMan's sarcasm...

Link to post
Share on other sites
blerk

Not sure if serious, or totally missing HawkMan's sarcasm...

Completely serious.

 

 

(Just kidding. And I can't be against them - my particular profession depends on drugs. An anesthetized patient is a happy patient :D )

Link to post
Share on other sites
(Account no longer active)

Okay, there may be extraterrestrial life, but who in turn created it? :iiam:

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

Okay, there may be extraterrestrial life, but who in turn created it? :iiam:

 

 

 

Going to go out on a limb and say, a product of evolution. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yazoo

you hear " if ET was out there we would have met him by now.."  I guess we are ET to them and have we introduced ourselves yet?  Maybe both our tech is not up to the interstellar travel to make that happen.. yet!

 

#Keepinganopenmind

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Co-ords

I'm a practicing Catholic, I'll believe in whichever entity proves their existence to me first! :rofl:

 

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen - Heb 11:1. Being a Christian is nothing without faith... we cannot prove what we believe, or otherwise it wouldn't be called faith, would it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
margrave

I believe in God.

 

I think that intelligent life on other planets is possible.

 

I do not think that those two things are mutually exclusive in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
neufuse

I believe in God, and I also believe in other life outside our planet... that's just my opinion

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

I believe in God, and I also believe in other life outside our planet... that's just my opinion

 

I believe in God and I am open to the fact that life outside our planet may exist. I haven't got to the belief part yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hum

ET's told me there is no god. :/

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

ET's told me there is no god. :/

 

Can we trust them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
compl3x

 

You seem to have misguided and very negative views of worship and eternal life, but let's not get too off-topic here.

 

 

Even the most innocuous forms of worship seem either self-serving (the worship results in a personal gain or benefit for the worshipper) or submissive (fear of punishment for failure to participate). The concept of eternal life just seems like the result of the natural human fear of death. We know we are mortal and will one day die so we've concocted literally thousands of ideas about how when we physically die we don't actually we just get to go to some other place. Usually a paradise where we can indulge in anything we've been forbidden to do while we are alive on earth or a form of reincarnation. This time around you were a human, and depending on your behaviour in this life you'll either comeback as a tapeworm or get to be a human again.

 

 

 

The mind-boggling hugeness of the universe is a testament to the glory of God, who is infinitely more powerful than any of the creatures that inhabit Earth.

 

The mind-boggling amount of disease which has infected and killed millions is a testament to the cruelty and callousness of god. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
FloatingFatMan

The mind-boggling amount of disease which has infected and killed millions is a testament to the cruelty and callousness of god. 

 

And all the natural disasters, don't forget those.

Link to post
Share on other sites
compl3x

And all the natural disasters, don't forget those.

 

 

Yes. Nothing proves god's love for humans like a child being ripped from the arms of its mother during a tsunami. Or all those poor folk frozen in place in Pompei by volcanic ash.

Link to post
Share on other sites
cork1958

Simply put, I believe in both! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
+therealDamien

Im proof of aliens. 

 

my mom told me they dropped me off at her house saying they couldn't deal with me...

 

 

I believe in god. I believe he/she likes to make my life hard....

 

 

 

 

 

then the dreams.........

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

^ Are you and Hum related? :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
FriendlyBully

no aliens would want to visit earth.. we are a bunch of douche bags. we're violent, judgmental,racist  

 

 

could be worse. what if god was an alien from advance alien race. and put all these different races on this planet to see how we would get along.

 

Don't be such a negative Nancy. You are right though, we are no better now intellectually than we were 3000 years ago.

 

You really can't blame our current state of natural behavior, and I am also sure you have also had one of those three traits in your past. We group into social structures based on our similarities. When one person from one group does something negative to someone from another group, we team up and go after the entire other group. Some diversity programs can make an environment feel really unnatural, and then there is isolation. For example, when I was in the service, everyone socialized with their own ethnic groups. Most of these feeling are open through comedy. If you laugh, deep down you feel that way. 

 

I also think you misunderstand the meaning a racism. Did you mean stereotyping? Not everyone feels their race is superior, however, we expect certain behaviors from groups. 

 

As far as God, you are better off letting people believe what they want. You cannot force people into thinking your belief system is right. I believe everything is alive, since everything on the planet comes from startdust. What's to say the universe as an eco-system doesn't have some sort of order, or awareness. Science is too new to understand everything. Give it a thousand years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
trieste
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremophile

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coacervate

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_time_scale

 

There is no evidence of god, a godly presence nor is anything as such abdundant and intimate. We have barely begun the robotic exploration of our nearest planets and haven't even left our solar system yet you conclusively believe there is no life elsewhere? how do you jump to such conclusions?

Extremophile - a testament to brilliant Creative design.

Coacervate - leaps of faith in biology and chemistry from self-organising lipids to a self-replicating cell with proteins and nucleic acids. By the way, sodium chloride also self-organises when it transitions from the molten to solid state; it's called crystallisation.

Geologic time scale - a time scale that no two radioactive dating methods agree on, let alone multiple.

 

Evidence of God - the fact that people innately and instinctly comprehend the concept of God (and intellectually rebel against). You can't rebel against nothing.

 

Throughout the centuries, most people have believed that only Earth contains life. With today's scientific knowledge, the immense complexity of even the simplest biological life precludes chemical origins, as the Miller-Urey experiment demonstrated. It's you, the exception, who believes that there must be life out there even in the total absence of scientific evidence. You're entitled to your belief, but in doing so portray yourself to be unscientific and non-empirical.

 

You're assuming life on other planets would be like anything here on Earth, for all we know life could exist in ways we can't even currently conceive. We ONLY currently know of life based on what we have on Earth, that's it. We know that the building blocks of life that work for our planet exists beyond our planet, from that we can start building models and predictions but that in no way means what I said earlier, life more then likely exists in ways we just can't even fathom. So no, it's not more likely for god in anyway. 

Let me outline the key words:

 "for all we know" ; "can't even currently conceive" ; "can't even fathom".

 

You can fathom the concept of God, but don't believe him. You can't fathom alternative systems of replicating life, yet believe them?

 

You've just demonstrated the faith (i.e. religious) nature of un-belief (atheism).

Link to post
Share on other sites
trieste

 The mind-boggling amount of disease which has infected and killed millions is a testament to the cruelty and callousness of god. 

Wrong.

 

God created everything perfect and good. No pain, no suffering, no disease and no death.

 

Disease and death is a testament to Adam's folly and rebellion against God, who pronounced a just curse on creation as punishment, known as the Fall. Disease and death is proof of human culpability in the grand scheme of things.

 

We're the linchpin between God, our master, and the universe, our dominion. Adam, as representative of mankind, chose to overturn the hierarchy of authority. We had it coming and we deserve every ounce of it.

 

Jesus' act of sacrifice to redeem our sorry selves is something we never deserved. But right now, all of us can claim it and escape the punishment of perdition. It boils down to the choice of each individual to return to ultimate reality, and time is not on our side.

 

Never say never.  I know plenty of people who are dumber than my watch.

Yet we never ever hear of people comparing the mental prowess of machines to that of their (people) respective watches. ;)

 

In a bygone era, we tried to identify aspects of mankind with the animal kingdom. In this era, we're identifying ourselves with machines. This belief in machine sentience, driven as it is by popular entertainment such as the Terminator series, will still fade away eventually.

 

And yet you've already fallen for the most elaborate human hoax of them all. :p

There's plenty of evidence in history and science that verifies the Bible post hoc. Logically, for you to categorically conclude it as a hoax, you necessarily have to outmatch that evidence with evidence that supports your conclusion. But if you insist on calling it a hoax without evidence, you definitely have the right to do so and I will protect that right.

 

ummm, but earth is only 6000 years old and was created perfect and dinosaurs are a fabrication by the scientists who are the creation of satan

 

obviously ;)

Earth is 6000 years old -- almost correct, as measured by the chrono-genealogies backwards from the Roman Empire.

 

Earth was created perfect -- correct, as explicitly stated in Genesis.

 

Dinosaurs are a fabrication -- incorrect, dinosaurs were brought onto Noah's Ark, most possibly in juvenile ages (small and compact). Most of them perished in the global Flood (not the infectious Halo kind, but the water kind), and those that survived it (by being on the Ark) were crowded out of their ecological niches by mammals and other reptiles (on land) or hunted down by human tribes. Historical accounts of the fearsomeness of dinosaurs exist in distorted form - dragons in medieval folklore is a good example.

 

Fabrications are perpetuated by scientists -- incorrect, I know many who perform solid science because of absence of bias and strongly empirical methods.

 

Scientists are created by Satan -- incorrect. Scientists are humans and hence descendants of Adam and Eve, who were both created by God. Satan has no creative power of his own because he is merely the most powerful entity created by God originally to serve God, but rebelled. The Silmarillion uses Melkor and describes his power and intellect as a rather fitting allegory of that of Satan's, if one chooses to imbibe exclusively "secular" texts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

 

 

Evidence of God - the fact that people innately and instinctly comprehend the concept of God (and intellectually rebel against). You can't rebel against nothing.

 

Throughout the centuries, most people have believed that only Earth contains life. With today's scientific knowledge, the immense complexity of even the simplest biological life precludes chemical origins, as the Miller-Urey experiment demonstrated. It's you, the exception, who believes that there must be life out there even in the total absence of scientific evidence. You're entitled to your belief, but in doing so portray yourself to be unscientific and non-empirical.

 

 

 

That is no more evidence of god then that is evidence of unicorns, leprechaun, Smurs, Harry Potter or Mr. Hankey the Christmas Poo. If you truly believe in that garbage nonsense then by that same nonsense you have to accept that as evidence for what I listed above and every other supernatural fairy tale story as well.

 

 

 

 

Let me outline the key words:

 "for all we know" ; "can't even currently conceive" ; "can't even fathom".

 

You can fathom the concept of God, but don't believe him. You can't fathom alternative systems of replicating life, yet believe them?

 

You've just demonstrated the faith (i.e. religious) nature of un-belief (atheism).

 

 

 

 

I can fathom the concept of godzilla too, that doesn't mean I believe in it. I also understand that given the size of the universe and the mind boggling amount of stars and planets within this vast universe that the odds of life existing are far more favorable to the possible existence of life then there not being. 

 

I don't have faith in a god existing, I have faith in the odds of life beyond our own world are correct. Faith is NOT limited to just a belief in a god. Huge difference. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

 

 

There's plenty of evidence in history and science that verifies the Bible post hoc. Logically, for you to categorically conclude it as a hoax, you necessarily have to outmatch that evidence with evidence that supports your conclusion. But if you insist on calling it a hoax without evidence, you definitely have the right to do so and I will protect that right.

 

Earth is 6000 years old -- almost correct, as measured by the chrono-genealogies backwards from the Roman Empire.

 

Earth was created perfect -- correct, as explicitly stated in Genesis.

 

Dinosaurs are a fabrication -- incorrect, dinosaurs were brought onto Noah's Ark, most possibly in juvenile ages (small and compact). Most of them perished in the global Flood (not the infectious Halo kind, but the water kind), and those that survived it (by being on the Ark) were crowded out of their ecological niches by mammals and other reptiles (on land) or hunted down by human tribes. Historical accounts of the fearsomeness of dinosaurs exist in distorted form - dragons in medieval folklore is a good example.

 

Fabrications are perpetuated by scientists -- incorrect, I know many who perform solid science because of absence of bias and strongly empirical methods.

 

Scientists are created by Satan -- incorrect. Scientists are humans and hence descendants of Adam and Eve, who were both created by God. Satan has no creative power of his own because he is merely the most powerful entity created by God originally to serve God, but rebelled. The Silmarillion uses Melkor and describes his power and intellect as a rather fitting allegory of that of Satan's, if one chooses to imbibe exclusively "secular" texts.

 

 

 

Holy mind numbing garbage batman, I really hope your post is just troll bait. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
compl3x

^ People who think like that truly scare me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Jay Bonggolto
      Twitter seems to be surveying users about potential features for its subscription model
      by Jay Bonggolto

      Last month, Twitter posted a job listing as part of its search for a software engineer for its new team, codenamed Gryphon, which would be responsible for developing a subscription platform. Now, Twitter appears to be advancing its push for a subscription model.

      The micro-blogging site is said to have started a survey asking users what features they would want to see in a paid service. The poll comes more than a week after Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey confirmed that his company was exploring the idea of subscription options for users. Screenshots of the new survey have been shared on Twitter by reporter Andrew Roth.

      In the survey, the company presents a number of capabilities that it may be considering adding to its paid tiers, such as the ability to undo tweets shortly after they are posted and customize the font or theme colors on mobile devices and desktops. Potential premium features also include the option to post longer videos with a higher resolution than normal and auto responses in reply to tweets. Survey participants are asked to rate the suggested features based on their importance.

      Twitter also appears to be gauging whether users would like to pay for an option to see fewer ads or remove these completely. In addition, the social networking site seems to be concerned about how users might react to a subscription model as it will limit some of its features to paying members.

      Dorsey recently disclosed that Twitter was in an early stage of exploring new ways to monetize its platform. Time will tell whether any or all of the features listed in its latest survey will make it to a public release.

    • By zikalify
      Facebook hopes to shine a light on true COVID-19 case numbers
      by Paul Hill



      Mark Zuckerberg has announced that Facebook will release an opt-in survey for users all around the world in a bid to figure out how many coronavirus cases each country really has. The official number of cases published on tracking websites only reveals confirmed cases but in many countries, there are just not enough tests to test everyone.

      The survey is already available in the United States where Facebook has partnered with health researchers at Carnegie Mellon University. The survey asks people if they have any symptoms including fevers, coughs, shortness of breath or a loss of smell – symptoms that are all associated with COVID-19. It said the millions of results it has had so far are promising and correlate with publicly available data on confirmed cases.

      In order to make its data even more useful, the team at Carnegie Mellon is building an API which will let researchers access the results and develop applications using the data. In order to serve people outside the U.S., Facebook will be working with the University of Maryland.

      In the United Kingdom and the United States, the health firm ZOE has been developing an app called COVID-19 Symptom Tracker with various educational institutions over the last few months. In the UK, it uses data to build maps showing coronavirus hotspots and was the project which revealed that a loss of smell and taste were stronger indicators that a person had COVID-19 than having a fever. While this project will remain relevant, it does not have the reach that Facebook’s tracker will have.

    • By Steven P.
      Less than three percent of people would use Facebook Libra cryptocurrency
      by Steven Parker



      According to a survey conducted by messaging app Viber, which by the way is direct competition to Facebook-owned WhatsApp, Viber asked 2,000 participants from the U.S. and UK if they would trust Facebook to keep their information secure when using its new crypto payment service, Libra which launches next year. Nearly half of all Americans (49%) say they would not trust Facebook at all, and barely 3% of Americans say they would be willing to try Libra for payments.

      Over in the UK, only 1.4 percent of Brits would consider trying Libra, while 49% also said they did not trust Facebook at all to keep their information secure. In addition, 13.9 percent of Americans and 16.6 percent of Brits said that they definitely wouldn't use Libra for payments.

      When the survey results are broken down by gender, women are much less likely to trust Facebook, with only 1.8 percent of women from the US willing to try Libra for payments, compared to 3.2 percent of men. In the UK, only 1.7 percent of men were willing to try Libra for payments, while even less women at 1.1 percent were willing to use the currency.

      Gen Z users are the most likely to try the Libra cryptocurrency at 2.7 percent, while they were also the most trusting in that they also agreed that Facebook would keep their info secure at only 4.1 percent. In the UK though, this position is reversed, with zero percent of Generation Z willing to try Libra payments, while 1.5 percent of baby boomers, and 2.1 percent of Millennials would.

      The results are hardly surprising given the widely reported scandal on Cambridge Analytica where it became clear that Facebook sold data on its users. Facebook are facing a fine north of $100 million from the to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the privacy breaches, while the UK's Information Commissioner’s Office levied a fine of £500,000 on the company in relation to its privacy violations last October.

      You can read the full Viber report here, but it's clear that Facebook has a long way to go in winning back the trust of its users and even whole countries, with France questioning the currency, as well as Japan and China conducting its own investigations, among others.

      Source: Viber via BetaNews

    • By Ruel Revales
      Instagram eclipses Snapchat as the most-used app among American teens, according to survey
      by Ruel Revales

      Instagram's Stories feature surpassed Snapchat in terms of daily usage in August last year. Today, the multimedia messaging app might be in for another blow to its stats as a new survey conducted by investment banking firm Piper Jaffray has revealed that Instagram has gained a lead over Snapchat as the most-used social networking application among teenagers in the U.S.

      According to the company's 36th semi-annual "Taking Stock With Teens" report, which polled 8,600 teens aged 16 on an average across 48 states, 85% of teens said they use Instagram at least once every month while 84% stated that they use Snapchat on the same frequency. It is worth noting that this is the first time the Facebook-owned service has eclipsed its closest rival in that respect since the spring of 2016, based on Piper Jaffray's surveys.

      Even so, Snapchat continues to be the most favorite social media platform among teenagers, with 46% of them choosing the service, in comparison to 32% picking Instagram. While both platforms remain two of the most-used applications among American teens, Twitter and Facebook are trailing behind.

      It's worth pointing out that Snapchat recently faced backlash after a revamp to the platform's design. Over the past few years, Instagram also introduced features that appeared to be taking a page from Snapchat's book including Stories and vanishing direct message photos, and the move seems to have benefited Instagram in terms of user growth, with it having reached one billion active users in June.

      Source: Piper Jaffray via Yahoo Finance

    • By ShirtShanks
      Apple is asking for direct feedback on key features from iMac Pro buyers
      by Sharath Ravishankar

      If you're an iMac Pro user, you should be receiving a survey from Apple asking you about your use of the various features that accompany the device on the hardware front.

      The survey includes questions about which of its features you use most, asking users to pinpoint the ones that could use some improvement and the ones that they already find themselves pleased with. It would appear that through some of the questions - namely, the ones that question users over their decision to buy their iMac Pro over other Macs and PCs - Apple is trying to gain a better understanding of the demographic it is catering to.

      Given Apple has a dedicated "Pro-Workflow Team" tasked with tailoring its computers for professional users, it is possible that this very team is responsible for the survey's circulation.

      One could also infer that Apple is trying to not repeat the mistakes it made with its original trashcan-esque Mac Pro, a product that Craig Federighi himself admitted could have been a lot better designed for its target market of power-users. A new Mac Pro is in the works for a reported 2019 release, and Apple is perhaps also attempting to better distinguish this upcoming device from the iMac Pro through the questions it has asked here.

      Source: a f waller (Twitter) via MacRumors | Image via Apple