Thread: The Nonreligious Are More Intelligent

Originally Posted by DeathCell

I don't understand why something being a choice means that it all of a sudden isn't unethical?

So basically, if I called homosexuals less intelligent with data backing it... since homosexuality is a "choice" it would be totally ethical?

Homosexuality in Animals;

A Comparison of LH Secretion and Brain Estradiol Receptors in Heterosexual and Homosexual Rams and Female Sheep. Sciene Direct;
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d57ca07e932fe3

Homosexuality in Humans

A neuroendocrine predisposition for homosexuality in men. Springer Netherlands.
+ http://www.springerlink.com/content/g1176x7289822289/

Sexual Orientation and the size of the anterior commissure in the human brain. Neurobiology.
+ http://www.pnas.org/content/89/15/7199.full.pdf

Male Homosexuality: The Adolescent’s Perspective. Pediatrics
+ http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...urcetype=HWCIT

Abnormalities of Male-Specific FRU Protein and Serotonin Expression in the CNS of fruitless Mutants in Drosophila. Journal of Neuroscience;
+ http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content...urcetype=HWCIT

An enlarged suprachiasmatic nucleus in homosexual men. Science Direct.
+ http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d21363fa9ce91d

The association between the fraternal birth order effect in male homosexuality and other markers of human sexual orientation. Biology Letters.
+ http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.o...urcetype=HWCIT

Sexual Differentiation of the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis in Humans May Extend into Adulthood. Journal of Neuroscience;
+ http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content...urcetype=HWCIT

Need more?

Edit: Do you accept links as non-junk science if they are not from wikipedia? Ought I link to wikipedia or some other simplistic site for you to read?

+++++++

Furthermore, why do people keep bringing up the ethics of the title?

Let us say that a ethnicity, a race, or some other random trait of a human had significant evidence for being more intellectual than the other. Would you not want to consider what that evidence then? Would it not be useful for us?

Also, why do people keep saying that this is Atheist propaganda?

The IQ test is not religious bias whatsoever; anyone who argues that is just ignorant (honestly, read the WAIS). There's no religious subtext in "2+2=?" or "what comes next..?" in a pattern recognition.

If the results show that religious people average lower than non-religious, then what propaganda am I preaching?

~

I'm religious... and frankly, I don't care about your study.

I don't care if I'm less intelligent (my IQ is almost off the charts and yes, I am a Christian who regularly attends church, but if you want to claim that its a fluke and most religious people are less intelligent than average than so be it).

I don't care what you have to say.

I'm posting this, and then I'm never looking at this thread again, because it doesn't concern me at all.

Debates similar to this have been going on forever... atheists attempting ot undermine the religious by claiming that they are less intelligent since they believe in something beyond , and religious attempting to defend themselves.

I don't care if you try and hide behind the phrase "I'm merely posting data," you yourself know that attempting to undermine the religious is exactly what you're doing, otherwise why would you bother to post all of this data? Don't give me excuses and flimsy "it's for science" shit. Anyone with half a brain can see right through that.

You're not going to change anyone's opinion, your merely looking to start an argument because deep inside you know that your data is not going to change anyone's opinion on the matter. Religious will stay opposed to it, despite all of your data, and atheists will rally around it perhaps, but in the end nothing changes.



Jesus, people, come on.

You can reply if you want, quote me, etc... I don't care because I'm not responding anyways... I've said what I'm going to say, and hopefully some of you will see the futility of this thread and all the others revolving around similar topics.

In the end, no one changes their mind.

Nothing changes.

The thread may as well have not existed, and it only served as a warzone for argument... no real progress was made.

Its happened before, ever since this forum started, and you guys are just feeding it, prolonging it.

Bah, I'm done.

Originally Posted by WakataDreamer

Nothing changes.

This is only true of hard-headed louts who make drive by posts that do nothing but assure us they are stubborn fools uninterested in the truth. Your post is the most useless and intellectually robbed post in this entire thread.

Originally Posted by WakataDreamer

so is he the little girl or the ass?

The religious have the lowest intelligence. The atheist have higher intelligence, that's not bad. But if your IQ gets even higher, those who have the REALLY big IQs then you find the religion behind the religion, the spirituality behind the spirituality.

But those rules get broken all the time anyway : ), just keep living your life as well as you can.

edit: and I don't mean this is as a hierarchy really, some are meant to be religious I am glad for them they are full of goodness and intelligence. Some are meant to be atheist and they are full of goodness and intelligence and some are meant in the third category and likewise. Just from my humble opinion anyways

Originally Posted by O'nus

Homosexuality in Animals;

A Comparison of LH Secretion and Brain Estradiol Receptors in Heterosexual and Homosexual Rams and Female Sheep. Sciene Direct;
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d57ca07e932fe3

Homosexuality in Humans

A neuroendocrine predisposition for homosexuality in men. Springer Netherlands.
+ http://www.springerlink.com/content/g1176x7289822289/

Sexual Orientation and the size of the anterior commissure in the human brain. Neurobiology.
+ http://www.pnas.org/content/89/15/7199.full.pdf

Male Homosexuality: The Adolescent’s Perspective. Pediatrics
+ http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...urcetype=HWCIT

Abnormalities of Male-Specific FRU Protein and Serotonin Expression in the CNS of fruitless Mutants in Drosophila. Journal of Neuroscience;
+ http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content...urcetype=HWCIT

An enlarged suprachiasmatic nucleus in homosexual men. Science Direct.
+ http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...d21363fa9ce91d

The association between the fraternal birth order effect in male homosexuality and other markers of human sexual orientation. Biology Letters.
+ http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.o...urcetype=HWCIT

Sexual Differentiation of the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis in Humans May Extend into Adulthood. Journal of Neuroscience;
+ http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content...urcetype=HWCIT

Need more?

Edit: Do you accept links as non-junk science if they are not from wikipedia? Ought I link to wikipedia or some other simplistic site for you to read?

+++++++

Furthermore, why do people keep bringing up the ethics of the title?

Let us say that a ethnicity, a race, or some other random trait of a human had significant evidence for being more intellectual than the other. Would you not want to consider what that evidence then? Would it not be useful for us?

Also, why do people keep saying that this is Atheist propaganda?

The IQ test is not religious bias whatsoever; anyone who argues that is just ignorant (honestly, read the WAIS). There's no religious subtext in "2+2=?" or "what comes next..?" in a pattern recognition.

If the results show that religious people average lower than non-religious, then what propaganda am I preaching?

~

Yes Onus, I'm well aware of Homosexuality in animals, and the evidence contrary of peoples opinions. I was using it as a what if statement.. lots of people believe it to be a choice.

I didn't say "choice" for no reason, Onus.


P.S. White People Are Smarter Than Non-Whites!!!

Wonder if that title would offend anyone...

Your study isn't the final word on intelligence, and it's barely scratching the beginning of real research.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Yes Onus, I'm well aware of Homosexuality in animals, and the evidence contrary of peoples opinions. I was using it as a what if statement.. lots of people believe it to be a choice.

I didn't say "choice" for no reason, Onus.

The people who "believe" it to be "choice" are wrong. People can believe wrong things, did you know that?

P.S. White People Are Smarter Than Non-Whites!!!

Wonder if that title would offend anyone...

Your study isn't the final word on intelligence, and it's barely scratching the beginning of real research.

Are you a complete idiot or deliberately trying to annoy everyone? I have said that exact same thing. Read my damn posts. You are one step away from a troll.

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

The people who "believe" it to be "choice" are wrong. People can believe wrong things, did you know that?

Living in acordance to homosexuality is a choice, having atraction for males isn't a choice. Same as living a life acording to heterosexuality is a choice.

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

Living in acordance to homosexuality is a choice, having atraction for males isn't a choice. Same as living a life acording to heterosexuality is a choice.

Feeling hungry isn't a choice, but eating is. Seriously, your point is stupid.


Also, "homosexuality" is defined as "having attraction to males". But I understood what you meant.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Feeling hungry isn't a choice, but eating is. Seriously, your point is stupid.


Also, "homosexuality" is defined as "having attraction to males". But I understood what you meant.

You must take life really seriously to find a point like that stupid, maybe things aren't going nice for you?

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

Living in acordance to homosexuality is a choice, having atraction for males isn't a choice. Same as living a life acording to heterosexuality is a choice.

Ah, I see, so if someone isn't a heterosexual, they should be condemned to a lifetime of misery? Perhaps you would feel better if they all just shot themselves in a fit of depression? Are they denied the rights to love and the pursuit of happiness?

One more question: Are you nuts?

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

You must take life really seriously to find a point like that stupid, maybe things aren't going nice for you?

WTF? Troll?

Originally Posted by Mario92

Ah, I see, so if someone isn't a heterosexual, they should be condemned to a lifetime of misery? Perhaps you would feel better if they all just shot themselves in a fit of depression? Are they denied the rights to love and the pursuit of happiness?

One more question: Are you nuts?

WTF? Troll?

Hahaha, excuse me, look I didn't say heterosexuality was wrong, I'm ok with all of it actually, I didn't say it trying to offend anyone with that point, but I see that you tried to look at it like if I was ( maybe you want to fight ? or something alike).

Every choice in life is valid.

Maybe I'm a little nuts =) lol

Naw I'm no troll you can check my posts in the help section, and most of my posts if you want, you'll see I'm not one.

I can't make heads or tails out of your first post, but it sounded like you want people to suppress the homosexual urges and go about living a life of heterosexuality, which I find to be disgusting.

Originally Posted by O'nus

The people who "believe" it to be "choice" are wrong. People can believe wrong things, did you know that?

[/b]

Are you a complete idiot or deliberately trying to annoy everyone? I have said that exact same thing. Read my damn posts. You are one step away from a troll.

~

Onus, you are ridiculous. One step away from a troll huh? If you didn't think it was important or even proof of anything why would you name it a topic like you did... only after being confronted do you admit..

You are one step away from being invalid. Honestly Onus, I used to have some respect for you, but most of that is gone. I've done nothing but come in here and show you how ridiculous your statements are and I'm a troll. Simply because my arguments aren't concrete enough for you, your a god damn hypocritical, stuck up snob. It's that simple, not everyone on a forum is going to waste hours studying something so unimportant and useless. It's doing nothing useful for the world, it's not helping explain intelligence, only categorizing people to drive a bigger wedge between humans.(I'm going to reply to your large post a page back and than I'm hopefully going to stop listening to you.. because you keep accusing me of having no argument or cause, when I clearly do.. so just because you can ignore everything I say.. doesn't mean I don't have an argument...)


P.S. I love your whole dodging the outliers thing.. but why would you have to address that...?

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Onus, you are ridiculous. One step away from a troll huh? If you didn't think it was important or even proof of anything why would you name it a topic like you did... only after being confronted do you admit..

You are one step away from being invalid. Honestly Onus, I used to have some respect for you, but most of that is gone. I've done nothing but come in here and show you how ridiculous your statements are and I'm a troll. Simply because my arguments aren't concrete enough for you, your a god damn hypocritical, stuck up snob. It's that simple, not everyone on a forum is going to waste hours studying something so unimportant and useless. It's doing nothing useful for the world, it's not helping explain intelligence, only categorizing people to drive a bigger wedge between humans.(I'm going to reply to your large post a page back and than I'm hopefully going to stop listening to you.. because you keep accusing me of having no argument or cause, when I clearly do.. so just because you can ignore everything I say.. doesn't mean I don't have an argument...)


P.S. I love your whole dodging the outliers thing.. but why would you have to address that...?

Troll.

Spoiler for .:

All I see is a big wall of bait and flame. Your arguments can hardly be considered valid, and the fact that you won't let the thread title issue die discredits you entirely. You're annoying, and few people like you...perhaps you should brush up on your definition of "troll."

Spoiler for .:

^That is precisely what you are doing, intentional or not.

Go climb in a fucking pipe.


All of a sudden I'm a troll? It's funny because I've been posting here since August of 2008 and this is the first topic I've been accused of this... Perhaps your just full of shit, and since you have no argument against what I've said you ignore my arguments and focus on bullshit like calling me a troll.. Just throw any word around and keep repeating yourself! It makes it true right.



Just because I think this topic and his study is stupid, moronic and not accurate means I'm a troll?


You know what? F**k you. Your the one whose post have added nothing to the discussion. Absolutely nothing, I've from the start stated my feelings and my opinions.. Just because you guys have your heads stuck so far up your asses that any argument I make is not valid doesn't mean I haven't made them..

Go stroke your own cocks somewhere else.







(Alrics rebuttals, than my posting about how others would view onus(which he took as a personal attack, when my worlds clearly said.."Atheists calling superiority of intelligence over religious people just makes you look like an assclown." ,outliers like the US and no proper explanation which is a No-No in statistics, and little to no mention of other factors.. It's obvious what the agenda of a study like this is, if you don't want to accept that that's fine but at least try debating with me instead of wasting text and making useless accusations that the majority of this forum knows is bullshit.)

P.S. Titling is one of the most important concepts we have available, and is the first thing the majority of people will notice...

Here is a few articles on the importance of titles, just because you are unaware of it's importance doesn't mean it's not. More likely shows your age or lack of experience when it comes to communication and writing skills.

http://www.writingsimplified.com/200...of-titles.html
http://www.readwritethink.org/lesson...ew.asp?id=1109
http://www.whitepapersource.com/writing/writing_titles/

His title left no room for anything but the nonreligious being more intelligent, whether religion is the main factor as Onus said has little effect on him.. Which is very misleading, especially if their are more pressing and important factors affecting intelligence.

Flame wars. I've never seen someone so upset before...

Look, it's all very simple. O'nus created a topic with a bold statement partly because statistics show a correlation (not causation) between religiosity and intelligence (which they do), and partly to encourage debate. Simple. Let it die.

If you would take a second look at the statistics, we can, in fact, see a general trend between religion and intelligence (specifically ACH thinking). We're not claiming, "Yeah, we're atheist, and we're the smartest bastards in the world. All you other little religious bastards are inferior to our awesome intellect." Nobody claims this.

This study is useful, too. For one thing, it shows that it may be a very good idea to remove religion entirely from the educational system. It's not here simply to stroke the egos of atheists and the non-religious.

Now please, think about your next post first. If you retaliate with a big wall of flame or bait, you cement your standing as a troll.