Thread: The Nonreligious Are More Intelligent

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 mowglycdb

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

You need a logic teacher more than I need a fake psychologist.

Here's a Banana to cheer everyone up:

Originally Posted by Kromoh

You need a logic teacher more than I need a fake psychologist.

Here's a Banana to cheer everyone up:

haha, cheers. I "used" to use alot of logic, but no more *screams*.

Originally Posted by Mario92

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.

I am homosexual =)

The only reason anyone has ever had a problem with homosexuality is because of religious purposes. If it is otherwise, please state it.

In a thread about the nonreligious being more intelligent than the religious, is it really a good idea to start a new debate over something that stems from a religious standpoint?

Please, stick to the topic.

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

The only reason anyone has ever had a problem with homosexuality is because of religious purposes. If it is otherwise, please state it.

In a thread about the nonreligious being more intelligent than the religious, is it really a good idea to start a new debate over something that stems from a religious standpoint?

Please, stick to the topic.

~

Yes there are, I've seen that alot of people that really love their country too much and consider it to better, more cool than others, and I say for example , yeah! I'm chilean horray, yeah I'm american! ( USA )
can have problems with homosexuality, mostly because it's something strange and diferent , people that compete and feel that their country is better than others are likely to be homophobics.

and yes statisticly I believe non religious people would have a higher IQ

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

Yes there are, I've seen that alot of people that really love their country too much and consider it to better, more cool than others, and I say for example , yeah! I'm chilean horray, yeah I'm american! ( USA )
can have problems with homosexuality, mostly because it's something strange and diferent , people that compete and feel that their country is better than others are likely to be homophobics.

...? What..?

Who's competing about countries..? I'm lost.

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

...? What..?

Who's competing about countries..? I'm lost.

~

I basically think he's saying that, if you have one prejudice, you are more likely to have another. Which is rather true in my humble opinion. Xenophobics, homophobics, racists, sexists, and religious zealots are usually one cohesive group.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

I basically think he's saying that, if you have one prejudice, you are more likely to have another. Which is rather true in my humble opinion. Xenophobics, homophobics, racists, sexists, and religious zealots are usually one cohesive group.

Likely a correlation with closed-mindedness.

~

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.

F**k you. Call me a troll all you want. I really don't care about the opinion of you and Onus. I'll show you a flame war, because this is hardly close to one.

This just in you, you and your posse aren't the whole forum.


Still no proper explanation of the outlier.. But why should you have to address something that invalidates your data?\


Please for the love of the goddess, think before you make your next post instead of repeating yourself and explain why their is an outlier.


Whites are more intelligent.

Men are more intelligent.


I wonder how that could possibly offend anyone? But I know you don't care about offending anyone, because of causation. You know even in the world of science, people should learn how to communicate their information in a way that won't offend.

For example, look at this article...

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/j/jencks-gap.html

Should I now start a topic titled, White people are more intelligent than black people ?

After all their is data supporting it..

Originally Posted by Mario92

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.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Fuck you. Call me a troll all you want. I really don't care about the opinion of you and Onus.

This just in you, you and your posse aren't the whole forum.

*facepalm*

You really are a troll, aren't you? I try to be nice and logical, and I get flamed at. Brilliant. Are you nine or something? Grow up.

If you don't like the thread, you may leave. The door is right there, mate.

Originally Posted by Mario92

*facepalm*

You really are a troll, aren't you? I try to be nice and logical, and I get flamed at. Brilliant. Are you nine or something? Grow up.

If you don't like the thread, you may leave. The door is right there, mate.

Listen here you child. I don't take your little ultimatums. You are in no way in control of my actions. So if you demand something from me I will do the opposite, especially when you've added less than me to this debate. Grow up, perhaps you should pull that mote out of your own eye first darling.

I don't like the thread, but I'm not leaving.


P.S. Please think about not being a moron in your next post, or your place as pointless poster will be cemented.



It's funny when people come in preaching moral superiority or some sort of perfectness when they are in fact themselves acting like a troll. You're the one who keeps addressing me with nothing, certainty no rebuttal to my arguments.



*So far any arguments I've posted you've ignored...

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Listen here you child. I don't take your little ultimatums. You are in no way in control of my actions. So if you demand something from me I will do the opposite, especially when you've added less than me to this debate. Grow up, perhaps you should pull that mote out of your own eye first darling.

I don't like the thread, but I'm not leaving.

P.S. Please think about not being a moron in your next post, or your place as pointless poster will be cemented.

It's funny when people come in preaching moral superiority or some sort of perfectness when they are in fact themselves acting like a troll. You're the one who keeps addressing me with nothing, certainty no rebuttal to my arguments.

*So far any arguments I've posted you've ignored...

Your digression and trolling have gone far enough. Any further derailing will be deleted. It has not only been myself that have asked you to quote your apparent "point" or "argument" and you have failed in doing so. Instead, you attack in turn. This only proves, not only your lacking ability to debate, but respect for other posters.

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

Your digression and trolling have gone far enough. Any further derailing will be deleted. It has not only been myself that have asked you to quote your apparent "point" or "argument" and you have failed in doing so. Instead, you attack in turn. This only proves, not only your lacking ability to debate, but respect for other posters.

~

That. DeathCell, if you continue your flame wars, I'll ask a mod that's not involved to delete your posts.

2 1/2 years later and the same tired squabbles still prevalent here at dreamviews, I see. Can't say I'm too surprised.

I liken threads like this to masturbation. It has one sole purpose, self-gratification in its most shameless form. Similarly, doing this in a public format should be equally embarrassing. And in the end, all that remains is a sticky mess, exhaustion, and a fading high back down to the oh-so-familiar plateau that made indulging in such an idea in the first place seem like a good idea at the time.

People shouldn't be too surprised or judgmental when some participants respond to this thread in the exact way the thread was designed to have them respond. After all, the thread seems to have been created for at least one of two reasons: 1.) For like-mind peers to sit around and enjoy the smell of their own farts [/southpark] 2.) To antagonize those who feel differently, not for the sake of civil debate, but for the sake of childish teasing/torment.

Antagonizing people to respond in a less than civil manner, and then turning around criticizing them for doing so is pretty sad IMO. This is not to say that I am defending the person(s) in question, but what did you really expect would happen when you created this thread? Surely you knew it was going to get someone all fired up...

If you can't deal with it, don't purposefully provoke people any more.

AS FOR THE TOPIC AT HAND, I think two words can sum it up nicely: Spurious Correlation.

I love the mob mentality in this topic, who all gang up and call me a troll.

I've constantly repeated myself onus with my argument, you are a troll.. First I left it up to Alric, because he came to this topic before and addressed many issues. Than when I give you my own personal argument it's not good enough? Because you keep ignoring my words and say I didn't... It's not my fault you guys have reading comprehension problems.

All your study proves it that countries that are less developed tend to be more religious and less intelligent... America being more religious and more intelligent shows my point to be true.

Alric seems to have this under control already, he can smell a fishy study obviously.

Than their was the information I provided that contradicted your Lynn study, but you made no attempt to address those problems... I know I didn't type it myself, but this entire topic is not really your own research...

Perhaps Onus, if people don't agree with you.. instead of calling them a troll after you were being insulting yourself.... you just agree to disagree..

Or maybe the fact that the US is a huge outlier might show you a problem with how the statistics were gathered. If you are well versed in statistics you must understand the importance of outliers?

Perhaps a few links will make you understand a little bit clearer.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Outlier.html

"An outlier is an observation that lies outside the overall pattern of a distribution (Moore and McCabe 1999). Usually, the presence of an outlier indicates some sort of problem. This can be a case which does not fit the model under study, or an error in measurement. "

P.S. I find it laughable the so apparent hypocrisy calling me a troll, but for some reason... Onus can say whatever rude things he feels like without so much as a whimper from Mario or Kromoh, but it's not too much of a surprise.. you guys are all on the "same side", I'm sure that's how your mind looks at it..


Onus, I'll show you and Mario some respect when you show me some as well.. You paint yourselves as some morally superior, highly educated debaters, but really when it comes down the nitty gritty your just as rude and obnoxious as the rest of us.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

I love the mob mentality in this topic, who all gang up and call me a troll.

I've constantly repeated myself onus with my argument, you are a troll.. Because you keep ignoring my words and say I didn't... It's not my fault you guys have reading comprehension problems.

chill out bro , they think you're a troll because you insult when answering and you show anger, if you answer in a more relaxed way maybe it would change.

Originally Posted by mowglycdb

chill out bro , they think you're a troll because you insult when answering and you show anger, if you answer in a more relaxed way maybe it would change.

I'll answer in a non-insulting way, when I'm accorded the same respect.. That has not been the case since I came into this topic.

Just because Onus tries to veil his insults in a wall of text, doesn't mean I can't see them.

And this isn't the first time I've had issues with these people, they don't think I'm a troll.. They know I've been posting here for ages, never having been accused of such nonsense. They are simply, because they know their little study and topic is utter bullshit, have degenerated into labeling the opposition as something.(Troll)

Otherwise maybe they'd have more to say about rebuttal of Lynn I posted for him. Or the fact that an outlier in statistics unless properly explained has a high chance of indicating a problem in how the data was gathered.. But that's not enough of an argument for them, I'm just a troll as they keep repeating....

He's a troll!!! For getting pissed off for being insulted omg!!

Let's show Onus being a rude, self-serving, hypocritical, snob.

Originally Posted by Onus

I highly respect it, opposed to the nonsense and non-thinking for the rest of these pillocks.

Originally Posted by Onus

I am losing confidence in the majority's capability to debate, let alone think.

Originally Posted by Onus

The fact that you cannot provide an intelligent response to this and instead favour emotional distress only reinforces my original argument.

Onus, just because you don't agree with an me, doesn't mean my argument is not valid.. nor does it reinforce your original argument.. It does show you being a snob. Their was no emotional distress in my posts, and claiming such nonsense is just silly. My response was quite intelligent, sad that you are so cut off from reality. Their is more to life that poorly correlated statistics.

Originally Posted by Onus

I understand though if you have a problem accepting facts and lack the intelligence to do so.

Originally Posted by Onus

I am sorry, I have a degree in psychology and philosophy. I believe I may be actually qualified in it as opposed to yourself.

Originally Posted by Onus

Could you perhaps offer any sort of substantial argument rather than ad hominems and other immature displays of childish prepositions?

Perhaps you should take your own advice, ad hominems seem to be your cup of tea. And I love your non explanation of "childish prepositions", Implying something without any reasoning or evidence.. just because you have no proper rebuttal to my argument doesn't mean it's childish.. just means you feel superior.

Originally Posted by Onus

The most important one, by Lynn, has not been touched upon by anyone yet.

And than when it is... you don't address that rebuttal because you can't... yet your study is somehow still fact in your mind.

Originally Posted by Onus

Interesting that you think Alric and yourself have pointed out such significant problems whereas, if you read, you will notice that my point still remains strong. In fact, my strongest point remains completely untouched (Lynn study).

But you seem to be so blinded by your "passion" that you fail to see that.

Now that your Crux has been crushed, your passion seems to have you blinded..

Originally Posted by Onus

You accuse me of using emotional attacks and ad hominems..? Are you reading yourself..?

I should be asking you that same question Onus...

Originally Posted by Onus

Your best argument is that:
- O'nus is an emotional attacking prick
- Thus, O'nus is wrong.

That was never my argument, and the fact that all my words were never actually read and processed by yourself.. You in your haste and anger, assumed that was my argument.. My original point was that this study does nothing to service the atheist movement, and that you would be viewed as an "assclown" for lack of a better term by a large majority of people... Course you don't care how people react, that is quite obvious in your style of posting. Than I said your wrong, because of the shoddy correlations, and later posted rebuttals to the Lynn Study and than I pointed out an unexplained outlier.. which is an important part of statistics.

Originally Posted by Onus

Who is the ignoramus in this respect..?

You sir.

Originally Posted by Onus

I seem to get emotionally charged? I will tell you when I am, and I have done so in the past. It is infrequent that I do, but I will tell you. You can clearly search and see it for yourself.

Infrequent??? Well here are many examples I've provided above. All from this one topic.

Originally Posted by Onus

What disappoints me the most is that I thought some religious people, like yourself, would disprove or act in the minority, with some responses of substance. You have done nothing but prove otherwise. Keep trying to attack me instead of the evidence (which has not been touched upon by a single post yet).

I never attacked you in the beginning... explaining to you how others will view you is not an attack.. I've provided plenty of substance, you choose to ignore it because my "assclown" comment obviously tipped you off.

Onus is just a lovely peach cobbler who never does an ounce of harm, he doesn't even show his emotions or lack of taste in any of his posts....

Originally Posted by DeathCell

I'll answer in a non-insulting way, when I'm accorded the same respect.. That has not been the case since I came into this topic.

Just because Onus tries to veil his insults in a wall of text, doesn't mean I can't see them.

And this isn't the first time I've had issues with these people, they don't think I'm a troll.. They know I've been posting here for ages, never having been accused of such nonsense. They are simply, because they know their little study and topic is utter bullshit, have degenerated into labeling the opposition as something.(Troll)

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Atheists calling superiority of intelligence over religious people just makes you look like an assclown.

Has atheism really came to the point that they need to spread propaganda or faulty correlations? Reminiscent of the church telling us to abandon our other religions for Heaven, now we must abandon religion for intelligence I assume? After all his study shows us.... lol

This is a disservice to the atheist movement.

I'm quoting your first message in this topic, you started.

Ok? Just makes you look like an assclown..

Like I said. I never said, you are an assclown Onus! I said it makes you look like one.. And in later posts made sure that I properly explained what that sentence meant.

Originally Posted by Onus

I provided evidence. Making prejudicial and simple rebuttals actually makes you look like an ass if all you got is ad hominems.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Actually it's the truth, if this is what you feel is an important study than you look like an assclown. It's that simple, it's not an ad hominem attack that's how you will be viewed by the majority of people.

I was trying to make Onus aware that his actions, and how he words himself, and what he chooses as important will have a great effect on how the majority of people will view him...

But he didn't want anything to do with that, he could careless how others see him he's more worried about other things..



More on topic, because this discussion is nothing but cluttering up this forum.

http://www.businessweek.com/innovate...929_872877.htm

The test achieves reliability by defining intelligence very narrowly, as the ability to solve simple analytical problems. It measures intelligence via a multiple-choice test that can be evaluated with no possibility of bias in measurement or judgment.

The problem is that IQ doesn't serve as a particularly great predictor of anything. In his best-selling book Emotional Intelligence, Daniel Goleman argues that EQ makes for a much better predictor of success in life than IQ. In essence, he argues that while IQ may demonstrate high reliability, it has modest validity.

To increase the validity of any process, one must consider a wide array of relevant variables. Goleman's EQ, for instance, builds on more qualitative considerations and judgment to produce what he argues has higher validity.

Of course, we would like a process that has both high validity and reliability. Up to a point, it's possible to get more of both, simply by being more thoughtful and less sloppy. But ultimately, more reliability requires fewer variables and therefore less validity, and vice versa. Reliability and validity seem to conflict.

Whole article is well worth the read.