Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Apr 25, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Psychology Today

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Comments (Page 731)

Showing posts 14,601 - 14,620 of20,851
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15404
May 6, 2013
 
Snevaeh legna wrote:
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038... Hhhmmm
*Can anyone tell me how they came up with this date?
Well, it's based on the trends. Religiosity is declining by a certain percentage each year, which increase by a steady amount, do some math ... bam, 2038.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15405
May 6, 2013
 
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes-- water exists because the combination of hydrogen and oxygen is at a mutually low-energy state.
TANSTAAFL... there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
A "water powered" car would require some other source of energy-- steam, for example can easily power a car.
Another possibility, would be something that splits the water-- the energy that goes in, would come out (save from what's lost to entropy). But if you had a water-splitting power source? Why not utilize that directly?
Of course, it could be that your energy source is less useful at powering a vehicle directly, than hydrogen + oxygen might be.
Say, in the case of a fuel cell which could create electricity from H2 and O2 directly.
And if your power-source were simply heat? You could use that to create super-heated steam, which if heated further, can split into h2 and o2. Of course-- at those temperatures, you'd have to keep those gases separate, or they'd simply re-combine right then.
:)
All in all, trying to use water as a "power source" is best left to gravity engines... you know... hydro-electrical damns.
And you are trying to split fresh water too. A resource that is already getting scarce even though it falls from the sky. or not.

Let's ask Phoenix and Los Angeles about water. I bet they have something to say about it.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15406
May 6, 2013
 
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Next up-- carefully destroy all those radioactive smoke detectors, that are protecting our homes from fires.
They all contain a bit of radioactive isotope-- Horrors!
... must .. destroy.. all...'nook-you-lur' enemies ...
<laughing>
Don't forget microwaves, video screens, radios, cellphones, landline telephones, refrigerators, stoves, fireplaces, lightbulbs (even the new ones), fire pits, lightning, powerlines, batteries, or, and pacemakers.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15407
May 6, 2013
 
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
There have been processes to create "artificial" petrochemicals in the past.
Heck, during WW2, Germany experimented with these processes, mainly because the Allies had cut off all oil importation.
Every few years, we see another attempt to commercialize one or more of the processes.
I'm kinda bummed that these pioneering companies are not successful, as one day the oil WILL run out-- what will we do then?
As far as I know, CWT was the first commercial venture on an industrial scale to attempt it. I'm probably wrong on whether it was the first, but when I ran across it 10 years ago, I was intrigued. They had improved the conversion efficiency but still had a lot of hurdles to overcome, most notably the price per barrel of oil. Kinda like the Alberta tar sands aren't economically feasible unless oil is something like $80 a barrel.

So was that large scale experiment wasted money?

If you are a Republican, yes. It didn't return a profit.

However, that could have been used for tax breaks (if you can afford the right tax lawyer).

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15408
May 6, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget microwaves, video screens, radios, cellphones, landline telephones, refrigerators, stoves, fireplaces, lightbulbs (even the new ones), fire pits, lightning, powerlines, batteries, or, and pacemakers.
Speaking of energy have you guys seen this:-
https://lasers.llnl.gov/

When they finally get it going all bets are off.

“ IT'S A CHOICE !!!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15409
May 6, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it's based on the trends. Religiosity is declining by a certain percentage each year, which increase by a steady amount, do some math ... bam, 2038.
Nice, I like math...:) Thx

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15410
May 6, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I have read up on biodiesel, or at least the cottage-industry methods used by smallish companies and individuals.
It is quite messy and smelly-- on a small scale. On large scale, the EPA would insist in air clean up, in the exhaust stacks, so it wouldn't be an issue, or it does not have to be.
One of the (currently) useless byproducts is glycol-- a kind of dirty, long-chain alcohol. Alas, it's too dirty to burn directly, so it's an unsatisfactory fuel-- but the small operators use it anyway, in spite of that.
Biodiesel is a good fuel, and modern engines like it very much-- in fact it works better than petro-diesel, as it has no sulfur compounds to corrode metal engine parts, and it leaves much less soot behind.
Alas, it has problems: it contains a bit less energy-per-liter than "regular" diesel, so mileage is lower. And it does not store long-term as well as petro-diesel. It will grow fungus, which clogs fuel filters. There's answers for that, of course.
Another problem with bio, is that it gets gel-like when too cold, and cannot be pumped at extreme low temperatures.
But it's 100% renewable. You can make biodiesel from anything that has fat in it-- like discarded turkey parts, or waste veggy oils/fats, or even waste animal fats too.
The process does involve hazardous chemicals (acid, wood alcohol) but those are not consumed entirely, and can be re-used with each cycle, with a small make-up addition as needed.
And the waste glycol is considered a mildly hazardous material-- on a large scale, disposal would be an issue.
I suppose there's really no one magic bullet to solve the energy problem, is there? Some avenues look to be more promising than others. And it looks more like we need a variety of sources to keep up with demand.

But, I know! Let's consult the Bible! Surely, there's answers in there for where we should get our energy from once the population has gone forth an multiplied! After all, it is quite detailed in other aspects of our lives. Like decorating Christmas trees or getting a tattoo or what is acceptable to eat.

Good thing I was only typing that. I wouldn't be able to keep a straight face if I said that.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15412
May 6, 2013
 

Judged:

2

Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Next up-- carefully destroy all those radioactive smoke detectors, that are protecting our homes from fires.
They all contain a bit of radioactive isotope-- Horrors!
... must .. destroy.. all...'nook-you-lur' enemies ...
<laughing>
We need to ban Bic lighters, too! When lit, I feel heat radiating from the flame. If I look too close at the flame, I could burn my eyes out!

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15413
May 6, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The irony is that it would actually be a new one of many uses for landfills. Many landfills are now "capped" off to siphon natural gas from, and some are even harvested for clay after a few decades as well. The problem is that there are not enough landfills to fill the need so they are still looking for other sources for these materials.
Recycling product only works for metals, all other products need more virgin materials to make the recycled product viable again than just a plain virgin product, but shh, the "green" lobbyist supporters will deny that. When you look at the big picture, our species is really doing less damage per capita than it was before we even used plastic now, the problem is that we have too many capita.:P
As for oil, the problem is the "reserves" our country stockpiles, which forces us to import in order to fill the need. But meh, if they don't find a solution that actually works soon ... the scientists will come to the rescue (again) and find an alternative that will make their entire oil nonsense obsolete anyway. That's what big corporations pay scientists to do.
I'd be curious just how much metals are in the landfills now. In a few thousand years, will there be a gold or silver rush on them?

And while I'm optimistic about science being able to come up with solutions, I'm cynical enough to say big business will crush any tech harmful to their bottom line. More realistically, corps will hold or buy the patents and never deploy them until they've squeezed out every last profitable dollar.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15414
May 6, 2013
 
Snevaeh legna wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice, I like math...:) Thx
Honestly, I don't know the math they employed or where they got the numbers and even I suspect it's nothing more than a hopeful guess. It's just fun to watch the mega-religious people squirm and gnash their teeth about it.

“ IT'S A CHOICE !!!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15415
May 6, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Honestly, I don't know the math they employed or where they got the numbers and even I suspect it's nothing more than a hopeful guess. It's just fun to watch the mega-religious people squirm and gnash their teeth about it.
Agreed!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15416
May 6, 2013
 
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd be curious just how much metals are in the landfills now. In a few thousand years, will there be a gold or silver rush on them?
And while I'm optimistic about science being able to come up with solutions, I'm cynical enough to say big business will crush any tech harmful to their bottom line. More realistically, corps will hold or buy the patents and never deploy them until they've squeezed out every last profitable dollar.
Here's the thing though, any new technology is always worth a fortune, and if it's marketable, it's worth a lot more. That's what people fail to recognize, especially those who spread the conspiracy nonsense about oil companies buying out the "fling cars" to prevent them from being produced. The government actually made those machines illegal because ... well we already have flying cars, they're called helicopters, and a special, expensive, license is required lest we have more air traffic accidents than land traffic ones ... imagine that mess for a moment and you'll know why the government said "no" to anything like them being mass produced.

Anyhow, when it comes to business practices and technology, every business wants to be the one to own the patent on it ... to sell it, because no technology will hurt the "bottom line" if you're the one producing it. The real problem is the oppressive copyright laws, brought to you by that annoying mouse's owners. Because of the state of the copyright laws as they are, most new products invented will never have an affordable generic version in production, unless the company is nice, ironically, like Apple. Can't believe I plugged Apple, anyhow, another drawback to the copyright laws is that innovation is slowed due to a lack of access to certain parts to the new technology. So if anything, we should be going after the media giants, they're the ones harming innovation more than any other company in the world, because they're the ones pushing for these insane life+infinity copyright laws. Just a recommendation for a way to actually improve things, not that I will see something improve like that in the US any time soon, I'd wager we'll see Brazil pass us up in technology soon.
rio

London, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15417
May 7, 2013
 
OMG, what a bundle of fun you lot are!

“If God was real”

Since: Jan 10

He would look like this

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15418
May 7, 2013
 
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
In Islam death penalty is not for "Minor Crimes" or on "Minors".
Those talking against death penalty are who do not know human nature and how crime rate goes higher when there is no deterrent punishment and when justice is denied or delayed due to the western court system, where every "protection" is given to the criminals and "Lawyers" are available to use every trick in the book to get their clients off hook.
The "sympathy" of law is with criminals and not with the victims, who have no protection or recompense for the wrongs they suffered.
According to Islamic law, a family of a victim can charge blood money and the offender can pay it to avoid other forms of criminal punishment.

“If God was real”

Since: Jan 10

He would look like this

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15419
May 7, 2013
 
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. On both counts.
By repealing Glass, we've allowed the banks to become the great barons of old. I cannot understand why Clinton did not veto the bill; he had no election coming up. He did not need republican support. Perhaps they Clintons benefited in some way from it's repeal.
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15420
May 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

GM wrote:
01. I will not even try to describe god in human terms considering what we've discovered of the universe. The best I can do is only offer guesses and I certainly would not try to enforce my guesses as dogma. You may as well ask me if the mathematical concept of infinity is sympathetic or can be angered.

02. No. Eating pork is not everything religion is about. However, certain religions has included the prohibition of eating pork. It seems trivial, don't you think?

03. "ism" does apply to Islam. And a whole host of other religions and other aspects of life. Look it up in the dictionary.

04.1 Because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. How about a game then? If you are so sure, tell the god squad you aren't going to answer the call to prayer. And no, you may not dress as a European/American/infidel.

04.2 "The people who do not close down their shops in market at prayer times, might face some penalty for violation of local laws."

Considering everyone is forced into the mosque, why should a business stay open when there aren't any customers? And what is the fine for a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th offense?

04.3 "You should know that in Islam there is no separation between Secular and religious duties. Ruler of state is also responsible to see that Islamic system is enforce on ground."

So the ruler has final say so in matters both political and religious. Basically, you are saying your leaders of religion are as trustworthy as a politicians.

04.4 Saudi Arabia also has traffic and normal police.



04.5 " There is no value of religion in your countries, so you do not care a damn about it."

Because religion is not withstanding the test of time. Whenever we discover something that contradicts the dogma, it's either suppressed or another lie needs to be constructed to support the previous lies. Given time, the religious dogmas start sounding as ridiculous as Santa Claus.

04.6 "In Islam it is different."

This sounds suspiciously like what a battered wife would say.
Ans.

01. Even if you "try" to define God, you will be unable to do it. So it is no "shame" that you did not do it. We know about that bits about God, which He Himself reveals in His revelation to His Prophets. That info is "More than sufficient".

02. Eating Pork or doing any thing which has been expressively banned by God, is not a Trivial thing. It is a challenge to the Authority of God as a Law Giver. And if any one does these things to Challenge God' power as law Giver, then he or she is a Rebel.

Slapping any human is bad….but try slapping a Police officer or a Military officer….? You challenge the Might of the State!!

03. Islam is not "ism", it is a state of belief and a way of life. Isms usually deal with a small portion of human life.

04. There is nothing called "god squad", It is duty of "every Muslim" to ask his brother to come for regular prayer. Any Muslim "denying" prayer, has committed a very great sin.

05. The Penalty increase for multiple offenses (as in any legal system) and in the end their business shall be closed down for good.

06. The rulers should be selected with the consent of people. When you "trust" goons like GWB the Great to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, why cant we trust our Muslim rulers?

07. I do not mind what Title you give to Lenin or Stalin, but people will soon forget their names. Only Prophets of God have ever living names in the hearts of their followers.

08. There are so many "battered wives" in your society, I do not know what they say about your system.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15421
May 7, 2013
 
rio wrote:
OMG, what a bundle of fun you lot are!
Care to add something productive to the debate?

“If God was real”

Since: Jan 10

He would look like this

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15422
May 7, 2013
 
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I would, if I was close enough-- I don't think what he did was right.
You don't think it was right to kill Osama?

“If God was real”

Since: Jan 10

He would look like this

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15423
May 7, 2013
 
greymouser wrote:
<quoted text>
Key word there is "supposed."
And a key concept there is that the religions should not be trying to dictate policies of the state.
There are intersections of state and religion with the easy example of "you may not murder."*
*this, of course, assumes there's a translation error of the "Thou shalt not kill" Commandment where kill == murder. Otherwise, the infallible Bible folks are going to have a hard time defending a self defense plea or admit there is an error in the Bible. But they are well trained in compartmentalization and may claim that's not a problem at all because they are completely unrelated.
Well Godbots claim credit for basic common sense laws like not murdering or stealing, as if people needed a deity for the most basic of principles. What they love to divorce themselves from is all the stupid laws in the old testament like the one that requires women to marry their rapist or the one that demands death for those who want to earn money on the Sabbath.
Christians claim credit for monogamy even though there is nothing in the buybull that condemns polygamy. In fact, it was the Pagan homosexual Romans who insisted that men have only one wife at a time.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15424
May 7, 2013
 
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text> You don't think it was right to kill Osama?
I dont agree with the assassination of Obama. That is a slippery slope to go down. Unfortunately the US appears big on assassinations with its drone programme.

The problem with capital punishment generally is it breaches human rights and encourages a culture of violence and death.

I hope eventually the US moves away from the assassination programme and similar policies.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 14,601 - 14,620 of20,851
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••