Science vs. Religion

[Anonymous No.3705740]

If Science is superior to Religion, how come that Evolution has not given birth to a state that rejects religion in favor of science?

This video describes what would happen if all atheists left America: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbef07aQtB8 . If they formed a country, wouldn't it attract the brightest minds, make rapid progress and thereby surpass the primitive nations quite soon?

So why hasn't that happened yet? Can anyone explain that to me?

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3705755]

>>3705740
all land on earth (that is habitable, at least) has already been colonised and is owned by the worlds individual countries. you cant just make a new country, you would need space to do it, and even if you could, people in 1st world counties who live in secular societys and do not have their freedoms limited too much by the state are pretty happy on the whole, so they would not want to leave and join some new country anyway, which would be a massive gamble as there is no telling whether it would be successful or not.
its far easier just to reject religion in your own country (if you have the freedom to do so... sucks to be arabic) and not give too much of a fuck if other people in your country are religious.

[Anonymous No.3705771]

>>3705755
>Can't make new countries
>Maps never change
>Derp

[pascal !n5Z3VuZapw No.3705789]

>>3705771
No that was pretty accurate. New countries will only form from old countries now. There is no unclaimed land.

[Anonymous No.3705800]

>>3705755
it sucks to be arabic but yeah, I do agree that religion shouldn't be rejected in the arab world because most of us are morons

[Anonymous No.3705803]

>>3705755
Yes, forming an entirely new country is just a thought experiment. But let's say there is an American state that is more progressive and favorable of science than the others. This attracts open-minded people who increase this development and possibly drives away those who oppose it.

In the end New England should be far superior to the Bible Belt. Yet while there are significant differences from average IQ to gay rights, atheists are still a minority of one third and less even in Vermont an New Hampshire. Shouldn't it rather be an self-accelerating spiral instead? Why don't atheists hold a huge majority in these states by now?

[Anonymous No.3705808]

>>3705789
>>3705755

Both of these are correct. There are a few fringe ideas in science and/or sci-fi - such as the "Rapture" city or, more feasibly, seasteading - but it's still a retarded cost/benefit analysis to staying in a 1st-world country and whining about morons.

[pascal !n5Z3VuZapw No.3705809]

>>3705803
It gets cold there. Lets all move to california instead.

[Anonymous No.3705818]

>>3705803

>Why don't atheists hold a huge majority in these states by now?

Because they're always the first ones to "get out of this fucking town" when people they like are present. Religious conservatives are more likely to shun the nonbeliever until they leave.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3705834]

>>3705771
can make a new country if we split an old one in 2 i guess.
might be quite a good idea, except that war between the atheist side and the fucktard side is kinda inevitable.
still, we'd be the ones with the science that builds the weapons that wins the war...
they can all just pray that our army all suffers a convenient heart attack en masse.

[Anonymous No.3705839]

>>3705803
Athiest scientist here. I live in North Carolina. New England is a shithole.

[Anonymous No.3705854]

>>3705839
Just Connecticut.

[Anonymous No.3705858]

>>3705818 Religious conservatives are more likely to shun the nonbeliever until they leave.

And where do they go? Shouldn't a significant number of them head to the same spot? Shouldn't some sort of aggregation of like-minded people take place? The United States has dozens of Chinatowns, Germany has several Muslim quarters, and the separation of social classes is a global phenomenon.

Wouldn't that suggest districts, cities or even states dominated by educated atheists?

[Anonymous No.3705859]

Not all atheists are super smart.

Some of them are 12yo edgy teens that got bored of going to church

But hey, to be honest, I started like that and I stopped being a faggot. You can be an atheist without being a faggot but other people will not stop being so retarded.

[Anonymous No.3705864]

Because, scientists are egocentric, the religious are community focused.

Atheist community is an oxymoron from the start.

[Anonymous No.3705872]

>>3705839 New England is a shithole.
New England states score best nationwide in various educational and social variables, from education over low crime to civil liberties. What is bad about them?

[pascal !n5Z3VuZapw No.3705874]

>>3705872
It gets cold there

[Anonymous No.3705881]

>>3705872
No barbecue.

[Anonymous No.3705887]

>if atheists left america
>picture of Stephen Hawking
stopped watching right there

Fucking idiots. It's not christfags, who are stupid. It's all of you, fucking 'murricans.

[Anonymous No.3705901]

>>3705859 Not all atheists are super smart.
I agree, there are some very stupid reasons for atheism. But in average, there are strong correlations between atheism and variables like education or non-criminal behavior. No matter what causes what, it suggests that atheist groups profit from beneficial factors, which in turn should make them more powerful, numerous and attractive. Just like people from poorer, war-torn countries swarm into richer and safer ones.

[SAGE No.3705908]

THIS THREAD ISN'T EVEN DISGUISED, THE TITLE BLATANTLY SAYS SCIENCE VS. RELIGION. WHY DO YOU PEOPLE HATE THIS BOARD SO MUCH?

[Anonymous No.3705911]

>>3705864
Implying all atheists are scientists.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.3705931]

>>3705908

[Anonymous No.3705941]

>>3705887 Stephen Hawking
I think the video also refers to temporary residents, not only citizens. Stephen Hawking spends a month every year in California. Also, Keanu Reeves is Canadian, but lived several years in New York. But I agree that the maker of the video should have included only citizens...

[Anonymous No.3705945]

>>3705931

Yes, he very justifiably mad because someone went and created a thread on this board which is actually named "Science vs. Religion" when the third rule for this board is that exactly threads of that nature are forbidden.

[Anonymous No.3705950]

>>3705908 THIS THREAD ISN'T EVEN DISGUISED, THE TITLE BLATANTLY SAYS SCIENCE VS. RELIGION
Yes, because Science and Religion exlude each other, until one limits Religion completely to subjective statements. I have no problems with people who do that, but they are very very rare. Most religious people cannot even cope with the mere thought that they might believe in something entirely made up. Instead they claim that their belief in magic is not just personal faith, but "objectively" true. Which makes it a scientific issue. And real science has never worked in favor of real magic...

[Anonymous No.3705958]

>>3705945
I don't want to talk about whether religion is true, since that is already settled for me. I want to know why Evolution seems to fail in regards to "scientific societies"

[Anonymous No.3705960]

>>3705945
Nothing is forbidden; everything is permitted.

Everything that is permitted is compulsory.

Everything that is not compulsory is forbidden.

Pick one, maybe two. I don't even care anymore.

[Anonymous No.3705971]

>>3705864 Because, scientists are egocentric, the religious are community focused.
That could be quite a valid point, as polemic as it may seem at first glance. At least it is an explanation for something that seems unexplainable to me. While ethnicities and religious groups are strongly focussed on building communities on these aspects, it does not seem to be a priority for atheists and scientists.

Does that mean that if someone started a "Science Community", this could incite the development I described? If being a scientist is no longer practiced as only a profession, but also a unifying philosophy?

[Anonymous No.3705980]

>>3705874 It gets cold there
That's why science has invented heating ;) Also, they have maple syrup!

[Anonymous No.3705984]

Religion is a common bug as a result of hyperactive agency detection systems, hyperactive pattern matching systems, the tendency for children to believe what they are told, or for people to bow to peer pressure, the weighting system we use to assign truth value to our beliefs, and a few others.

Without functional versions of these systems, we'd be nowhere near as capable of building societies or sciences. But they are also vulnerable to hacking, and may lead to erroneous results that are very hard to correct.