Religion

trotsky

(49,533 posts)

37. This is probably true.

Reply to Speck Tater (Reply #29)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 02:19 PM

Aug 2012

But even in that case, it goes completely against the idea of a "religious revolution" as hoped for by the author.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Atheism Might Not Be As Popular As You Think: The Religious Revolution in the US [View all] rug Aug 2012 OP

So basically this person's article can be summed up thusly: trotsky Aug 2012 #1

It's true that an unbiased interpretation of the chart refutes the text, but what if dimbear Aug 2012 #44

I don't think those stats mean what you think they mean. MineralMan Aug 2012 #2

Would not matter a tinker's cuss if there were only one atheist or one theist in the world dmallind Aug 2012 #3

Narrow minds see only what they want to see. nt humblebum Aug 2012 #24

Who the heck cares if their personal belief (or non-belief) is popular? djean111 Aug 2012 #4

The "support" for the stats being decieving comes from a catholic apologist site. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #5

Are you saying policymic.com is an apologist site or Pew is? rug Aug 2012 #8

No, I'm stating that the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate is. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #9

It also links to ARDA. rug Aug 2012 #11

I already did, and found it to be lacking. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #13

Well, there's a robust critique. rug Aug 2012 #15

Certainly moreso than your original comments in the OP. Oh yeah, you didn't make any. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #18

I didn't post a little rolling smiley either. rug Aug 2012 #19

You didn't post anything. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #20

Au contraire, I posted an article of interest. rug Aug 2012 #23

It's only interesting becuase of its poor use of statistics. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #25

I defer to your expetise in statistics rug Aug 2012 #31

Thanks, I'm pretty good at sizing up liars and weasely wieners. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #32

Wieners? rug Aug 2012 #36

Yes, like some here tend to get most of their information from humblebum Aug 2012 #21

Hi, Humblebum. So nice to see you again. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #22

Post removed Post removed Aug 2012 #6

"Even for you" rug Aug 2012 #7

How convenient. His post was hidden just MINUTES after you responded. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #12

Maybe he should clean up his act so he can respond. rug Aug 2012 #14

Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to alert. cleanhippie Aug 2012 #16

Maybe you should read the Community Standards. rug Aug 2012 #17

Time will tell. It will be interesting to watch what happen to the "nones" cbayer Aug 2012 #10

I have said for some time that what SOME people "don't believe" in is what they are being told patrice Aug 2012 #26

Interesting. Can you explain further what you mean about ancient awarenesses/cognitions? cbayer Aug 2012 #27

I consider anything on this topic ONLY a starting point; yes, Jung, primarily, but we should patrice Aug 2012 #33

Other than some reading of Jung, I am unfamiliar with much of what you are discussing. cbayer Aug 2012 #35

Jung is central, because of his presentation of what amounts to "species memory", usually known patrice Aug 2012 #38

You are way over my head here, patrice. cbayer Aug 2012 #39

If I can do it, you can do it. I'm not that "smart". I just know HOW to use what I do have. patrice Aug 2012 #41

Thank you for your kind words and I will try to learn more and talk cbayer Aug 2012 #43

Jung is a VERY good starting point. nt patrice Aug 2012 #42

Oh! another good book is Warren A. Shibles "Metaphor: An Annotated Bibliography" it may be patrice Aug 2012 #40

You mean things like supernatural events and miracles? cleanhippie Aug 2012 #28

Though I have serous problems with the mumbo jumbo going on under the heading of "miracles and patrice Aug 2012 #34

I think there is more indifference than atheism Speck Tater Aug 2012 #29

Agree. I see a huge grey area with some vague beliefs in things really not cbayer Aug 2012 #30

This is probably true. trotsky Aug 2012 #37