Physics predicts end of Religion/Superstition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197)


A study using census data from nine countries shows that religion there is set for extinction, say researchers. The data reflect a steady rise in those claiming no religious affiliation. The team's mathematical model attempts to account for the interplay between the number of religious respondents and the social motives behind being one.

The result, reported at the American Physical Society meeting in Dallas, US, indicates that religion will all but die out altogether in those countries. Nonlinear dynamics is invoked to explain a wide range of physical phenomena in which a number of factors play a part.More good news from the front. Well, not really news to those of us living in wealthy secular highly educated modern societies.


http://www.laymark.com/i/m/m120.gif (http://www.laymark.com)

i don't see any mention of america. i'm so shocked.

such fine culture america has and so many intelligent people thumping their bible.

Actually there was a study last year on the number of genX who do not believe in their parents' superstition and the same trend is happening in the USA.

I suppose one way to look at things is an inevitable slide towards truth. A luxury of wealth and consequence of education. When people feel safe and secure they don't seem to need (or want the hassle of) the Gods.

IMO there will probably be a migration away from two denominational primitive deity based belief systems to more eastern deeper self reflecting belief systems - such as Buddhism. Actually, ttytt as nimble as Christianity is don't be shocked by a blending of Buddhist reflective practice with Christianity self forgiveness.

I just read this article myself, and came here to link to it. It's quite interesting, because it seems people cling to labels, and would count themselves as being Christian because their parents had them Christened, but they never go to church unless there's a wedding or a funeral, and probably wouldn't fare very well in quiz about their religion (but then it's been shown that atheists know more about religion than believers (http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/69391,news-comment,news-politics,us-atheists-know-more-about-religion-than-believers-)).

The Census, which is underway in the UK right now, asks some rather loaded questions, which gives a false impression of religious affiliation. But simply, there are very few believers in the UK, it's just some whiff of tradition they are detecting.

it's just some whiff of tradition they are detecting.

There really is so much of that around, at least in the western world anyway. I know a number of people who identify themselves as Church of England, or Baptist, or Catholic simply because of some vague familial association. If you broach the topic of religion with them the only response you really get is a few brief comments about Sunday school and a short story about how their second cousins father was a minister. God doesn't seem any more real to them than he does to me.

Actually there was a study last year on the number of genX who do not believe in their parents' superstition and the same trend is happening in the USA.

I suppose one way to look at things is an inevitable slide towards truth. A luxury of wealth and consequence of education. When people feel safe and secure they don't seem to need (or want the hassle of) the Gods.

IMO there will probably be a migration away from two denominational primitive deity based belief systems to more eastern deeper self reflecting belief systems - such as Buddhism. Actually, ttytt as nimble as Christianity is don't be shocked by a blending of Buddhist reflective practice with Christianity self forgiveness.

i'm sorry, but i don't find your apparent faith in the wealth and education in society to be any more sound than religious faiths, and i doubt the majority of gen X does either. i live in a pretty comfortable part of the world, and still from what i've seen, young and old alike, we can't afford to have faith in anything but god itself. and that's good. i think that will ultimately make things a lot better.

we can't afford to have faith in anything but god itself. and that's good.

What about believing in yourself? Why can't you give that a go instead of only trying out another belief that is supposed to "control" you.

i think that will ultimately make things a lot better.

Lori, the article states that ultimately, religion is dead.

Lori, the article states that ultimately, religion is dead.

i know. let's all dance a jig.

Physics predicts end of Religion/Superstition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197)

More good news from the front. Well, not really news to those of us living in wealthy secular highly educated modern societies.


http://www.laymark.com/i/m/m120.gif (http://www.laymark.com)

Thank God (pun intended) for evolution!

What about believing in yourself? Why can't you give that a go instead of only trying out another belief that is supposed to "control" you.

well god is what it is. i mean, when it comes to control, ultimately, inherently, yeah. but that's not how it seems from a personal perspective in regards to what i choose to do. interaction with god has actually resulted in empowerment and confidence in my case. god has encouraged me to learn to love myself. society will never do that.

i know. let's all dance a jig.

Or how about you work on you comprehension skills, so you won't post things contrary to the conclusions of the research, and appear to be ignorant?

Or how about you work on you comprehension skills, so you won't post things contrary to the conclusions of the research, and appear to be ignorant?

i only seem ignorant to you because your own paradigm equates god with religion.

[QUOTE=Michael;2715554]Physics predicts end of Religion/Superstition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197)

More good news from the front. Well, not really news to those of us living in wealthy secular highly educated modern societies.


The model is based on extrapolation to zero or the assumption the intercept is going trough zero, Physicist have not solved their own problem , so they jump into something that is not comprehensible to them such as consciousness.
It is comprehensible , if you have a belly full you will allow your mind to wonder , but in the horizon with out population rise and our commodity will become more scarce man is going to look into direction the secularism.

i only seem ignorant to you because your own paradigm equates god with religion.

And you talk a lot of crap, you know. Belief in God makes you religious, period.

Although I don't really understand why you seek to distance yourself from religion. Seems incongruous with your signature, declaring yourself 'the church'.

well god is what it is. i mean, when it comes to control, ultimately, inherently, yeah. but that's not how it seems from a personal perspective in regards to what i choose to do. interaction with god has actually resulted in empowerment and confidence in my case. god has encouraged me to learn to love myself. society will never do that.

What else does God tell you and can't you see how one person claiming communication with God is the cause of religion? First he tells you what's good, then you tell another person, and before you know it, it's a religion.

god has encouraged me to learn to love myself. society will never do that.

But if you were to just believe in yourself to have started with, then you would not be relying on anything but yourself to believe in. Substituting a "god" to give you what you already have isn't necessary once you realize that it is you that is who you rely on and is in ultimate control, nothing else.

But if you were to just believe in yourself to have started with, then you would not be relying on anything but yourself to believe in. Substituting a "god" to give you what you already have isn't necessary once you realize that it is you that is who you rely on and is in ultimate control, nothing else.

and i thought i was an idealist. :p

it's just not the way it happens. all we know when we come out of the womb is that we're uncomfortable and then the conditioning commences. i will say however, that in my experience, seeking and interacting with god has involved much introspection.

And you talk a lot of crap, you know. Belief in God makes you religious, period.

Although I don't really understand why you seek to distance yourself from religion. Seems incongruous with your signature, declaring yourself 'the church'.

god is not religion. god isn't even religious!

religion is like the police. if we weren't fucked up we wouldn't need it.

What else does God tell you and can't you see how one person claiming communication with God is the cause of religion? First he tells you what's good, then you tell another person, and before you know it, it's a religion.

well that's not my problem.

i've joked before about how ridiculous it might be if people tried to make a religion out of what i've experienced. religious practices are often ridiculous. but it wouldn't mean that i didn't experience what i did, or that my experience was meaningless, or detrimental. we as people can find ways to corrupt almost anything and everything.

i'm sorry, but i don't find your apparent faith in the wealth and education in society to be any more sound than religious faiths, and i doubt the majority of gen X does either. i live in a pretty comfortable part of the world, and still from what i've seen, young and old alike, we can't afford to have faith in anything but god itself. and that's good. i think that will ultimately make things a lot better.I am not suggesting that people have faith in wealth and health; only that wealthy healthy educated societies lack many of the superstitious affiliations of poorer unhealthy illiterate societies.

I suppose at some level, one could suggest that secular people have faith in humanity, compared with religious people?

I am not suggesting that people have faith in wealth and health; only that wealthy healthy educated societies lack many of the superstitious affiliations of poorer unhealthy illiterate societies.

I suppose at some level, one could suggest that secular people have faith in humanity, compared with religious people?

I agree with both statements, especially the last. As I became less religious the more faith I had in mankind. Losing my religion improved my outlook on mankind immediately as I no longer waited for a hero figure to save us! No more doom and gloom!

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2715398#post2715398

Some other thoughts from a similar thread about the same thing, posted at almost the same time. :)

I am not suggesting that people have faith in wealth and health; only that wealthy healthy educated societies lack many of the superstitious affiliations of poorer unhealthy illiterate societies.

I suppose at some level, one could suggest that secular people have faith in humanity, compared with religious people?

i wouldn't go so far as to say that on behalf of all secular people; not if faith is trust.

god is not religion.

Belief in God is, however.


god isn't even religious!

And rock stars aren't fans of themselves either.


religion is like the police. if we weren't fucked up we wouldn't need it.

Well, you have it, and you're fucked up. What's new?

and i thought i was an idealist. :p

it's just not the way it happens. all we know when we come out of the womb is that we're uncomfortable and then the conditioning commences. i will say however, that in my experience, seeking and interacting with god has involved much introspection.

But you could have , as many of us humans do, those same introspection without any other type of "god" helping us. I'm only suggesting that billions of people seem to have learned about life and living without any "god" to show them anything. They just grow and learn through their parents and friends as well as other outside influences that are in our world. Laws that humans have made are just another way to learn about how living is and how we should behave within any society that has laws.

But you could have , as many of us humans do, those same introspection without any other type of "god" helping us. I'm only suggesting that billions of people seem to have learned about life and living without any "god" to show them anything. They just grow and learn through their parents and friends as well as other outside influences that are in our world. Laws that humans have made are just another way to learn about how living is and how we should behave within any society that has laws.

it's not working for a lot of people. and collectively, it's just not working out.

Belief in God is, however.



And rock stars aren't fans of themselves either.



Well, you have it, and you're fucked up. What's new?

what's new is that i don't see religion as a solution or a source of salvation or redemption. instead i seek communion with god as the only solution. i don't think that practicing a religion is the same thing as communing with god, or it even promotes communion with god necessarily.

i don't think that practicing a religion is the same thing as communing with god, or it even promotes communion with god necessarily.

But sane people do see 'communing with god' as being religious. I fail to see why you refuse the label of 'religious' however, you're still batshit crazy with or without it.

But sane people do see 'communing with god' as being religious. I fail to see why you refuse the label of 'religious' however, you're still batshit crazy with or without it.

Insults seem to be your best debate tactic , Fucked up , Bat shit crazy , Funny thing is Lori don't look like either to Me . Ah what is your definition of sane people again ? Ones that call people batshit crazy and fucked up evidently. That must make Me extremely sane mo fo

...Lori don't look like either to Me . ...

You clearly don't know enough about Lori.

as much as i criticize fundamental religion, i'm not really against religion persay or against people's right to their faith. it would be a very dry and cold world if people's sense of wonder or spiritual/emotional/moral development were crushed.

what is the problem is those who can't or won't separate facts from faith. people like that can be dangerous if they gain power. this is the problem with fundamental religions.

also, as much as i rail against fundamental religion, i know that it's not just religionists who are a problem in the world or just religion. these are the same people with or without religion just like anyone else.

the difference is when faith is put above facts or truth and anyone can use 'god' as an unquestioned authority limits reason or to justify anything. it also breeds confusion which makes people easy to exploit when reason or evidence is placed second.

in my personal opinion, i think the world would be better off without fundamental religions but that is just my opinion as i said.

i would have no problem with christianity if it didn't place it's doctrines above most of the teachings of jesus as well as dropped the old testament. being a member of a religion or 'saved' being more important than actually being is not a good religion to me. to me, that's like being assured i get a passing grade in class no matter what i do just because i'm a member of the class. that's a farce to me.

You clearly don't know enough about Lori.

he knows all the reasons you call me bat shit crazy and fucked up. what he doesn't know is that you're a dick. he was reading the thread and thought, "wow, this guy's a real dick!", for the first time, and was compelled to say something to you about it.

he'll get used to it. :)

But sane people do see 'communing with god' as being religious. I fail to see why you refuse the label of 'religious' however, you're still batshit crazy with or without it.

no, no, no. i think you've made it clear that you don't think anyone who believes in god is sane. :confused:

i refuse the label because this is my life and this is god. the relationship is personal and i see religion as a whole other animal in this world. it's an institution. a variety of institutions actually, and i am a member of none of them. to me, it's not about a ceremony, or a ritual, or a cathedral, or a stone temple, or a dress code, or a moral code, or all of that stuff that religion is about. i never sought to be indoctrinated. i sought god, and i found it. so ha! and since then i haven't wanted a damn thing to do with conformity. i want to be free, to be exactly who i am, and will be, with god.

In general people join religious institutions for fellowship and a sense of belonging to a group. We evolved to want to be a part of a group - religion in the past has somewhat served as the only available group. I believe people still feel the need to have fellowship in group in modern societies . Its just that there are many more groups to choose to join. Even Sciforums is a group.

Even Lori sees little benefit in joining a religious society and prefers the company of Sciforum members - a diverse, yet mostly atheistic, group.

In general people join religious institutions for fellowship and a sense of belonging to a group. We evolved to want to be a part of a group - religion in the past has somewhat served as the only available group. I believe people still feel the need to have fellowship in group in modern societies . Its just that there are many more groups to choose to join. Even Sciforums is a group.

Even Lori sees little benefit in joining a religious society and prefers the company of Sciforum members - a diverse, yet mostly atheistic, group.

i like the unitarians/universalists. they tend to be pretty good people, open-minded, less superficial, humane, well-informed etc.

i agree that one overriding philosophy tends to be very suffocating and oppressive to those in society where it really doesn't fit them. that's why there are so many different religions and philosophies. it's just that fundamental ones tend to want to supersede them all and get rid of them.

In general people join religious institutions for fellowship and a sense of belonging to a group. We evolved to want to be a part of a group - religion in the past has somewhat served as the only available group. I believe people still feel the need to have fellowship in group in modern societies . Its just that there are many more groups to choose to join. Even Sciforums is a group.

Even Lori sees little benefit in joining a religious society and prefers the company of Sciforum members - a diverse, yet mostly atheistic, group.

i want to be able to have fellowship with everybody; we're all human. i don't want it to be dictated to me by an institution's charter. i don't trust institutions. why would i? because i'm conditioned to be dependent upon them for my livelihood? we'll see.

i like the unitarians/universalists. they tend to be pretty good people, open-minded, less superficial, humane, well-informed etc.Isn't non-trinity their schtick?


i want to be able to have fellowship with everybody; we're all human. i don't want it to be dictated to me by an institution's charter. i don't trust institutions. why would i? because i'm conditioned to be dependent upon them for my livelihood? we'll see.Yes, but you would agree that relationships are not equal. Those fellowships whereby you are close my be in those group.

Isn't non-trinity their schtick?



no, they seem more like a secular organization. they accept anyone of any religion as well as even atheists while respecting their views. so this means in reality, their real values are as well as those who are involved, that a sense of humanity and ethical considerations is their core values, while the rest is secondary philosophical interests. this type of moral base is very intelligent yet leaves room for much spiritual exploration, sharing and growth. it's just a lot more progressive. i think it's one of the better ones along with some other philosophies like buddhism. it's more open-minded. the good aspect of this type of philosophy is it attracts those who tend to be more sane, also not usually out of a motivation to use it as some statement that they are better or holier than thou. this is because the organization is not based on that so it's less likely to attract those with that type of motivation.

as far as fundamental religions, though i respect that they have a right to their organizations, that doesn't mean i respect those people as individuals or their values. also, this is the mainstream and they see organizations like universalist as "out there" or "psycho" with subtle disparaging, condescending and false connotations of 'paganism' because it's secular but there beliefs are not; they are the legitimate ones, the ones god loves the most, the favored people, the right people, the most humble, the most loving, the most compassionate, the ones who are the most sane and moral ad nauseum. it's a very upside down world we live in.

to me, for an adult to remain in that type of closed-minded organization and endorse it willingly is someone i really wouldn't consider a good person. it's just kind of impossible if you've been in those organizations and churches to do that unless you agree pretty much with bigotry. there are some there that maybe more naive and that's why but for the rest, even though they may think of themselves as most moral, i don't see that. they have to shut out other philosophies and not consider them etc, they tend to shun other people who are not christian etc. pretty much, they are bigots. what's amazing is they can appear pretty goody-two shoes so it can be a little puzzling at first but after awhile you get to see that they have a very dark side. you find this out when discussing anything that may offend the 'ego' of their god. greatest i am put it best in the other thread. if you are not christian, you are shit on a stick, though they may have a pretense of humility toward you. they are not as good or compassionate as they think of themselves or their image of propriety.

i think that fundamentalists stunt their emotional, mental and spiritual growth by being emphatic about their god. this is because they never leave room for any doubt. you would think that this makes them stronger, it doesn't and that is why they want to spread it more to get others to confirm this dogmatic belief. it's similar to someone saying they finished a race when they've only begun and they tell themselves they've arrived.

i find an open-minded philosophy to be much more spiritually powerful because one is not fooling themselves. each new discovery or moment of enlightenment is enriching and leads to spiritual, mental, and emotional growth and awareness.

My underwriting principle is that reality exists.

Reality is a physical place: here- in reality. If nothing existed within the realm of reality than nothing existed ever- including us. Yet we endure.

Reality really exists- we really are part of Spacetime. And Spacetime is the quanta of energy within this box called reality- this space in space that either exists or does not, but we within the box believe it does so it dies.

This quanta is "stuff"... it's "reality-based stuff" in a sea of nothingness forever, everywhere. It's a lump of something in a sea of nothing. And if that lump did not exist, then nothing would ever exist ever, including us who are here pondering.

Reality is a box with stuff in it.

We can bypass God and assume existence exists, but we are talking philosophy and all the scientists have to take a big leap at once to make this happen.

he knows all the reasons you call me bat shit crazy and fucked up. what he doesn't know is that you're a dick.

No Lori, the word you are looking for to describe me isn't dick, it's 'sane'.