3 ms·

> If you weren't devoutly religious, you didn't get the support from society you needed to do science. Where is the data supporting this?

CamperBob2 12y ago
Look who's interested in data all of a sudden.
- dang 12y ago
  Please follow the HN guidelines and remain personally respectful. Also, please abstain from flamewars on this site, especially religious flamewars.
  - CamperBob2 12y ago
    I respect anyone who asks for data, actually. I just respect them more if they ask for data from everybody, not just me. (Also, it's nice if what they ask for can be answered with unequivocal objective data, which I'm sure you'll agree isn't the case with cscurmudgeon's request.)
    - cscurmudgeon 12y ago
      Social scientists and historians engage in data collection and processing like the one you described almost all the time. There is a ton of data out there. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=christianity+and+science+middle+ages&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=christianity+and+science...
      - CamperBob2 12y ago
        Go back to my original assertion ("If you weren't devoutly religious, you didn't get the support from society you needed to do science.") You hear stranger stuff from your clergyman every Sunday. Do you hold him to the same standard of proof?
        cscurmudgeon 12y ago
        Why do you think I believe in Christianity or what the clergy say? I don't.
- cscurmudgeon 12y ago
  Despite what you might think, I am a scientist with a PhD (oh the horror). As I said elsewhere in this thread, the only quality argument seems to be Gödel's proof of God's existence which has been machine verified by Zalta's group at Stanford. But on the other side, all I see are ad hominems and complete ignorance of arguments like Gödel's while attacking the easy targets like the 2000-year creationists and anti-vaccine groups. Whatever :)
CamperBob2 12y ago
Can't reply to your last comment, so: no disrespect intended, and I'm sorry I took the bait. Enjoy the site. It was one of the last ones not taken over by woo merchants (along with the WSJ), but apparently the management policies and moderation guidelines are moving in a different direction. If anyone has a suggestion for a site similar to HN's original spirit, but where longtime users are allowed to downvote stories, I'd be interested.

CamperBob2 12y ago

Look who's interested in data all of a sudden.

dang 12y ago
Please follow the HN guidelines and remain personally respectful. Also, please abstain from flamewars on this site, especially religious flamewars.
- CamperBob2 12y ago
  I respect anyone who asks for data, actually. I just respect them more if they ask for data from everybody, not just me. (Also, it's nice if what they ask for can be answered with unequivocal objective data, which I'm sure you'll agree isn't the case with cscurmudgeon's request.)
  - cscurmudgeon 12y ago
    Social scientists and historians engage in data collection and processing like the one you described almost all the time. There is a ton of data out there. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=christianity+and+science+middle+ages&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=christianity+and+science...
    - CamperBob2 12y ago
      Go back to my original assertion ("If you weren't devoutly religious, you didn't get the support from society you needed to do science.") You hear stranger stuff from your clergyman every Sunday. Do you hold him to the same standard of proof?
      - cscurmudgeon 12y ago
        Why do you think I believe in Christianity or what the clergy say? I don't.
cscurmudgeon 12y ago
Despite what you might think, I am a scientist with a PhD (oh the horror). As I said elsewhere in this thread, the only quality argument seems to be Gödel's proof of God's existence which has been machine verified by Zalta's group at Stanford. But on the other side, all I see are ad hominems and complete ignorance of arguments like Gödel's while attacking the easy targets like the 2000-year creationists and anti-vaccine groups. Whatever :)

CamperBob2 12y ago

Can't reply to your last comment, so: no disrespect intended, and I'm sorry I took the bait. Enjoy the site. It was one of the last ones not taken over by woo merchants (along with the WSJ), but apparently the management policies and moderation guidelines are moving in a different direction. If anyone has a suggestion for a site similar to HN's original spirit, but where longtime users are allowed to downvote stories, I'd be interested.