From: specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net   
      
   On 1/29/26 8:50 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   > On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 08:29:34 -0800, Mark Isaak   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1/27/26 4:48 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 27 Jan 2026 16:30:51 +0000, Martin Harran   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 09:39:59 -0800, Vincent Maycock   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 14:34:11 +0000, Martin Harran   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Fri, 23 Jan 2026 09:13:12 -0800, Vincent Maycock   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Jan 2026 13:26:17 +0000, Martin Harran   
   >>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 22:34:44 -0500, Chris Thompson   
   >>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> [...]   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> It seems to me that your remarks would be better pointed to Vincent   
   >>>>>>>> who doesn't seem to regard perspiration as particularly necessary.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Where did you get that from?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> ===================================   
   >>>>>> Me:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On the other side of the coin (no pun intended), as part of my own   
   >>>>>>> study of science versus religion, I have read both Dawkins and Coyne's   
   >>>>>>> books on why religious beliefs is a load of bunkum, and I thought both   
   >>>>>>> books were totally unconvincing.   
   >>>>>> [..]   
   >>>>>>> Or take Intelligent Design which I have regularly dismissed here,   
   >>>>>>> again I did my homework reading people like Denyse O'Leary and Stephen   
   >>>>>>> Meyer and again found their arguments totally unconvincing.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> So let me kick that back to you. What books or other writings arguing   
   >>>>>>> for religious belief have you studied to reach the conclusion that   
   >>>>>>> religious belief is a load of bunkum?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I've read the Bible, and I'm not impressed.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> ===========================================   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> And reading the Bible is less perspiration than reading Dawkins and   
   >>>>> Coyne?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Apparently you don't grasp the difference between reading a book and   
   >>>> understanding the subject that the book is addressing.   
   >>>   
   >>> What makes you think I don't understand the Bible?  Because I don't   
   >>> insist that it be read non-literally all the time?   
   >>>   
   >>>> Sorry but don't think I can do anything else to help you with that.   
   >>>   
   >>> What a coincidence!  It turns out I don't need your help with any of   
   >>> that.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>>> Questions have been asked about the existence of God for thousands of   
   >>>>>>>> years and millions of words have been published - Aquinas wrote about   
   >>>>>>>> 1.8 million in Summa Theologica alone. Vincent reckons that can all be   
   >>>>>>>> just ignored,   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> So how many angels *can* dance on the head of a pin?   Or is Thomas   
   >>>>>>> Aquinas better than that because he wrote oh so much?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> However, I will give you the opportunity to post your favorite *Summa   
   >>>>>>> Theologica* argument, and I'll debunk it for you.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Sorry, based on your 'debunking' performance to date, I'll give that a   
   >>>>>> miss.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Cite?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Right through your posts above e.g. your very poor understanding of   
   >>>> statistical surveys.   
   >>>   
   >>> You claimed adolescents were not a representative sample of the   
   >>> population at large, and I said IQ scores tend to be stable by   
   >>> adolescence, and that therefore the methods in the study being   
   >>> discussed were a valid use of statistical sampling.   
   >>   
   >> You are correct about that, but I don't think religious belief is stable   
   >> by adolescence. It certainly was not in my case.   
   >   
   > Perhaps you would be kind enough to also confirm that results from a   
   > survey of adolescents cannot be applied to the general population.   
   > Vincent is rather reluctant to accept it from me.   
      
   It depends on what you're surveying, and whether there have been any   
   demographic shifts in that quality over time. For qualities such as   
   handedness, eye color, or IQ, I expect a survey of adolescents would be   
   a pretty good indicator of the population as a whole, barring influences   
   such as, say, a mass immigration of foreign workers who tend to be older   
   and have different eye colors than the original native population.   
      
   --   
   Mark Isaak   
   "Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That   
   doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)