View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
Doug Freyburger Doug Freyburger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,415
Default Global Warming

Dan L wrote:
> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>> Dan L wrote:
>>> "FarmI" <ask@itshall be given> wrote:

>
>> Note there are only a couple of religions that oppose science. They
>> happen to be the two largest religions by population world wide. That
>> doesn't mean there are no other religions that have no problems with
>> science.

>
> Those other religions that are pro science are so small in number they can
> be rounded off to zero!


Check some religious demographics. I started with the wikipedia article
on the topic then I also checked some other sites through a google
search. They don't agree in the second significant digit but they do in
the first so I'll stick to one significant digit. Christianity and
Islam have 2 billion adherents each and are the only religions with
major anti-science movements, largely because they are the only ones
with the problem of biblical inerrancy. Buddhism and Hindu are roughly
1 billion each. It turns out the expression "Big Three" when discussing
religions is actually "Big Four" and the lists don't agree. All other
faiths combined fill out very roughly another billion. The lists that
include the non-religious go as high as another billion.

Reading the demographics you just claimed that 3/7ths to 1/2 of the
total human population can be rounded off to zero. That's a bit like a
common atheist argument that assumes there's only one religion and then
proceeds to work on proving that religion to be in error.

> One note: I do not consider Atheism a religion!


Thus giving you plenty of wiggle room for dropping anyone else just
because you think they also have the error of biblical inerrancy.
Check. Different lists give different numbers for the non-religious but
that only moves the 3/7ths who do not have religious problems with
science towards a larger fraction.

> I hope science wins!


Agreed. I'm a member of one of those many faiths that have no conflict
with science.

But in the end the way science wins is by watching what actually happens
and then explaining it. Current science only gives current estimated
rate and direction of climite change plus error bars based on past
trends. After a million years of ice ages maybe the planet is now
switching to a warm age, more likely per current science. Or maybe
there's another ice age on the way, less likely per current science.
Either way, humanity has been through worse.