Quote from: Okurkabinladin on May 15, 2017, 01:58:56 AM

Quote from: craked5 on May 12, 2017, 02:32:39 PM

Quote from: Okurkabinladin on May 10, 2017, 07:03:59 PM

-Obvious scam-

Hey man.
Just to adress your big question of "religious being the big winner of Darwin evolution" as you say.

Simple question: do you think religion is a genetic characteristic?

Why do you say "scam", when I am sourcing statistics from secular governments? You wont find any country in the entire world where nonbelievers have enough children to atleast replace their own numbers. In such cases evolution theory prescripts extinction, no?

Nope. And that's where the scam is.
I'm calling your theory a scam because the base of it is false, not because the data are.

Quote

Indeed, atheist scientists do believe there is such thing as "religious gene", thats what you are asking right? You do not care for what I think. So let atheists speak for themselves and how they admit, that religious will inherit the Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene

Oh it's not that I don't care for what you think! It's just that there is a difference between "I think that" and "that is the truth" Wink

Please just read your own link and see how only a few religious scientists actually defend this theory of a god gene, all the others are saying it has nothing specific to do with God or religion.

Quote

Already wrote, that I see convergence between science and religion as both complement each other in description of natural phenomena and Gods will. One from material, the other from spiritual perspective.

Well here is why your theory is a scam from a scientific point of view:
1/ You lack one information. The Darwin's evolution theory is NOT "evolutionnary winner makes the most children" but "evolutionnary winner have the greater genetic legacy". It means that if the birth rate is 7 but the death rate is 6 before the age of 30, it's not an evolutionnary success. You have to take into account the survival of the children until they're able to procreate again, not just the number of children.
2/ Darwinism is fit ONLY to genetic legacy. If you separate religious people from other people it just doesn't lead to any conlusion because religion is NOT a genetic phenomenon. So it doesn't matter how much they breed, their religion isn't in their genes ^^
To give you a conrete example: if short people had an evolutionnary advantage there would be more and more short people... Simply because those being short would make more children and those children would survive more easily and statistically short people would make much more short people because it's a genetic characteristic. While religion is an education question so it has no link with genes.

You migh be able to create a Darwin theory for social characteristics and education though, that might be possible I don't know. But Darwinism doesn't prove your point Wink