Well, do you?

I'm an atheist myself, I find it just absurd.

No flaming, please.

Lol i find it annoying in some religeons, where they say to there selfs they cant do this that and the opther. If i was religes id still want to eat the things i eat.

i don't believe because there is no evidence. but I'm open to ideas.
i consider myself a scientist, and any decent scientist has to be open to new and strange ideas however ridiculous they may seem.
would take me pages to answer this properly.

I agree, Will, if they can prove it (in a valid scientific way), by all means, I will agree with them. But until they can (which I highly doubt will ever happen), I will beleive in the scientific theories and such, which are far more plausable and have good evidence.

But there must be a god, cos theres no life in the peanut butter!!!

The funny thing is, the kind of evangelical religious who made that argument would say "God put it there" if life was found, then go on to claim that this likely one off occurance was due to a miracle (lets not even go into the fact that noticeable life can't evolve from no-life instataneously).

i have my own beliefs that suport all science yet there is no real evidence for any of it .... ( no disprofs ether ) im not realy gna bother explaining ne of it but just ways of making sence of some things to myself realy and stop me doing cirtain things. and i know but to all thoughs peeps that believe in science ther is quite a bit of science that originaly and in some still even now, that are based on no more evidence than religions were created a lot of quantum physic perticurly was made by some 1 writing a formula and then trying to prove it experimentaly but without realy being able to see what is happening but in general a lot of peeps say that its only as much coincidence as religious theorys are based. their still quit a lot of science about thought to be quite tru with no evidence at all.

By the way you've put the names there, it would make me an Atheist.
I am a man of science... the idea of there being an entity that can bend the laws of Physics, Chemistry & Biology is ridiculous. If there is a God, whatever, I don't care.

Wigo, you make a (half) valid point, IMO.

What you say about stuff in science not being proven is similar to religion has one fundamental flaw - (proper) scientists will never say it is true unless it has been proven. Up until then they will call it a theory and attempt to scientifically prove it (or indeed, disprove it, at which point it will be abandonned [unless the research is of questionable quality]). The purpose of theories is to give an aim or to improve a model so that we can further science. This is opposed to religion where people (the ones who do beleive, not the ones who follow for the moral guidelines and what have you) will claim what they say is true and not attempt to prove it scientifically (this doesn't count).

But I digress, people are free to beleive what they want.

Athiest.

is there no1 else here tht here that believes in un proven theorys that cant realy b proven ....

Well according to the poll even you don't

But yeah, I don't think there are going to be many here.

lol my vote is the fact that mine cant be put under ther title religion it is only a set of personal beliefs that sits v much in the midle ... in a way lol

For the simplicity of this poll, a Theist is someone who beleives in some divine superbeaing (aliens don't count, BTW).

I used to be an atheist.... until I found out that I AM GOD.
A little joke

lol well il change my vote though techniqualy a super being isnt quite what i beleave but mmmm supernatural relm is more like it but under wha ur saying its closer to that lol

You have nothing to fear.... when you die you experience out-of-body experiences where you can view people and what they are doing (ladies in showers... watch out) and also view first-person views of people (men will never be able to secretly stare at women's body parts again...) and then you will suddenly reappear on Earth again

Life is not a video game....


.... or is it?

ooooo-eeeee-ooooo

I Disagree with the "cannot be proven" thing
if such a being exists, logically it must exist somewhere, therefore they must be a way to find it.

belief in 'God' is an early science imo, people trying to understand the universe as best they can, times change and so must the definition.
i think of God as an event rather than a person, makes more sense to me that way.

:O i love my infinate alternative reality theory amuses me regardless of anythign else i think of, now you mention it there can and can't be a god ^_^.

I agree with this in part. One of the things I've said about religion/God is that it is there to answer the questions science hasn't/hadn't answered. However, we have now reached the point where science has pretty much answered everything that religion was there to answer, and now science is trying answer questions that, on the whole, don't really matter, we want them answered because we want them answered, not because they really affect our lives (quantum physics, relativity etc).

One thing I must stress, though, is that religion is not, and never has been, science. It's a matter of definition. Religion is an (unquestioning) beleif in something to be true without proof. Science is modelling and calculating the real world.

Technically, you can say that no theory can ever be proved to be true (as any single test could prove something wrong, meaning we would need an infinite number of correct experiments to prove somethig), and therefore we cannot claim something to BE true in science. Most of the time it is acceptable to use the word "true" because it is true enough for it's purposes (unless it's a theory, which aren't called true). It's also why we always refine the models of everything, to make it truer. It's quite hard to explain, and I don't want to go into it further, but hopefully you get my point.

Actually, I will say one thing more about theories;

The Higgs-Boson.

ATM, this is one of the biggest theories being worked on. It is pretty much the entire point of CERN (they can do other stuff with the LHC, but their main aim is the Higgs-Boson). If the theory is true, then they will find it pretty much straight away (and don't say it must be wrong, then, because they haven't actually started using the LHC properly yet, and it's actually broken [lol] and won't be ready to go again for a fair while), so they can instantly prove or disprove it, which will lead to building up more theories or creating new ones and testing them, respectively.

P.S. Alternative realities is one of the theories floating around in science world, along with other crazy stuff like string theory. Completely theoretical, of course, but they can fit with what we currently know and do help us have objectives to discover.

string theory and multiverse stuff is 1 the places where science blends with religion a little imo lol many beleive it to be tru without proving it yet, there preyer or pilgramage being reserch and experiments if u know wha u mean lol .....

lol ne1 got ne other beliefs .... ne1 or just me lol

Well, if there was a god Im sure he wouldnt let me be so miserable so, untill sumit goes right for me, there is no god... only me... in hell....

actaully there is one god....

But the thing about that is that scientists beleive it could be true, and therefore set out to prove it, whereas theists beleive something is true. That makes all the difference, as if a theist claims they only beleive it could be true then they are, by definition, an agnostic (with theistic leanings).

i see the point you are making. but think back a few hundred or thousand years, they knew nothing about the higgs or relativity and the like. there was no way for them too. the whole God thing came from people trying to work out how the world/universe was created. Modern Science has tried to answer the same thing. Same goal, different method. they used what was available to them. be it the LHC or deep thought.

the difference is that religion is convinced they have the answer and look no further, like you said. they don't want to change.
but lets not forget, science didn't want to hear about earth orbiting the sun, earth being round, the big bang (universe in chaos) etc.


i would go as far as saying modern science is a religion.
a religion that is constantly rewriting the bible. the way it should have been from the start