If you can show me one instance where a large proportion of the population of middle aged people converted from one belief system to another while not lowering the average members education then I would welcome it. I agree with you that indoctrination of children heightens education about belief systems to an extent. However in a situation like this even if the society values education the average member's education will still decrease when there is a rapid conversion of the middle aged. This argument is a bit worthless because we both agree that the average education has gone down among the community in discussion. NASA is government funded. I consider them real science. Military technology is government funded. I consider them real science. You act like the government trains the scientists and then gives them jobs. In research funding the government hands out funds to the most promising private research projects two thirds of the time, 20% of the funding goes to government scientists that were not trained by the government and 10% goes to universities. Highly complex research is one of the few things that our government actually avoids. Shouldn't that be a good thing considering their constant and unending effort to control everything? I'm still looking forward to the data you have regarding specific scientific organizations and departments that have lost funding due to the dumbed down atheist community.
You ignore common sense, you ignore the arguments I made for proof, and you are suggesting I prove you wrong, when you have not made any substantive argument... You are batting 1000% again...
As scientific atheism has risen, America has declined in real wages, morality, divorce, increases in corruption in nearly every institution, and an overall decline in society... That is the proof... By scientific and statistical measure, America has declined (except levels of debt) in the overall quality of life with the rise of scientific atheism...
This is from the OP article. "Take, to begin with, the Swedish chickens. Three years ago, researchers led by a professor at the university of Linköping in Sweden created a henhouse that was specially designed to make its chicken occupants feel stressed. The lighting was manipulated to make the rhythms of night and day unpredictable, so the chickens lost track of when to eat or roost. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, they showed a significant decrease in their ability to learn how to find food hidden in a maze. The surprising part is what happened next: the chickens were moved back to a non-stressful environment, where they conceived and hatched chicks who were raised without stress â and yet these chicks, too, demonstrated unexpectedly poor skills at finding food in a maze. They appeared to have inherited a problem that had been induced in their mothers through the environment. Further research established that the inherited change had altered the chicks' "gene expression" â the way certain genes are turned "on" or "off", bestowing any given animal with specific traits. The stress had affected the mother hens on a genetic level, and they had passed it on to their offspring." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- So Darwin is not wrong to say genes go from parent to child. And he is not wrong to say the gene that make something survive and have babies is what survive. What happen with the chickens? The mom have stress with the lights. She become weak and can not find food in the maze. Then they move her to no stress. Then she is pregnant. Her babies are born with no able to find the food in the maze, BUT the babies are born in (environment) with (NO STRESS) So maybe the mom pass the gene to survive ({WITH} THE STRESS ENVIRONMENT)? Maybe do the experiment again, but make the new babies born to STRESS ENVIRONMENT. Then see if new babies do very good because they have the gene from the mom for stress environment.
No, you gave your opinion. There could be a large amount of other factors that have contributed. You also haven't given me any data that suggests the dumbing down of the atheist community has decreased the funding of legitimate scientific institutions.
The decline in real wages is not opinion, nor is the level of pollution, nor is the decline of the middle class, nor are the levels of corruption, etc., etc., etc....