# Christians: Why are scientists more likely to be non-believers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 1, 2013, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322 "2013-07-01T06:22:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/301 "2013-07-04T07:43:30Z")
No, it’s not necessary to count every raindrop to know that you’re wet, but if you say that a particular shower that just got you wet is the heaviest one in human history, you better know a lot about showers and history. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 8:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/302 "2013-07-04T08:40:11Z")
> [@Wendell\_Wagner](#): > > No, it’s not necessary to count every raindrop to know that you’re wet, but if you say that a particular shower that just got you wet is the heaviest one in human history, you better know a lot about showers and history. Ah, and now we have another standard; “Unless you have hard proof that _\_ is the worst thing in all of human history, don’t you dare criticize it in any way!” It was, and is, _monstrously evil._ Regardless of whether or not it’s the worst thing in history, that’s _more_ than bad enough to condemn it. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/303 "2013-07-04T08:43:08Z")
About the original topic: > **[Demographics of atheism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism)** > > Accurate demographics of atheism are difficult to obtain since conceptions of atheism vary considerably across different cultures and languages, ranging from an active concept to being unimportant or not developed. Also in some countries and regions atheism carries a strong stigma, making it harder to count atheists in these countries. In global studies, the number of people without a religion is usually higher than the number of people without a belief in a deity and the number of p According t... > [@](#): > > Atheists comprised an estimated **2.01%** of the world population, according to The World Factbook in 2010…Scientists and in particular eminent scientists are **mostly atheists** , perhaps the only demographic in the West in which this occurs. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/304 "2013-07-04T08:49:12Z")
I wanted to get replies from people who thought that the Bible can be taken literally… I tried making a new thread about it: > **[Literalist Christians only please: Why are scientists more likely to be...](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=695455)** > > This is based on Christians: Why are scientists more likely to be non-believers? http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080108213234AAeWHSr Why would people who are very intelligent and supposedly objective be more likely to be... For some reason I didn’t seem to get the Christians I was after there… Then I went back to a forum I posted on a few years ago - [christianforums.com](http://christianforums.com)… I got quite a few good replies and also humorous non-believer replies. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 8:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/305 "2013-07-04T08:56:29Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > I wanted to get replies from people who thought that the Bible can be taken literally… I tried making a new thread about it: > [Literalist Christians only please: Why are scientists more likely to be non-believers? - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=695455) > For some reason I didn’t seem to get the Christians I was after there… As has been said, it’s because there are barely any such people here since the position is such a bad one to take. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/306 "2013-07-04T09:31:37Z")
I have no problem with you criticizing the Catholic church in the Middle Ages. I do have problems with you claiming that it’s vastly worse than many other screwed-up institutions at many other times. Quit misquoting me. At no point did I ever say anything that implied that you can’t criticize it. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/307 "2013-07-04T10:19:02Z")
What’s the point of the Roman Catholic Church if it cannot be held to a higher standard than other contemporary institutions? Surely God’s chosen lieutenant on Earth can come up with a better way of doing things than the normal people. Surely they would be the first to condemn injustice and cruelty. And if not, what purpose do they have? Why do they have to keep apologizing for their predecessors? What justification does anyone have to think of the Vatican as any kind of moral authority at all? The thing is, if you declare yourself to be above and better than everyone else, you get judged accordingly. The idea that, maybe, just maybe, the current version of the Catholic Church is good this time, that no one is going to be apologizing for their current actions in 50 or 100 years time and saying “yeah we got it all wrong then, but _now_ we’ve got it right!” is desperate and foolish. > [@JohnClay](#): > > I wanted to get replies from people who thought that the Bible can be taken literally… I tried making a new thread about it: > [Literalist Christians only please: Why are scientists more likely to be non-believers? - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=695455) > For some reason I didn’t seem to get the Christians I was after there… > > Then I went back to a forum I posted on a few years ago - [christianforums.com](http://christianforums.com)… I got quite a few good replies and also humorous non-believer replies. It shouldn’t be a huge surprise if [christianforums.com](http://christianforums.com) has a lot more vocal Christians than a site about “fighting ignorance”. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/308 "2013-07-04T10:47:24Z")
> [@Wendell\_Wagner](#): > > I have no problem with you criticizing the Catholic church in the Middle Ages. I do have problems with you claiming that it’s vastly worse than many other screwed-up institutions at many other times. If it is, that’s still condemning it, because it claims to be better, to have a special inside take on what is right and good. If it’s no better, then that adds “liar” and/or “self deluded” to its list of flaws, and eliminates the one excuse it has to be taken seriously when it lectures and browbeats everyone on what it thinks is “moral”. And few of those “other institutions” exist anymore, either. When an organization or person makes a claim to moral authority, then it gets held to a higher standard than one that does not. And the Church’s alleged moral authority is _by your own argument_ limited to no better than a Middle Ages King/thug. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/309 "2013-07-04T12:36:01Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > I wanted to get replies from people who thought that the Bible can be taken literally… I tried making a new thread about it: > [Literalist Christians only please: Why are scientists more likely to be non-believers? - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=695455) > For some reason I didn’t seem to get the Christians I was after there… > > Then I went back to a forum I posted on a few years ago - [christianforums.com](http://christianforums.com)… I got quite a few good replies and also humorous non-believer replies. Why would you think they would have any insight? If you ran a restaurant and only a few regulars ever came, you would not poll them to see why other people are not coming. You would need to talk with the people who aren’t coming to learn what is keeping them from being patrons. The answer could be as simple as a repainting or as complex as a complete re-do of the menu, but at least you would be hearing from the folks in question. Otherwise you are just reinforcing your concepts of the “others.” You will never learn or grow if you do not talk to outsiders. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/310 "2013-07-04T13:35:54Z")
I never claimed that the Catholic church is a moral authority. I don’t remotely care whether it claims that it’s a moral authority. Where did you possibly get the idea that I claimed that it’s a moral authority? I was replying to your statement that I seemed to be claiming that “Unless you have hard proof that \ is the worst thing in all of human history, don’t you dare criticize it in any way!” I never claimed that you shouldn’t criticize it in any way. You know, you spend a lot of time on the SDMB criticizing religion. I seldom even address the subject of religion in my posts. You seem to think that anyone who isn’t as critical of religion as you are must think that it’s perfect and beyond criticism. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/311 "2013-07-04T19:00:45Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > That’s why I brought up Galileo, but you didn’t like that either. Bruno was just another scientist/heliocentrist It is not a matter of what Captain Amazing or anyone else “likes”, but a matter of historical fact. The case of Galileo’s trial was not motivated by the church being “anti-science” and neither was anything related to Bruno. In fact, Bruno was never a scientist. You’ve have been shown these things, with real cites rather than just Wikipedia articles. You entered the thread with incorrect beliefs about these matters; others have told you the truth, in accordance with the Straight Dope’s purpose. Anyone’s entitled to make a mistake, but you shouldn’t continue spreading ignorance after learning that it’s ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/312 "2013-07-04T21:38:00Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > Why would you think they would have any insight?.. I’m not interested in the real reason for my question… I’m wondering what literalist Christians think about it. > [@](#): > > …Otherwise you are just reinforcing your concepts of the “others.” You will never learn or grow if you do not talk to outsiders. I’ve already heard enough from outsiders. I want to hear from literalist Christians. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/313 "2013-07-04T21:40:10Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > I’m not interested in the real reason for my question… I’m wondering what literalist Christians think about it. > I’ve already heard enough from outsiders. I want to hear from literalist Christians. Once again; there pretty much _aren’t any here_. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/314 "2013-07-04T21:51:01Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > I’m not interested in the real reason for my question… I’m wondering what literalist Christians think about it. > I’ve already heard enough from outsiders. I want to hear from literalist Christians. Dave’s not here, man. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/315 "2013-07-04T21:53:23Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Once again; there pretty much _aren’t any here_. Yes that’s why I went to another forum. I was responding to “You will never learn or grow if you do not talk to outsiders” from DrFidelius. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/316 "2013-07-04T21:59:25Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > I am not sure about that. This seems like science to me: a medical doctor examines a patient, makes a preliminary diagnosis, does tests, updates the diagnosis, treats the patient, does follow-up exams and tests, etc. In that case, my auto mechanic is a scientist. ---
**Author:** ![Twoflower](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/twoflower/32/22_2.png) [@Twoflower](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Twoflower)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/317 "2013-07-04T22:11:30Z")
I think we’re had quite a few threads here where YEC types have dropped by with a claim that their opinion is based on science. And invariably, they are totally unable to defend that opinion against any type of logic or actual facts. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/318 "2013-07-04T22:26:57Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > I’m not interested in the real reason for my question… I’m wondering what literalist Christians think about it. > I’ve already heard enough from outsiders. I want to hear from literalist Christians. Why ask a question if you are not interested in “the real reason?” ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/319 "2013-07-04T22:39:44Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > Why ask a question if you are not interested in “the real reason?” Because he’s interested in what certain people think the reason is. That’s not necessarily the same thing as “the real reason”. ---
**Author:** ![dougie\_monty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@dougie\_monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dougie_monty)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2013, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/320 "2013-07-04T22:59:27Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > About the original topic: > [Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism) How about Bolsheviki? I would say they are 100% atheists. They changed a country from old Russian icons to new Soviet icons (Lenin, Stalin, etc.) :rolleyes: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322.md?page=17)