>the smartest man to have ever lived believed in god
explain yourself atheist
1. he could have been lying
2. even smart people can believe stupid things
>>71404715
>smartest
I wouldn't go that far, but it is true that greatest scientists were theists.
>>71404715
>>71404715
He also believed in alchemy. Should we re-evaluate modern chemistry because of that?
>>71404715
You got your image wrong there
Newton's laws are inaccurate - Newton wasn't always right.
>>71404715
I'd say Einstein was smarter desu
>>71404715
You can have a very high IQ and be almost schizophrenic at the same time. Bobby Fischer was a genius but believed lots of nonsense.
>>71404957
Einstein was a hack.
>>71404957
Oy vey! What a good choice, Jews are a very gifted people
>>71404715
>>71404939
>>71404957
Amateurs, please.
Information that exists now didn't exist in that time.
>>71404976
Oy vey
>>71404912
Transmuting is normal. Just because I was born lead doesn't mean I can't be gold. Check your periodic privilege, shitlord.
>>71405099
>>71404715
not to mention if you said you're an atheist they'd fucking burn you to death.
>only theorizing or inventing a few things in your lifetime
Da Vinci is the GOAT brain. All these other hacks can step aside.
>>71404912
who is to know? minds like newton's have not been around for a long time.
Real scientists see the facts and evidence and draw their conclusion; all scientists that laid the groundwork for modern 'scientists' understood that there is a creator, that every material (and immaterial- emotions/thought processes) thing in existence was crafted with thought, precision and foresight.
These days we get people like dawkins who openly admit that everything looks designed, but do not be fooled, because it's not designed nor created.
Let's take parts to a 747, throw it into a chaotic tornado and see it magically form into a 747, all by chance with no foresight or guiding process. That is evolution, life without a creator.
>>71404715
not about that .Smart people believing in god can accomplish great things , name one neck beard fedora who has done such a thing
Greatest mathematician of all time and arguably the greatest scientist.
>>71404944
Einstein was a charlatan with a lower IQ than Newton. Relativity will be considered "inaccurate" when unifying laws are discovered.
>>71405247
Leave it to Australia to unironically consider alchemy could be possible.
>>71405099
Yet he produced some of that information.
>>71404774
I don't think he was lying. He wrote some pretty heretical theories about God and Christianity for sure, but he honestly believed.
>>71404957
he was agnostic ( to say the least) alongside modern well-known scientists such as kaku and deGrasse, even hawking has his doubts about his well-tipped fedora lately.
(Search for interviews without much exposure, most scientists avoid saying that they are not atheists so they don't get "bad reputation" amongst their communities)
>>71405174
Newton searched for encrypted messages in the Bible, no one forced him to do it.
>>71404715
>the smartest man to have ever lived believed in god
Publicly
"Gracchus: Privately I believe in none of them - neither do you. Publicly, I believe in them all "
>>71404715
>You should believe in God because Isaac Newton believed in God
He also died a virgin. Does that mean you should be a virgin the rest of your life?
>>71405224
>falling for the da vinci meme
>b-but muh tanks!
Good goy!
>>71404715
Most great geniuses are around the same intelligence we just tend to rate their respective intelligence based on what role they had the fortune of fulfilling in history. Newton in my opinion was no smarter at physics and math than Ghengis Khan was at killing and raping.
>>71405386
quotes a hollywood movie , do i have to say more,
no no no you fucking retard :)
>>71404715
Thats not the smartest man ever
>>71405286
How could something even evolve if it is not alive, not even exists?. There's got to be something anything but something. Lets just hope "God" is not an asshole cunt who loves to torment or else we fuck.
>>71404715
>>71405483
Yes, if only people could appreciate the genius required to rape...
>>71404715
iirc Newton's opinion of the Church is at best "shrouded in mystery".
>>71405323
>Einstein was a charlatan
Show me one serious scientist who thinks like you
>with a lower IQ than Newton
Maybe
>Relativity will be considered "inaccurate" when unifying laws are discovered.
Guess you're right about that.
The story we will tell ourselves will be more accurate.
>>71404715
He was a genius, but "smartest" ever is probably a bit of a stretch.
He also believed in Alchemy.
>>71404715
>smartest man to have ever lived
lmao, thats not Neil DeGrasse Tyson
What planet are you living on buddy?
>>71404715
>Newton was a Christian
>into alchemy more he ever was in physics
This meme has to die
Most scientists, philosophers etc were theists, simply because most of society was and if you werent your loving god would kill you.
>>71405599
word
>>71404715
It was of utmost necessity. Otherwise he would have been considered a loony by the masses. He took the easy way out.
But what he also managed was an ole switch&bait. If one maintains a belief incredulously popular and widespread and achieves a measure of renown with one's work, there is no reason why one could not, at the expense of a measure of self-respect, conjoin the two, and render the said toil even better known, better praised. Better accepted.
Imagine if, I don't know, Neil deGrasse Tyson came out and said 9/11 was a bunch of bull. An inside job.
Even should that be the case, it's not at all popular with the local masses. He'd stand to lose a lot. So he toes the line.
So did Newton.
They all do.
>>71404944
They were not inaccurate, they would just not absolute. Which he never really specifically stated, although I have never read the full principia mathematica in Latin.
>>71405008
No, he was undeniably a genius. Just because he was assisted with the mathematics isn't to say he doesn't deserve the credit he received.
>>71405224
Most of his inventions turned out to be novelty. Again, another genius, but his inventions had a millions of the effect Newton's calculus and his descriptions of light did.
>>71405325
your racist attitude is repulsive you leaf
>>71405516
>quotes a hollywood movie , do i have to say more,
>Taking posts at face value
Simpleton
>>71405947
>Neil deGrasse Tyson
my sides lad
>>71404715
He invented gravity.
We just floated around before Newton. FACT.
>>71406082
A millionth*
>>71405947
Or maybe he knew that a knowledge of science does not preclude one from faith in God? If anything, it exacerbates it as you learn more.
>The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you
>>71406147
Why would he do that? Floating around would be much easier on our bodies.
>>71405991
>They were not inaccurate
yes they are.
>although I have never read the full principia mathematica in Latin.
okay?
>>71405642
I hate kikes
>>71404715
>>71406294
No, they weren't. His measurements were into 100% but the laws he derived from them are 100% accurate, except in certain circumstances, which means they were not absolute. Inertial frames of reference are only important at high speeds.
I said that I haven't read a Latin translation because I claimed that Newton himself never claimed that his laws were absolute, however because I haven't read an original translation I can't be sure.
Tell me, rather than just repeating yourself like a child, where the inaccuracy lies?
>>71406204
Oh, share your diplomas and degrees with us. Please. Don't be humble.
Truth be told, the way science, as a movement, is treated these days, you could at times forget it was not organized religion.
It's a rather strange turn of the pendulum.
Let explain this shit once and for all.
Gods exists, whole phanteons of them and even your only ONE.
But unfortunately in our world it doesn't matter, empirical truth is that gods dont' have realpower here.
Worshipping them is pointless, you can only count on minor psychological buffs, we don't live in fucking Faerun where worhsipping gods would give acces to healing and shit.
Belivers are sentenced to chasing mirage, ever promising, never providing and this shit can really fuck you up, look at muslim fanatics, they are like puppets on strings, their god is playing with them. Only power gods have over you is power you give to them trough your actions and thoughts, they can't materialize themself and kill you or do some crazy shit, maybe there were times when they could but now they can't.
And to be honest, even if some God would appear himself and demand obedience I wouldn't give a shit.
>>71405323
Tell me, what does his IQ have to do with it? Relativity is a perplexing reality, and you need to give credit to the person that began to think in frames of reference first.
>>71406242
I don't know mate. Floating around seems like a nice idea. But Sir Isaac Newton had to fuck it up.
As to my highly scientific knowledge, only astronauts have floating ability, but all the moon landings and space shuttle, ISS are fake. So my theory is fucked.
Prove me wrong.
You can't.
>>71406482
The scientific community has never been more effective, only considering that it is being bombarded by conflicts of interest like never before.
>>71405777
This.
Being non-religious during the middle ages until the late 19th century could very easily get you murdered by state sponsored thugs in most places.
No fucking shit most of the scientists of the past were theists of some sort. The alternative was being tortured to death.
>>71404715
I believe in god not in jesus this collosal fag
Paradigms.
>>71406147
Actually ancient black egyptians invented gravity because their pyramids were floating around and shit
>>71406914
Wtf are you totally retarded pensées of Pascal was wrote for atheist who were numerous at this time, the proportion of atheist was high in the society, and newton used to communicate with atheist
>>71406973
Are you a kike? Because your definitely not a Christian, and if you were Muslim you would hold a better opinion of Jesus. If you were of an eastern theistic religion you probably wouldn't be able to turn on a computer.
>>71406481
>where the inaccuracy lies?
Newton's laws are first-order approximation of relativity
It's always inaccurate, but it's significant only in high speeds.
theoretically, it's possible to measure the inaccuracy even in low speeds.
It's not like that suddenly at a certain point it becomes inaccurate.
look at the graph, the red curve and the green line agree only at the zero point, but it is easier to measure the difference as you approach the speed of light.
>>71404715
Isaac Newton didn't believe in the trinity and considered worshipping Christ as God to be the ultimate blasphemy.
So why do you still believe in Nicean Christianity, /pol/?
>>71407294
>didn't believe in the trinity and considered worshipping Christ as God to be the ultimate blasphemy
All Christians should think like this.
>>71407226
No i grow up in a atheist family, some jew in my mother side but christians in general, and every important christian writer i read are just annoyed by jesus because it's stupid and speak only about god
>>71404715
I'm pretty sure Jimmy Page was an occultist, not christian.
>>71404715
>the smartest man to have ever lived
That would be Carl Friedrich Gauss.
>>71404715
Nikola Tesla was religious?
>>71407290
Hate to say it, but the kike is right this time.
However, Newton was right in the sense he had no capacity to measure those inaccuracies of his model at that time.
So if you only had access to the tech Newton had you wouldn't be able to measure SR effects and everything would look like Newtonian mechanics.
He also believed that alchemy was a real thing and that metals had spirits in them
>>71404715
He also believed in alchemy and meme magick
>>71405224
I'm with you on DaVinci. Everyone else is second tier.
>>71404715
poor's man Lavoisier
and he was a real pusy magnet not an ugly nerd
>>71405323
That his theories may be deemed inaccurate when unifying laws are discovered may be true but that is how scientific progress works. It is not a linear process. When a scientific revolution takes places the previous framework of science is left behind and the new framework begins to be filled in. The progress of science is erratic and destructive at times.
>>71404715
He worked against religion. I wouldn't really call those people smart, since they were privileged king's bitches, since everybody else was forced to life of poverty and wasn't even allowed to go to school or invent. Even Newton took risks, since church would burn normal citizen as a Satan's worshiper.
>>71407935
Approximately half of his writings were on religion. And that's A LOT of writing.
>>71404715
Daily reminder that Archimedes was on the path to discovering Calculus but was BTFO.
Ancient Greeks were ridiculously smart.
>>71405323
Toppu kekku
>>71404715
>smartest man
that's not gauss or neumann...
>>71404715
>a smart person had an opinion 400 years ago
>I have to believe him because he's smart
There are a couple flavors of bleach you haven't tried yet.
>>71407972
King and his church buddies ruled, so its hardly surprising. What's surprising is that they turned against their own church, when they had that comfy life. Even religious retards get tired of their brain limitations when they get to power & wealth, then they break god's rules of what is allowed and proven by god.
>>71407290
It is only even recognizable at speed impossible to those in Newton's time.
When his laws work perfectly well with anything bellow 0.20c it is no more inaccurate than any other measurement a scientist may take.
I will concede that this is technically inaccurate, but at what margin can we say that it isn't?
I suppose the best way I can articulate my discomfort with calling it inaccurate is that Newton could have measured typical motion with tools more accurate than we have today, and still come to the same conclusion. Yeah, it's inaccurate, but saying that urks me considering that it works.
>>71407567
A Christian writer annoyed by Jesus... I think your a dumb cunt, but feel free to prove me wrong.
>>71404715
how does black science man feel about his idol being a theist?
>>71408240
I should have said something like ~0.20c
It is more or less a guess.
>>71405325
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_transmutation
Kek
>>71407724
>However, Newton was right in the sense he had no capacity to measure those inaccuracies of his model at that time.
Neither did Einstein. Gedanken never required anything but pen and paper. It's not as if we had a train that could go the speed of light in 1940.
>>71408381
You are right. These things didn't cross Newtons mind. But you know what they say, Science is built on the shoulders of giants.
>>71406102
then fuck of to /b/
>>71404715
>1700's
>context
>>71408543
Hence why I said that Gauss was the smartest man ever.
>>71407666
>>71408771
Why? Based on what? I think Newton had a far more impressive impact. This is all baseless bullshit from you.
>>71404715
That doesn't mean he was a theist. God is quite a broad concept.
Newton didn't just believe in God, he believed in all sorts of crazy mystical shit and rest assured he was much more initiated than the average /pol atheist faggot or Redditor who identifies with atheism as some kind of modern movement and ultimate "redpill". You guys are faggots.
>>71408925
He spent a good deal of his life looking for hidden meaning in the Christian bible. He was flat our a Christian, albeit a heretical one.
>>71404774
I don't feel he was lying when the one thing he did other than his physics and Calculus was examining thoroughly the bible to find out the hidden truths and determine the second coming of Christ
>>71404912
>alchemy didn't lead directly to the Chemistry we know now
>no great minds ever didn't know what we know now
WEW LAD
>>71408851
>Based on what?
The fundamental theorem of mathematics, non-Euclidean geometry, and the construction of a 17-sided polygon among many many many other contributions. Go to a mathematical conference, do a survey of who people consider the top mathematician of all time, and Gauss will never lose. Never.
Newton pushed forward analysis with the publication of the calculus (however the question of primacy is still in dispute and we all use Leibniz notation today), and he did some shit with light until he blinded himself like an idiot, and he modified Kepler but still got it wrong. Congrats?
>>71404939
/thread
>>71405286
>every possible God is the Christian God
>there's no way evolution and a God could exist
Now you're just being insulting with the shitposting
People believing in God are insecure little faggots that can't stand the fact that once their heart stops beating their existence will end, so it's more reassuring to believe that some guy living in the sky has created a heaven where they can live forever.
Stupid pussies afraid of dying
>>71409315
I feel like you are intentional downplaying what he had done.
Theoretical mathematics doesn't hold a candle to Newtons revelations about nature in my opinion.
>>71408192
>ha, he actually was a mega atheist ****tip****
But he wrote a lot on and actually spent a good chunk of his time on writing about religion
>well duh, m'lady, that's because he was forced to. Don't you lesser minds know how oppressive the king was during the plague when everyone was inside and Newton by himself explored more of the Bible and also discovered Calculus?
Everyone believes in God.
Even if you don't believe in Christian God, you adopt another belief even unconsciously which in effect becomes God.
Furthermore, if you proclaim your own free-will to be absolute, you become God yourself.
>>71409540
If you aren't afraid of dying, why are you living?
Surely, if it's like you say, non-existence is better than existence, because non-existence is nothing, while existence necessarily includes suffering.
So why suffer?
>>71409753
Theoretical mathematics ARE revelations about nature. Even Newton must have known that.
>>71409892
Well I'm glad to be alive, never said the opposite. But unlike Christfags I'm okay with the fact that when I die, there won't be another life after death, death means the absolute end of my existence, and that's fine. Of course I'd like to have another life after death if it really existed, but it doesn't. Too bad, but I won't depress about it, I'd rather enjoy the few time I'll have on this planet and disappear forever when the time comes
>>71409814
While I don't fully agree with this statement as a blanket statement, this is true for many modern day atheist leftists (and atheists are disproportionately likely to lean left) who elevate the state to some kind of deity. Hence why they believe that the state should take care of the poor and the state should make everything fair: Christians believe that is the task of the Church and those who claim to represent God.
>>71404715
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y201QzDdzbg
>>71409807
He was a Christian, because it was a Christian rule, like caveman was living in cave. Such revelation. We though 100 years ago that leeches could cure all the diseases. We moved on. We though during nuclear age that radioactive materials could cure everything, because it glows so nicely. What do you think people 200 years though when golden crosses glowed nicely? We moved on. You can be religious like they were 500 years ago as you can not wash/brush your teeth since tooth paste is in use no longer than 100 years. Your point being constantly that he was le Christian and we le tip, it totally pointless point.
>>71409814
Crna Planino that was balls deep
Yeah well your can sumarize his contribution to f=m*a
thank you not so hard to imagine.
Go fuck yourself Newton, you're not such a genius at all. Also infinitesimality was already invented by arabs centuries before him;
>>71410168
That's not an answer.
>death means absolute end
Thus death is superior, following your logic. In death there is nothing. Life must at least include some suffering. Suffering is negative experience. No one can enjoy suffering.
Are you proclaiming that your own free-will is absolute? Then you're God. So you believe in God. But if you are arguing for hard determinism, then you admit that there is God. At both extremes, there is God.
Reason you don't kill yourself is fear. You aren't being honest to yourself or me.
If you were truly a nihilist, and true atheism is nihilism, you'd end your existence, because you'd realize it's utterly meaningless. To find meaning is to find God.
>>71404715
No it's context duh!! If he was born today he would DEFINITELY be an athiest :)))) people only used to believe in God for things they couldn't explain, it's called the GOD GAP look it up?
>>71404820
Name someone smarter then.
>>71406914
>late 19th century
Yea, not that late. A lot of the philosophers of the enlightenment, and your founding fathers, were not religious people - they were almost all deists
Which is essentially they're not edgy enough to admit that god doesn't exist, and admit that they can't know either way, so simply believe there probably is a god but that he's irrelevant and hasn't concerned himself with the Universe since It's creation. God turned on his simulation program and has just left It running unaltered.
>>71405374
>kaku
>degrasse
>hawking
Do you know anything about science at all?
>>71407042
>ancient black egyptians
just say ancient egyptians, we know they be black
>>71410790
*tips fedora*
>>71405286
humans were the one who created 747s you have to use an eyeball or something for your analogy to work and then that could simply mean eyeballs were designed by something like humans but not God
>>71405374
>memechio Cuckoo
>>71410774
>Reason you don't kill yourself is fear.
No, the reason why I don't kill myself is because I have no good reason to do so. I love my life, and it'll be short enough so I don't want to end it sooner than "planned". What I'm just trying to tell you is that I'm okay with the fact that there is nothing after death, why would I have to kill myself for thinking this? I don't get your point about this.
Also I wouldn't kill myself alone, in my bedroom. I'd rather do something useful before leaving this planet, like joining the fight against muslims invaders and die on the battlefield, happy to have served the white race.
>To find meaning is to find God
We don't have the same PoV about God then
>>71410824
Leibniz, Pascal, Da Vinci, Goethe, Von Neumann all spring to mind.
But let's be real for a change: you have no fucking clue (and neither do I) how all these men would fit in an arbitrary scale of "intelligence" relative to one another, so it's a completely futile exercise. They all presumably had their distinct qualities and talents, each more or less suited to his time, each more or less suited to his chosen profession and to the opportunities that were given him.
>>71412016
>Pascal
You're actually serious?
>>71404715
Before Darwin came along and became the smartest man so far, until Einstein came along.
>>71412016
>you have no fucking clue (and neither do I) how all these men would fit in an arbitrary scale of "intelligence" relative to one another
Most physicists have put Newton as #1.
>>71410574
Damn, Slovenia, you tried. We call them cavemen because Neanderthal is a bit too hard. We call them Christians because they believe in Christ. Nobody believes he was a Christian because of the time he lived in, there were many an ebin fedora then too. We believe he was a Christian because of his actions. You can believe he was a closet fedora like fags believe so many historical figures were fags. But that's just your view, how you want him to be. Nobody is arguing we continue doing it because it's what used to be, that's just a nice strawman on your part
>>71412087
Pascal's status as a genius isn't even controversial. I don't know what you're trying to stir up. The kid invented the calculator as a kid to help his dad for fuck's sake.
>>71412177
No shit, I wonder why......
Oh, mightn't it be because he became the most influential physicist? Obviously influence and intelligence are different things.
he also died a virgin
doesn't mean you have to stay virgin to be intelligent
spirituality is an important part of life though. christianity is just one letter of the endles language of the spirit.
>>71412280
>Pascal's status as a genius isn't even controversial
What's controversial is putting him above Newton though, considering his impact on both mathematics and physics is infinitely smaller. His most famous works even directly rely on Newton's work (notice that Pascial is Newton per square meter. Which unit came first?).
>>71412181
People believe what they learn, you ain't going to question every single thing you learn, then you will go mad. People believed the universe consists of few planet and that they turn around earth, but before that they didn't even know other planets exist. Humanity proven that world isn't flat and that we aren't center of universe, church lost long ago. Arabs invented things too, they are Muslims and Pajet from India can be very good at some thing if he learns it, but that doesn't means he's smart. People who are well taught and believe everything they read are dumb. Newton was little smarter than some, but perhaps he was pretty dumb when it come as whole if he believed in church fairy tales. Maybe you had farmers back then who were atheists, they done nothing but picking vegetables and they knew god is bullshit, they were smarter than skilled Newton. Being well taught and skilled at something doesn't makes you smarter.
>>71412408
As I said, influence does not correlate to intelligence. Making a judgement on that is a pointless exercise. Also, I'm sure you are aware that Pascal lived before Newton, so I don't quite understand your line of reasoning there. I've been baited enough by this thread. Time to leave.
>>71404841
Kurds are shit and will forever be dominated by strong bulls. How does that make you feel?
>>71404715
It was the best explanation for everything at that time. He was also spergy as fuck.
>>71412726
>influence does not correlate to intelligence
Sure thing friend
>>71411989
>I have no good reason to
I gave you a reason. Thing is, you either don't understand me or you avoid understanding me.
You state that you're an atheist, yet you're not an atheist. Total, honest atheism is nihilism. Nihilism has only one end, because if you accept that there is no meaning, there is no reason to exist either. Non-existence is superior to existence, following nihilist logic to it's full extent.
>I'd rather do something useful before leaving this planet, like joining the fight against muslims invaders and die on the battlefield, happy to have served the white race.
So you have a meaning, thus you believe in God. You just don't believe in Christian God. That's my point.
As I said, you're not being honest, to yourself or me. You fear death, and that is normal. To not fear death is to accept that there is no meaning, to proclaim absolute freedom. One who proclaims absolute freedom honestly and in full capacity, can only end himself, because it's the only logical thing. Paradoxically, by doing so, you become God.
Thus God is inevitable.
>>71411012
Kaangz and sheeit.
Niggaz invented Stonehenge. Yo, in da hood, mofo. I is pure gangsta. And can't conjugate verbs. Nor pronounce sheeeeeit. Mudda fukka.
U is beegn rassisss.
Ah wuz a kang and sheeit. Check it homeyy.
>>71404715
>Smartest man to have ever lived
>Not posting Euler
Shiggy Diggy.
>>71406844
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrxjaGq-FIo
You must watch because of the pic you posted
Just because you're smart in one subject doesn't mean you are for all of them.
>>71404715
being smart and believing in god has nothing to do with each other
you either have faith or you dont, look at darwin
first he is a christfag then a atheist , he lost faith because of his shit tier life
>>71412969
>I gave you a reason
Yes, but not a good one. I consider having no reason to end my life, I just don't want to. If I have the choice to end myself I also have the choice to not do it, right? Well not killing myself is my choice
Well my God is certainly not the Christian God. If you consider that the white race is my God because I'm ready to die for it if necessary, then so be it, I have a God.
>>71404817
Topkeks
>>71404715
>Newton is the smartest man
Can't argue with that. Don't even think someone came close to his level, he's barely human.
>He thought Alchemy was real
The basic principles of alchemy ARE actually real. Transmutation happens all the time in nuclear power plants.
>Newton believed in god.
I don't think this is the case. He took the "you have to read the bible to find the path to heaven" literally.
He thought that the bible possessed hidden knowledge that would open a portal to another dimension where immortality and true omnipotence would be possible.
He was a man that sought the truth of the universe. Longed for ascendance and thought the bible would provide him that.
Sadly the technology at that time didn't provide him with the tools to succeed in his mission. But we young people in 2016 might actually have a chance if we dedicate ourselves in to understanding the world around us and defying mortality.
>>71413475
>being smart and believing in god has nothing to do with each other
But many of the great men of the scientific revolution, including Newton, did not just believe in God while happening to be scientists. For many of them their faith in god was integral for what Einstein referred to as scientific faith: the belief that the universe is at all comprehensible for human reason and expressable in scientific laws (a belief that did not arise anywhere else on earth). For men like Newton the two were related and not coincidental.
>he lost faith because of his shit tier life
Nah, it was because of parasitic wasps. I'm not even joking. It wasn't evolution that shook his faith, but the existence of wasps who planted their larvae inside caterpillars, meaning the larvae would consume the caterpillar from the inside out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichneumonidae#Darwin_and_the_Ichneumonidae
May God have mercy on us all ;-;
It hurts me seeing everyone being intrigued by there own intelligence.
Tesla is the world's finest scientist. That motherfucker is responsible for most of the technology we have today. IE radios, sail foams, electricity, etc. Bonus Point: not a fan of der juden.
>>71413776
>The basic principles of alchemy ARE actually real
We can go even further: until Lavoisier all "chemistry" was alchemy. In a way we still believe in alchemy, just in a more scientific and better defined alchemy.
>>71404715
>explain yourself atheist
I don't live in the mid-17th century.
>>71414078
>The God Delusion
Even Atheists laugh at you
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/02/atheism-dawkins-ruse
Here you go. Michael Ruse, an atheist with an actual pedigree in philosophy and knowledge of theology, specifically states that Dawkins makes him ashamed to be an atheist. If you want to ridicule Christians, try showing at least some basic knowledge about the issue and don't parrot the popular, plebeian option that serious thinkers laugh out of the room.
>Inb4 "hurr durr you're just afraid of Dawkins"
Which is why I cite an atheist with better formulated and more logical objections to Christianity, right?
>>71404715
>implying
>>71414078
>>71414206
Can a single human posses complete, absolute knowledge?
No. Thus you're forced to believe in something, and that belief is God.
Atheism in colloquial sense is usually and simply denial of Christian God. Atheism in full sense is nihilism, and nihilism is obliteration of oneself. Without meaning, there is no reason to exist. None of ''atheists'' are really atheists.
To believe is to believe in God, and to find a meaning is to find God.
>>71414078
stop trying to steal science from Christians
>we wuz scientists and shiet
>>71404939
>There is a famous legend[62] inspired by Euler's arguments with secular philosophers over religion, which is set during Euler's second stint at the St. Petersburg academy. The French philosopher Denis Diderot was visiting Russia on Catherine the Great's invitation. However, the Empress was alarmed that the philosopher's arguments for atheism were influencing members of her court, and so Euler was asked to confront the Frenchman. Diderot was informed that a learned mathematician had produced a proof of the existence of God: he agreed to view the proof as it was presented in court. Euler appeared, advanced toward Diderot, and in a tone of perfect conviction announced this non-sequitur: "Sir,
a+bn
/
n
=x, hence God exists—reply!" Diderot, to whom (says the story) all mathematics was gibberish, stood dumbstruck as peals of laughter erupted from the court. Embarrassed, he asked to leave Russia, a request that was graciously granted by the Empress. However amusing the anecdote may be, it is apocryphal, given that Diderot himself did research in mathematics.[63] The legend was apparently first told by Dieudonné Thiébault[64] with significant embellishment by Augustus De Morgan.
based
>>71415287
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Euler
>>71405539
too obvious
8 of the 10 highest living IQs are theists and at least 6 are Christians
http://blog.eternalvigilance.me/2014/07/of-10-highest-iqs-on-earth-at-least-8-are-theists-at-least-6-are-christians-examiner-com/
>>71406366
What the fuck am I reading?
>>71416982
when youre incredibly smart and you start asking questions that cant be answered you immediately go, "oh shit thats God"
then fedoras will somehow say "oh they dont know shit even though their arguments are based off of "smart" people
>>71404820
Newton was indeed probably one of the smartest people to ever live. He is a human that only shows up once a millennium. The reason it seems like he hasn't accomplished more is because he never focused on one field. He usually did something amazing in a field, and then moved onto a next one. His work in Physics alone though proves that there has never been someone quite in touch with nature than he was.
>>71404715
I wouldn't take any stock in a man believing in God in a time where not believing in God got you killed, Christcuck.
If he were alive today he'd be atheist, or at least agnostic, 100% guaranteed.
>>71410908
I'll give him Hawking. As for the other two, I'm surprised he didn't mention Bill Nye.
>>71413895
You mean Maxwell?
>>71417287
nah he is smart enough to not fall for the science jew
>>71404817
R A R E
A
R
E
Hi desert person
>>71404957
>he actually believes general relativity despite the theory not applying to normal and small sized things
Einstein's theories are BS empirical nonsense.
>>71404976
Are we playing where's scholomo?
>>71405286
Things are the way they are because that's what works. There is no organization or design when you factor in that every outcome could have been possible. In other words, the universe is what it is, because that's the way things wound up, not because some thing designed it.
>>71406914
t. richard dawkins, bumble bee scientist
The thing was Newton was Christian but wrote and held MANY heretical and punishable beliefs about Christ and God.
You're pathetic explanation can go back to plebbit and get you some karma but it doesn't work in the real world.
>>71407904
Too bad the Jewish Free Masons cut his head off.
>>71404715
Reminder Jesus Christ is real.
>>71418057
except there's too much similarity between things and when broken down mathematically often things are too perfect. Although people like to spout off there is no organization or design the further scientists have broken things down frantically searching for that randomness all they usually get is the opposite.
>spend time thinking about god
>achieving anything in life
pick one
>>71410295
The guy who made this guy is retarded pseudoscientist youtuber.
He clearly has no training history and philosophy of science because his arguments are shit and were discareded in 1200 by Roger Bacon and nobody who is well read takes them seriously.
>>71413895
To bed Reddit and le oatmeal turned him into a meme.
>>71404774
>he believes in God and that's stupid
Real high level discussion here
>>71404715
Gauss? Yeah, he was Lutheran.
>>71404774
Like the universe expanding from a mass the size of a pea?
>>71414078
Dawkins and Hitchens are just sophists who literally got shit on every time they debated or presented their work to serious academics, christian and atheist alike. Dawkins doesn't understand modal logic and just calls it a dumb waste of time.
Its honestly hilarious how stupid he is.
He is legitamately a bumble bee scientist who wrote about 10 papers on bumble bee digging patterns before realizing he could make money selling controversy.
You're the drooling retard he targets his books towards. The best part is you think he's smart for it.
>>71418279
Literally the atheist points to a bunch of Jewish scientists to say nu-uh look smart people are atheist.
Wonder who this fuckboy's religious views were.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Évariste_Galois
>>71404715
I was reading a Chemistry history book, Newton had a bit of input on Chemistry actually.
Point is up to half and possibly more than half of his career was spent on spiritual endeavors, such as writing out timelines and deciphering biblical prophecy, and like many scientists before him they look for esoteric metaphors to decipher the exoteric experiments.
Thanks to him Chemists caught wind of affinities, and recognizing trends was key in making sense of it all.
There is this meme that scientists can't believe in God, but really it's just academic culture isn't part of it today (yeah even in theology, can you believe it). I still see God fearing people in academia.
>>71418354
Faggotry like this is why Europe is getting butt fucked by Muslims right now
Moral relativism is complete dog shit
Believing in God /= believing in religion.
>>71410824
Prince of Mathematics, Gauss, I think, it's just my opinion, I can't prove that he's smarter though.
>>71419397
This. In fact they are almost mutually exclusive when you come down to it. Not to make church of no effect, it's just not the point.
>>71404715
He also limited himself by using God as an explanation for things he did not understand
I think the expanding universe theory is enough evidence to call creator theories as viable as alternatives.
Einstein fought this theory early on because he thought it was just religious dogma dictating scientific theory. It turned out the universe's expansion from a single point is most likely the state of affairs.
>>71418279
You obviously have no idea what you're talking about if you respresent Christan science by Copernicus and Galileo.
>>71404715
>the smartest man to have ever lived died a virgin
Explain yourselves non-virgins.
>>71419254
>Newton had a bit of input on Chemistry actually
No shit
>>71405286
Except he had never said that anything looks designed. In fact you can see a video of him on YouTube dissecting a giraffe exclaiming why I couldn't have been designed by anything other than natural selection.
>>71419790
>>71419790
I'm in no way agreeing with the previous post at all, but why couldn't someone see natural selection and the larger trend of spontaneous order in the universe as the method of "design?"
>>71415287
i don't get it...
someone explain ploz
>>71419374
>You need god to have morals
No
>>71404774
>1. he could have been lying
He risked his livelihood by being a closet Unitarian.
>>71405561
How could God be an asshole when he keeps you alive? He can wipe out your existence and wipe everyon'es memory of you; yet he keeps the sun shining on you, spoils you in the riches of this life while you spit in His face
.>>71409359
The christian God and biblical christianity is the only 'religion' that gives coherent answers to our fundamental questions about life, without fail. The problem with mixing man's word and biblical God's word in a way as to smash the creator God with evolution is silly and failed logic. For there to have been millions and millions of years of death and suffering, there would be no need for a savior, no need for Jesus to redeem us because there'd be nothing to redeem, we never would have fallen- the entire world was already filled with death and it was never in a perfect state had there been millions of years of evolution.
>>71411216
The analogy still applies. And with your attempt to prove me wrong, you only enforced my point. All of our structures and creations were created by us, intelligent beings with the capability to think things out with foresight to come up with a solution to every possible problem.
With eyes balls, it's even more complex. Evolution has no answer to how we got started, ot anymore, but the popular thought was as simple as primordial soup where the building blocks amino acids got together and started forming life in soe way, unguided, blind. Yet it somehow managed to give us our perfect little cell machines, trillions and trillions in each living thing, all working together flawlessly (for the most part). For us to even have arrived at our current state, EVERYTHING had to have been together in working order all at the same time. You take one piece of a cell out and it all falls apart, causing defects. So how do you explain even just the 'changing of species into a completely different species', even given millions of years, when you can not keep adding over time because it will fail to work without
>>71420209
Just glad you beaners are Catholic and not dirt worshipping muslims
>>71420059
Because the design is shitty, why do humans have kidneys if all they do is push excess water out of the body? Why aren't humans cold blooded so we only have to eat once a week? The writing on the wall in nature is that it's random through mutations and only things that work exist. There's just no sign of perfection in design which you would expect from omnipotence. Sure you can argue that its not meant to be understood but that would be a cruel God not worth worshiping.
>>71406552
>Relativity is a perplexing reality, and you need to give credit to the person that began to think in frames of reference first.
Einstein didn't start thinking in different frames of reference before anyone else. Poincare, Lorentz and others did first in setting out special relativity. What Einstein did was arrive at basically the same equations as the aforementioned for special relativity, but did so without a term for the non-existent ether that the others didn't want to do away with. He also did frames of reference thinking for gravity, which no one else did, and which was his greatest achievement.
>>71419140
Mmmh. Boipussy
>>71420161
He just made a random equation that didn't really mean much and the guy supposedly didn't know math so he couldn't argue back
>>71418607
It wasn't a mass and it had no size, but close.
>>71420342
Poor people (the niggers of México) who kill and steal are die hard catholics, they even pray for their own safety DURING their robberies
>>71404715
>smartest man to have ever lived
You called?
Einstien was a Socialist.
>>71406542
top kek
>>71404715
>implying Newton or any other saint of religious science ever existed
>>71404715
He also lived in a society where the central dogma was a religion that killed anyone who disagreed with it.
Sound familiar?
>>71420645
Because he saw into the future where robots will do our jobs and capitalism won't support a population that exceeds anything more than a few million people.
>>71406542
We exist in the domain of a trickster god. It's no biggy. Praying to our resident deity is like asking favors from the Joker.
>>71420293
>Implying god exists
You can't base an argument on a bias only you hold.
Try arguing logically, learn something about science and not use the agency of a would be god for core logic in arguments.
Cell Biology is simply too fucking complicated to be anything but designed, even the scientists who modeled DNA said this
>>71410752
He invented calculus to show that f=ma applies to lots of different observable phenomena, including gravitational phenomena where f=ma=MmG/r^2.
He demonstrated that his equations worked on the planetary scale, down to the human scale. This was at a time when an awful lot of physics was still not backed up with quantitative analysis.
>>71420645
>implying a socialist is a smart person.
>>71404715
What was the alternative?
>>71404817
tell your family members to gtfo my country
>>71420645
And agnostic Most scientist dont belief in god because of science ,but because they dont belief in a personal god with a hell punishment , why does god allow suffering, why does a bee kill it self when it stings.And we can keep going on
>>71411216
one tiny little piece?
Not to mention that dna itself can not be added onto, only subtracted from. There has yet t be a case where something gained dna information instead of losing it. So, we evolved into what we are, getting better and better species throughout the millenia, at which point did it start going downhill and how are we still evolving? If things were different and we couldn't see the process itself, but let's just say what scientists believe to be true, that things are getting better and better, dna is being added onto; when did it stop being added to and start being subtracted from? How were mutations a good trait, only up until when humans became sentient and could spot something wrong, then becoming a bad trait?
>>71418057
There is more faith in believing that we have all this due to blind random chance wtih every possible outcome. Every outcome would have ben possible, but to roll the dice and win trillions of times without losing just once, multiply that by the biggest number we've yet to come up to; all the life on the planet, rolling the dice trillions of times ad infinitum.
There's nothing guiding or creating the 'works', or giving a male and female to come about at the exact time and still be able to create viable offspring. A scientist conducted a study with rodents, cutting their tails off with each generation. Every generation the offspring had tails. This could not be changed no matter how many he went through. This was done with already existing beings, with an intelligent being behind it, yet it couold not be changed. Scientists tried making fruit flies tur into something else, and of course failed. They ended up with all kinds of mutated fruit flies, but none the less, fruit flies.
This is one human cell. All of it's parts are all needed- there are no extra parts. Flawlessly working altogether, this cell needs all pieces and can not acquire on piece along the way of any amount of time.
>>71418057
An engine needs every part to work and there are no extra parts. The engine will not work until all pieces are together. This is not the way our cells work. If every piece is not in place right at the get go, it can not work. DNA is itself a code, there's letters there before we were able to get our eyes on it.
MAthematics, laws of physics and logic were there before we uncovered them. How does evolution explain immaterial things like conscious, mathematics and laws.
Evolution fails right from the start and only serves to bring down human kind through the thought that we are all just animals, this like has no meaning, there are no absolutes; what may be wrong in your eyes may be right in mine, so how are we to judge a pedophile for harming children? If there's n grounding, no measuring stick, no fixed point foundation, everything is juts a matter of muh feels rather than logic.
How can atheists just a God, saying He is evil, when they have no basis for good or evil except for their feelings? There can't be evil without good just as there can't be shadows without light, but there damn well can be light without shadows.
Damn rant, excuse me.
>>71420462
The design simply "is what it is" to use a meaningless phrase. The idea is that from it's single-point origin, the universe through succession of random states of chaos develops into certain orders. Kidneys or not, cold blooded or warm, we seem to be the result of a universal force that orders our universe- it cannot be imperfect.
A universe expanding from a single point, and guided by a principle of spontaneous order out of that expansion, could lead to a viable belief in a creator. I'm not saying it's the case, I just don't get where people get off assuming it's ridiculous to believe in a creator.
>>71404715
He was logical not smart.
>>71405286
Let's take the parts of a 747, and try to put them together in random combinations, sequentially, until by chance we hit on the combination that is effective. Then let's do the same thing through millions of iterations, discarding the configurations that don't work as effectively. Eventually, by chance, we will build an entire 747.
That's a better analogy for natural selection.
>>71421459
a higher authority creates good and evil you can be evil without knowing it
send a white baby to some tribe in africa and as he grows up he learns to rape kill and pillage.
and has no sense of wrong doing
>>71421756
> I just don't get where people get off assuming it's ridiculous to believe in a creator.
It's not; however, the reasoning behind that belief is often ridiculous.
>>71421778
You forgot "once we have something that does what a 747 does, no matter how inefficiently, it takes over the environmental niche and stifles all further development that isn't based on its own design."
That's right, corporate inertia is natural selection.
>>71405376
So he enjoyed doing something, that doesn't mean he was religious.
Plenty of people love that type of stuff and aren't religious, plenty of people have read the bible/ko;ran that aren't religious
>>71421778
to bad you dont have that with the creation of life what was it again billion years
>>71404715
appeal to authority. Think for yourself. Magical sky pixies don't exist.
>>71421774
>invented calculus
>invented Newtonian physics
>"not smart"
Shoulda checked the flag
>>71422096
The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare.
In this context, "almost surely" is a mathematical term with a precise meaning, and the "monkey" is not an actual monkey, but a metaphor for an abstract device that produces an endless random sequence of letters and symbols. One of the earliest instances of the use of the "monkey metaphor" is that of French mathematician Émile Borel in 1913,[1] but the first instance may be even earlier. The relevance of the theorem is questionable—the probability of a universe full of monkeys typing a complete work such as Shakespeare's Hamlet is so tiny that the chance of it occurring during a period of time hundreds of thousands of orders of magnitude longer than the age of the universe is extremely low (but technically not zero). It should also be noted that real monkeys do not produce actually random output, which means that an "actual" monkey hitting keys for an infinite amount of time has no statistical certainty of ever producing any given text - some letters or combinations of letters in Hamlet may have precisely zero probability of being typed.
>>71404715
Newton was a faggot and a cuck
>>71422152
*tips*
>>71421778
That's not natural selection, you idiot.
>>71422920
> knowlage
Give me your knowlage, master!
>>71404715
You're rather mistaken about the smartest man who ever lived. This is our true God.
>>71423385
That isn't the only word deliberately misspelled Good eye Ahmed, good eye...
>>71423013
It's not a perfect analogy, no, but it wasnt want to be. It's just a slightly closer analogy than the original one.
>>71423535
It's not even close
>>71404715
>Newton
>white
>>71405589
>muh Monads
>>71414078
Funny thing is, Atheism nowadays is becoming more like a cool kids club. You guys act like you're smarter than everyone, while 9/10 atheists i've met were stupid nihilists rejecting the claim that God exists because it's somehow irrational. Richard Dawkins is an awful philosopher and probably hasn't even spent time looking at counterarguments to his claims. Also, most nobel laureates to this day believed in God, so don't try to hijack science and think it's yours.
Fucking hell, atheism is an ideology like Christianity , so the correct way to approach them is philosophy. Science doesn't lead to Atheism nor Christianity , it's just a way to explain the natural world.
>>71412969
There's no reason to not exist either.
>the smartest man to have ever lived was brainwashed
Scared to be frank.
>>71405143
Underrated
