Health and Religion

[Moloch]

Religitards don't understand how to enjoy the ride...

[LuanX3]

In Mensa Magazine Bruce G Charlton posited three fundamental disadvantages of high IQ .

Charlton’s triad:
1)   Socialism
2)   Atheism
3)   Infertility

So, along with high IQ comes critical thinking skills...

1) Socialism is a no-brainer for intelligent people - it just makes sense to help those less fortunate than yourself
2) Atheism is a no-brainer for intelligent people - it just makes sense...
3) Intelligent parents have no need to produce dozens of brainwashed children... 1-2 smart children are better than 6 stupid ones destined for welfare




Newsflash: Atheists are a minority... you cannot blame the world's problems on 3% of the population... try blaming the 97% (religion) for your problems

Why blame the Mormons, and Jews and Atheists for all of your problems?

Why do religious people always blame and hate everyone?

I'm trying of trying to understand that too, bro. I'm atheist, WHY PEOPLE DON'T RESPECT THAT? I'm NOT a demon or something, I'm human being capable of thinking, unlike DISRESPECTFUL PEOPLE, who makes the world, the worst place I can imagine.

[CoinCube]

A Former CIA Executive's Advice On How To Make Hard Decisions
A five-step decision-making process from a man who spent 25 years making life-and-death decisions.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3046600/know-it-all/a-former-cia-executives-advice-on-how-to-make-hard-decisions

1.   FIND THE REAL QUESTION - Start with what you’re trying to accomplish and work your way back, instead of moving forward and making conclusions.

2.   IDENTIFY YOUR "DRIVERS” - This approach gives you a way to manage data.

3.   DECIDE ON YOUR METRICS - Decide what metrics you’ll use to measure how the problem and solution are evolving over time.

4.   COLLECT THE DATA - Aggressively question the validity of your data. Once you have your data sorted, give yourself a grade that represents your confidence in assessing your question.

5.   LOOK FOR WHAT’S MISSING - Every time you go into a problem, and before you rip into data, ask yourself, ‘Am I sure where I’m heading?’"

[CoinCube]

Mouse Utopia

In 1968 Dr. Calhoun created 'Mouse Utopia' a large fixed environment with unlimited food, and water, free of disease and predators intermittently cleaned and regularly resupplied. Four pairs of mice were introduced into the 'utopia' on July 9 1968. Initially they thrived exhibiting exponential growth then something changed.

http://tomax7.com/HeyGod/misc/MousePopulationStudy.PDF

As the unusually large number of young gained adulthood they had to remain,and they did contest for roles in the filed social system. Males who failed withdrew physically and psychologically; they became very inactive and aggregated in large pools near the centre of the floor of the universe. From this point on they no longer initiated interaction with their established associates,nor did their behavior elicit attack by the most territorial males. Even so, they became characterized by many wounds and much scar tissue as a result of attacks by other withdrawn males.

As a result of the extreme demands made on territorial males their ability to continue territorial defence declined. Gradually the frequency of this involvement in territorial defence declined as did the area defended. This left nursing females more exposed to invasion of their nest sites. Normally nursing females in the presence of territorial males exhibit little aggression. However, in response to invasion of nest sites and bases of ramps leading to them, the nursing females did become aggressive, essentially taking over the role of the territorial males. This aggression generalized to their own young who were attacked, wounded, and forced to leave home several days before normal weaning.

Maternal behavior became disrupted. Young were often wounded in the delivery process. Females transported their young to several sites, during which process some were abandoned. Many liters of young age on one survey disappeared before the next survey.

Population increase abruptly ceased on Day 560 after colonization. A few mice born up until Day 600 survived past weaning. Between these times deaths just slightly exceeded births. Beyond Day 600 the incidence of pregnancies declined very rapidly. Last conception was about Day 920.

Male counterparts to these non-reproducing females we soon dubbed the 'beautiful ones'.  They never engaged in sexual approaches toward females, and they never engaged in fighting, and so they had no wound or scar tissue. Their behavioral repertoire became largely confined to eating, drinking, sleeping and grooming, none of which carried any social implications beyond that represented by contiguity of bodies.

Most of the last of the population born were fully or largely like these non-reproducing females and these 'beautiful ones'(males). At this time only the 'beautiful one' category of males, and their counter part females, remained at an age normally compatible with reproduction, but they had long since failed to develop this capacity.

By March 1 1972, the average age of survivors was 776 days, over 200 days beyond menopause. On June 22 1972, there were only 122 (22male,100female) survivors. Projection of the prior few months of exponential decline in numbers indicates that the last surviving male will be dead on May 23 1973,1780 days after colonization.The population will be, reproductively,definitely dead at that time, although such death was predicted by 700 days after colonization. This demise of a population contradicts prior knowledge which indicates that when a population declines a few remnant groups, some individuals will reinitiate its growth.

The results obtained in this study should be obtained when customary causes of mortality become markedly reduced in any species of mammal whose members form social groups.

Prior theory indicated that a population in this type of environment would stabilize not go extinct. So why did it the mice in 'mouse utopia' die off? Some have argued that increasing mutation load is the cause but I find such arguments unpersuasive.  Dr. Calhoun created an environment that destroyed the social structure and social behaviors of mice. This led to their extinction.

Biology is often conserved and there is a simple biological model that expanded and extrapolated might account for the extinction seen in mouse utopia. That model is one of cellular apoptosis.

This experiment provides a contextual framework for the observations and papers upthread showing that both active group involvement in religious organizations and active group involvement in secular organizations are associated with health benefits.

[organofcorti]

Mouse Utopia

In 1968 Dr. Calhoun created 'Mouse Utopia' a large fixed environment with unlimited food, and water, free of disease and predators intermittently cleaned and regularly resupplied. Four pairs of mice were introduced into the 'utopia' on July 9 1968. Initially they thrived exhibiting exponential growth then something changed.

http://tomax7.com/HeyGod/misc/MousePopulationStudy.PDF

As the unusually large number of young gained adulthood they had to remain,and they did contest for roles in the filed social system. Males who failed withdrew physically and psychologically; they became very inactive and aggregated in large pools near the centre of the floor of the universe. From this point on they no longer initiated interaction with their established associates,nor did their behavior elicit attack by the most territorial males. Even so, they became characterized by many wounds and much scar tissue as a result of attacks by other withdrawn males.

As a result of the extreme demands made on territorial males their ability to continue territorial defence declined. Gradually the frequency of this involvement in territorial defence declined as did the area defended. This left nursing females more exposed to invasion of their nest sites. Normally nursing females in the presence of territorial males exhibit little aggression. However, in response to invasion of nest sites and bases of ramps leading to them, the nursing females did become aggressive, essentially taking over the role of the territorial males. This aggression generalized to their own young who were attacked, wounded, and forced to leave home several days before normal weaning.

Maternal behavior became disrupted. Young were often wounded in the delivery process. Females transported their young to several sites, during which process some were abandoned. Many liters of young age on one survey disappeared before the next survey.

Population increase abruptly ceased on Day 560 after colonization. A few mice born up until Day 600 survived past weaning. Between these times deaths just slightly exceeded births. Beyond Day 600 the incidence of pregnancies declined very rapidly. Last conception was about Day 920.

Male counterparts to these non-reproducing females we soon dubbed the 'beautiful ones'.  They never engaged in sexual approaches toward females, and they never engaged in fighting, and so they had no wound or scar tissue. Their behavioral repertoire became largely confined to eating, drinking, sleeping and grooming, none of which carried any social implications beyond that represented by contiguity of bodies.

Most of the last of the population born were fully or largely like these non-reproducing females and these 'beautiful ones'(males). At this time only the 'beautiful one' category of males, and their counter part females, remained at an age normally compatible with reproduction, but they had long since failed to develop this capacity.

By March 1 1972, the average age of survivors was 776 days, over 200 days beyond menopause. On June 22 1972, there were only 122 (22male,100female) survivors. Projection of the prior few months of exponential decline in numbers indicates that the last surviving male will be dead on May 23 1973,1780 days after colonization.The population will be, reproductively,definitely dead at that time, although such death was predicted by 700 days after colonization. This demise of a population contradicts prior knowledge which indicates that when a population declines a few remnant groups, some individuals will reinitiate its growth.

The results obtained in this study should be obtained when customary causes of mortality become markedly reduced in any species of mammal whose members form social groups.

Prior theory indicated that a population in this type of environment would stabilize not go extinct. So why did it the mice in 'mouse utopia' die off? Some have argued that increasing mutation load is the cause but I find such arguments unpersuasive.  Dr. Calhoun created an environment that destroyed the social structure and social behaviors of mice. This led to their extinction.

Biology is often conserved and there is a simple biological model that expanded and extrapolated might account for the extinction seen in mouse utopia. That model is one of cellular apoptosis.

This experiment provides a contextual framework for the observations and papers upthread showing that both active group involvement in religious organizations and active group involvement in secular organizations are associated with health benefits.

Maybe they were atheist mice and therefore destroyed the world?

[CoinCube]

Maybe they were atheist mice and therefore destroyed the world?

I would imagine they were traditional mice interested in traditional mice things.

At least they started out that that way.

[BADecker]

Atheism is top poison, because it moves its people away from the only thing that can keep them from eternal damnation and destruction.

At least theism allows its people the opportunity to find out that they can have eternal life through God... the only way it comes to anyone.

[JustDie]

Atheism is top poison, because it moves its people away from the only thing that can keep them from eternal damnation and destruction.

At least theism allows its people the opportunity to find out that they can have eternal life through God... the only way it comes to anyone.

how about LGBT ? is that a poison ? , or it just ...

[Moloch]

[BADecker]

image

image

image

image

One need remember that atheism is religion, according to the dictionary definitions. Even if it isn't religion somehow, it is so close that it might as well be. Anything that one holds against religion for being religion, one can hold against atheism with the same correct fervor.

The strange thing about atheism that makes it a self-contradictory religion is, most atheists won't consider that atheism is a religion. This makes atheism a religion of non-religion. Atheists are some of the strongest religiously faithful people because of this.

[BADecker]

Atheism is top poison, because it moves its people away from the only thing that can keep them from eternal damnation and destruction.

At least theism allows its people the opportunity to find out that they can have eternal life through God... the only way it comes to anyone.

how about LGBT ? is that a poison ? , or it just ...

The difference between religions that are atheistic and those that are not is, if you don't have God, you don't have a chance to be saved in the hereafter.

Everyone makes mistakes. LGBT of itself is simply mistakes, and might have mistakes within the mistake that it is. If a LGBT person believes that God exists, he/she might have opportunity to ask for forgiveness for the mistakes, and receive salvation, everlasting life in the hereafter.

An atheist can't request forgiveness from a God that he doesn't believe exists. But even if he wishes for help to get everlasting life, he doesn't get it because he won't accept God, the only One Who can give everlasting life.

[Moloch]

One need remember that atheism is religion, blah blah blah

Why do you insist on making ignorant claims about Atheism... please stick to making ignorant claims about your own religion, thanks

[BADecker]

One need remember that atheism is religion, blah blah blah

Why do you insist on making ignorant claims about Atheism... please stick to making ignorant claims about your own religion, thanks

Why do you insist on misleading people with ignorant-like claims about Atheism. Notice how you even capitalized it, like the formal religion it is. As do the various US presidents, first you make a claim, then you do the opposite.

[organofcorti]

image

image

image

image

One need remember that atheism is religion, according to the dictionary definitions. Even if it isn't religion somehow, it is so close that it might as well be. Anything that one holds against religion for being religion, one can hold against atheism with the same correct fervor.

The strange thing about atheism that makes it a self-contradictory religion is, most atheists won't consider that atheism is a religion. This makes atheism a religion of non-religion. Atheists are some of the strongest religiously faithful people because of this.

Atheism is not a religion.

[BADecker]

image

image

image

image

One need remember that atheism is religion, according to the dictionary definitions. Even if it isn't religion somehow, it is so close that it might as well be. Anything that one holds against religion for being religion, one can hold against atheism with the same correct fervor.

The strange thing about atheism that makes it a self-contradictory religion is, most atheists won't consider that atheism is a religion. This makes atheism a religion of non-religion. Atheists are some of the strongest religiously faithful people because of this.

Atheism is not a religion.

If you say it enough, you just might strengthen your atheism religious faith.      Just don't look up those nasty dictionary definitions. They just might destroy your atheism faith.

[magnific61]

All those things are stupid.

[organofcorti]

image

image

image

image

One need remember that atheism is religion, according to the dictionary definitions. Even if it isn't religion somehow, it is so close that it might as well be. Anything that one holds against religion for being religion, one can hold against atheism with the same correct fervor.

The strange thing about atheism that makes it a self-contradictory religion is, most atheists won't consider that atheism is a religion. This makes atheism a religion of non-religion. Atheists are some of the strongest religiously faithful people because of this.

Atheism is not a religion.

If you say it enough, you just might strengthen your atheism religious faith.      Just don't look up those nasty dictionary definitions. They just might destroy your atheism faith.

Of all the dictionary definitions I looked at more than 90% mentioned gods or supernatural beings at being integral to a religion. I have more faith in dictionaries than you do.

[BADecker]

All those things are stupid.

Atheists aren't stupid... just deceived by the devil and their own, selfish lusts.

[BADecker]

image

image

image

image

One need remember that atheism is religion, according to the dictionary definitions. Even if it isn't religion somehow, it is so close that it might as well be. Anything that one holds against religion for being religion, one can hold against atheism with the same correct fervor.

The strange thing about atheism that makes it a self-contradictory religion is, most atheists won't consider that atheism is a religion. This makes atheism a religion of non-religion. Atheists are some of the strongest religiously faithful people because of this.

Atheism is not a religion.

If you say it enough, you just might strengthen your atheism religious faith.      Just don't look up those nasty dictionary definitions. They just might destroy your atheism faith.

Of all the dictionary definitions I looked at more than 90% mentioned gods or supernatural beings at being integral to a religion. I have more faith in dictionaries than you do.

Now you seem to be saying that dictionaries are religions, and that you believe them, too. Self-contradictory atheist.

[Moloch]

One need remember that atheism is religion, blah blah blah

Why do you insist on making ignorant claims about Atheism... please stick to making ignorant claims about your own religion, thanks

Why do you insist on misleading people with ignorant-like claims about Atheism.

Why do you insist on calling Atheism a religion?

Is it so you can point and say, "haha, you're a religion too"?  I don't get it...