Why are Atheists still around, when even Dr. Kaku renounced Atheism and Agnosticism in 2018?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

He said, and I quote, "The Multiverse described by String Theory is so perfect, that the only way it could come into being is if it were in fact Created by a pre-existing Intelligence." Dr. Michio Kaku, 2018.

This man has an IQ in excess of 180 and a PhD in Physics and top secret clearance to work on Nuclear Weapons.

Very simply, Atheists, since the Universe is controlled by logical laws which are always maximized, there needs to be an intelligent source of the Logic.

You may ask, "Where did God come from?"

I will answer, "The Frist Cause does not have a cause, but the First Cause does need to be self-eternal and self-motivated, otherwise nothing else would exist."

The problem for physics is that nothing in physics is "self-motivated", so you don't believe anything can be self-motivated, not even your own consciousness. Well, you're just mistaken that's all. A self-motivated First Cause is in fact a super-intelligence, because it gives rise to all other possibilities.

[Anonymous]

Lol i found this unreasonably (pun intended) hilarious.

The thing is that most people including myself have no idea of what exactly Dr. Kaku did.

It's hilarious to ask "why are a quarter of the world's population not arriving at the same conclusion as a man of 180 IQ."

Do you need a direct answer? Because atheists don't have IQ of 180.

[genericname85]

Most people don't have an IQ of 180 but atheists are statistically more likely to have high iq. Sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative but facts rarely fit religious narratives.

[Opinion Owner]

@genericname85 i never brought up any "narrative". I laughed at "why does a quarter of the whole world population not conclude the same way a 180iq person does".

I vaguely looked at your opinion thread, and, without bothering about the details, i think you both are right: white skins are correlated with higher iq. But also, whites are by far the most atheistic.

[genericname85]

yeah that's also true and people tend to use the fact to make racist arguments. but it's just that people who live around the equator didn't have to develop as much intelligence since they could grow food year round while people more north where seasons are extreme had to plan and strategize more making higher intellect a evolutionary necessity. so it's really not about "race". it's merely about the environment the ethnicities adapted to.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

@genericname85 That has nothing to do with it. It has been proven statistically that Africans flat out do not have the problem solving skills of whites, native Americans, nor Asians.

IQ tests are designed so that there is no bias for language, culture, or location of residence.

[genericname85]

yeah that's what i said tho. if the environment you live in doesn't force you to develop problem solving skills or intelligence, you won't. nature is efficient. intelligence is expensive. why invest into something you don't need? that's why there's absolutely a bias through location of residence cause that goes along with environmental factors. not over a few years but over a few 1000 years.

[strateguy632]

Because some people are pig headed and stubborn https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pigheaded

[strateguy632]

Oh and IQ 180 is not high when 280 is possible.

[strateguy632]

For example Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) has MAXIMUM IQ 160. "maximum Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) is 160." So on that scale a score 180 needs conversion 180/280 is x/160 so 103/160.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Tests that allow higher scores than 160 are actually too easy. I complained that both the WAIS and Mensa were too easy. They ask a lot of the same questions over and over again, instead of asking harder and harder questions. Only the Ravens squares test is progressive, and I could score well over 200 on that, as I'm just super-human at visual pattern finding. Vocabulary is actually my weakest topic on IQ tests, and I score around 135 in that section, because it is for some reason biased toward the Greek and Latin languages, even though it is not supposed to be.

[NathanDavis]

because god said so?

" let there be atheists... and let'em stick around... "

[Mike_Hum]

The venn diagram of atheists and people with bad relationships with their father is almost a circle.

[genericname85]

if you actually look at the facts, then religion matters less the more intelligent people are. the more intelligent someone is, the more likely that they are an atheist. outliers exist. correlation doesn't mean causation that means highly intelligent relgious people do exist and dumb atheists also exist. but if you look at the big picture and look at the numbers, the facts are pretty clear. but don't let the facts bother your delusion guys.

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 None of that has a single fucking thing to do with my reply.

[genericname85]

yeah my bad. must have fat fingered the reply button. wanted to reply to the other guy, not you.

[genericname85]

but what you said is factually not true. maybe that's your personal experience but that's not reflected in any sort of reliable statistic.

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 i'll take money on that bet.

[genericname85]

There's a statistically significant positive relationship between religiousness and relationship to father. I'm not contesting that. I'm saying that your claim that a ven diagram between atheists and people with negative relationships to their dads are a circle is absolutely false and I would highly suggest not putting a very high bet on that claim cause you you will lose that money.

[genericname85]

And I'm willing to bet if you go into multi variate regression to analyze the determinants of positive relationship to the father, the religiousness variables will shrink into insignificance cause it's other factors that are way stronger variables in determining a good bond your father than religion

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 prove me wrong

[genericname85]

I'm an atheist and I have a great relationship with my dad. So since your claim was so extreme, it just needs one single example to show you're wrong.

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 I said 'almost'. So not quite.

[genericname85]

So let's say I make the effort and actually Google up the relevant social scientific literature, that shows that most atheists have a great relationships with their dads. Will you say "ok I was wrong" or will you do the religious thing and ignore the evidence and favor what you believe despite the facts? Cause that's my experience with providing evidence to anyone religious and if that's gonna the result, it's not worth the effort at all.

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 lol, the "religious thing". hahaha. You don't go after "anyone religious", you go after Christians.

[genericname85]

no i don't. i think no god exists, not just the christian one exclusively. that's the definition of atheism my dude xD

[genericname85]

here's your proof by the way https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4318262/

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 RIght, but you don't spout your anti-religion bullshit in front of muslims.

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85
Results indicated that those who became religious were higher in social competence than those who left a religion. Additionally, those who switched away from their parent’s religion were lower in parent communication than those who switched to their parent’s religion.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

In other words, the high IQ atheist just misread his own source material.

[Mike_Hum]

bingo.

[Mike_Hum]

and the material he referenced doesn't just include a "religious->atheist move" but even christian->muslim or even from catholic->protestant.

[genericname85]

you must conveniently missed the part where it found "Atheists or nonreligious individuals do not exhibit poorer father attachments overall" indicating there's no big statistically significant correlation so your claim about the ven diagramm is wrong.

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 like where you missed this part:

argued that secondary compensation is a large part of religiousness and religious organizations and that atheism might be more common among those with fewer, less intimate personal relationships. Indeed, data support this claim by illustrating that those who have fewer intimate relationships (e. g., those single or cohabiting, having no children, those who would not like to go to a family reunion or family trip) and with lower quality relations with friends (e. g., those less likely to want cook a festive meal, less likely to say friends “will be there for me”, more likely to move residence) were more likely to be atheists.

[genericname85]

yeah i never said i was speaking about christian exclusively. by the way: "those who became religious were higher in social competence" that comes from the fact that through religious tradition people thend to have more social exposure (through attendance of relligious services) than non religious folks. so you might assume the "reason" for their improvement is religion but it's not.

[Mike_Hum]

And that phrase you posted is not in your link

[genericname85]

"might be more common among those with fewer, less intimate personal relationships". "might". that's a guess. not a statement of fact. also that doesn't show that there's a difference as extreme as you indicated. so it can be concluded: i was right you were wrong.

[Mike_Hum]

@genericname85 absolutely you aren't correct, but if it helps you feel better at night, no skin off my teeth.

[jshm2]

The same reason anti-vaxxers and flat earthers are still around. There is no cure for human stupidity.

[FunkyMonkee]

When Dr. Kaku shows up holding hands with god, I'll believe. Until then, there's no such thing as god!!

[genericname85]

does having 180 iq make it possible to believe in something that isn't true?

[genericname85]

also how do you explain then that high iq correlates so strongly with atheism that you can actually accurately predict the proportion of atheists in a society by looking at the average IQ of that society and the higher it is, the more atheists they'll ahve?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

the actual average IQ of white people in the United States is in the 120s. The national average is around 107 officially, but that is heavily weighted DOWNWARD by the fact the average African American has an IQ of just 80, while native Africans have an average IQ of 65.

When I was 21 years old I had tested with Mensa and the High IQ Society and found to have IQ around 187. Even after I had my strokes, I retested with WAIS and Mensa and found it to be in the 145 range.

You literally will never convince me of the non-existence of God, because I'm far too smart to be convinced that everything came from nothing for no reason: You'd have to be a complete fool to believe that.

[genericname85]

you're confusing being "smart" with being "deluded". cause no ammount of smarts can make something true that is not true and someone that is smart will always be open to being corrected if wrong, which is the opposit of what you say you do. the only way to resist facts and still believe what is untrue is possible with delusion and you quite explicitly told here that you plan on staying deluded, so there's nothing else for me to say. can't reason a person out of a position that they never "reasoned" themself into.

[genericname85]

and by the way ethnicly white americans average around 100-103 iq. the average iq of the USA overall is 97-100. but i know your delusion isn't bothered by the facts, so you'll ignore that as well.

[In_Trance]

Clearly atheists and agnostics don't give a shit what that dick head has to say

[genericname85]

Well why would Atheist listen to the one outlier? Most high iq people are atheists.