Difference between revisions of "Talk:Essay: 10 reasons why American atheism will see a significant decline"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Rate of atheist decline ==
 
== Rate of atheist decline ==
  
The newly updated 2012 "Status of Global Mission" report states that atheism is losing 800 adherents per day rather than the 300 reported in the 2011 IBMR. Also, agnosticism is losing 1,100 adherents per day. Here's the link http://www.gordonconwell.edu/resources/CSGC-Resources.cfm -Clint
+
The newly updated 2012 "Status of Global Mission" report states that atheism is now losing 800 adherents per day rather than the 300 reported in the 2011 IBMR. Also, agnosticism is losing 1,100 adherents per day(I know the article is about atheism, but the agnostic statistic shows decline in secularism as well, good statistic for other articles.Here's the link http://www.gordonconwell.edu/resources/CSGC-Resources.cfm -Clint
  
 
== One thing you need to clarify ==
 
== One thing you need to clarify ==

Revision as of 18:26, May 15, 2012

Rate of atheist decline

The newly updated 2012 "Status of Global Mission" report states that atheism is now losing 800 adherents per day rather than the 300 reported in the 2011 IBMR. Also, agnosticism is losing 1,100 adherents per day(I know the article is about atheism, but the agnostic statistic shows decline in secularism as well, good statistic for other articles.) Here's the link http://www.gordonconwell.edu/resources/CSGC-Resources.cfm -Clint

One thing you need to clarify

You keep referring to the "leadership" of the atheist movement. What you haven't clarified is how many atheists consider themselves a part of this movement, and are followers of men like Dawkins and Myers, and how many atheists are not involved with any organized group, and are unaffected by anything it does. I have a feeling there are many more who fall outside of any organization, and who don't give much thought to God or religion or even their own lack of belief, or outright disbelief. --SharonW 10:14, 28 October 2011 (EDT)

I have never claimed the atheist movement has strong leadership. In fact, it could be argued that I have argued the opposite (for example, Atheism and cowardice). Plus, I wrote this article: Atheist factions. Nevertheless, your "herding cats" comment is a valid point. Conservative 10:43, 28 October 2011 (EDT)
SharonW, thanks. I added this sentence: "In addition, there is a lot of disharmony in the atheist movement (see: Atheist factions and Atheism: A house divided and in global decline)". Conservative 10:47, 28 October 2011 (EDT)
My point was actually not that there was disharmony, but that many people are apolitical, and don't pay attention to anything outside of their own lives. They're just not involved with any movements, or organizations, and many people who might consider themselves agnostic or atheist aren't even aware of these so-called leaders or organizations for atheists. --SharonW 14:30, 28 October 2011 (EDT)
Wired magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged males which would lend some support to what you have to say - as in "herding cats". Conservative 15:18, 28 October 2011 (EDT)
Thanks Sharon, I added this material: "Wired magazine made the observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men. " Conservative 15:26, 28 October 2011 (EDT)
Talk about completely missing the point. What she was saying is that most atheists aren't part of any "atheist movement." They just don't believe in gods.--RayFlagherty 08:16, 23 February 2012 (EST)

I don't think the atheists are ready for battle; it's like they got their middle ages armor on while they do an uphill climb on a grease-covered mountain as they read the wrong manuals on how to fight! Karajou 01:26, 7 November 2011 (EST)

Yes, the allies of atheism/evolutionism are getting weaker (liberal press, etc.) plus the atheists/evolutionists are totally unprepared for the onslaught of a grassroots campaign like the Question evolution! campaign. Conservative 02:44, 7 November 2011 (EST)

A thought

Atheists seem intent that there is no God- all while believing that we come from pond slime. They claim that God is some fairy tale that people made up while believing something easily as seemingly impossible. They should really actually listen to and debate creationists, instead of laughing them off as crazy lunatics.--James Wilson 16:16, 12 November 2011 (EST)

References

User:Conservative, could you please clean up the references? They look really messy! AugustO 08:04, 23 February 2012 (EST)

AugustO, thanks. Footnote #5 looked "messy" plus I got rid of two bare links as footnotes. Other than that I think the footnotes are fine in terms of formatting and I will keep them the same. Conservative 18:45, 26 February 2012 (EST)
Just the references? If you ask me the whole article's a mess. --RayFlagherty 08:13, 23 February 2012 (EST)
Ray, can you offer us better demographic analysis than Eric Kaufmann on the expected "great shrinking" of global atheism and how he expects it will affect Western atheism? Does Eric Kaufmann say that atheism will shrink at an increasing rate in the future? Is global atheism shrinking now? Is the atheist population esteemed by the American public now? What did Sam Harris say how the American public views atheists? Among various worldviews did a reputable survey say that atheists were the least trusted group in America? Conservative 18:35, 26 February 2012 (EST)

@User:Conservative: Other than that I think the footnotes are fine in terms of formatting and I will keep them the same. They aren't and you shouldn't:

  • Footnotes 3 & 4 are identical
  • Footnotes 5 & 10 are identical
  • Footnotes 11 & 12 are identical
  • ditto footnotes 23 & 24

If don't know how to handle multiple occurrences of a single source, I'm happy to give a link to a basic tutorial. AugustO 01:47, 28 February 2012 (EST)

I am really not into using the wiki footnoting format where one footnote is used for multiple citations. It makes it hard for future editing sometimes. Ibid makes sense for footnotes in offline papers though. Sorry, just a preference of mine. Conservative 03:02, 28 April 2012 (EDT)