mckitterick: (Flying Spaghetti Monster)
mckitterick ([personal profile] mckitterick) wrote2011-03-22 02:22 pm
Entry tags:

Religion and Social Networking

Over on Facebook, I got myself involved in a debate on religion. I know, I know; I should know better. But it's fun, y'know? Anyhow, what prompted the debate was this article on the BBC about how relgions go extinct. Good stuff.

Anyhow, it got me thinking about my interactions there and over here, and I'm curious about my friends' religious beliefs. Am I just living in an insulated bubble as described in that article, or are those national polls on religion just manipulated? So, a poll!

Here it is, a Google Docs poll so anyone can use it: Are you religious? What social networking tools do you use?

Thanks!
Chris

[identity profile] piezocuttlefish.livejournal.com 2011-03-23 12:36 pm (UTC)(link)
Wait. I think you may have just called a group of physicist hobbyists doing simulations on a subject way, way out of their area of expertise [reductivist].

Hmm.

Reporting on the findings of a collection of hobbyists does seem a bit sensationalist, no?
ext_12541: (Default)

[identity profile] ms-danson.livejournal.com 2011-03-23 05:23 pm (UTC)(link)
I question the conclusions presented based on the data I've seen and the apparent assumptions. I think the whole article is poorly presented and possibly misleading (can't say for sure given the information).

I didn't know that they were physicists/engineers when I read it. The reductivist complaint may indeed apply here.

I agree with you that the title of the article and the way it is presented is a bit sensationalistic.

As for hobbiests in general... amateurs and hobbiests can, and have, contributed greatly to science and should continue to do so. Writing their work off *because* it is amateur or hobbiest work is overkill.

[identity profile] piezocuttlefish.livejournal.com 2011-03-24 02:47 pm (UTC)(link)
Agree on hobbyists and amateur scientists.