CADRE Comments

 In part 1, I dealt with problems and concerned raised by the study itself and the data it used. In this section I will present ideas that counter the overall conclusions atheist draw from the study, namely that atheism must be true because it's believed by more intelligent people. The first argument that I present is about the lack of longitudinal data. The researchers of IQ are measuring either per-college or college students. Not too many of these studies measure IQ's of middle aged adults. They are getting them at a time in their lives when they are either beginning to want to leave home or when they have left home for the first time. Francis says the shock of the "atheist professor" is not as great as it used to be: The long discussed shock of freshmen encountering Atheistic professors at college and the transition problems from childhood beliefs to intellectually defensible beliefs have been reduced in recent years. Today the shock co

Today is the 50th Anniversary of the great "I Have A Dream" Speech by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. It was a great moment -- one that rightly ought to be honored.  However, we must remember that Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr's, thoughts were not borne in the atheistic or secular vacuum that today's media would lead you to believe. Rather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Christian. He was a Reverend; a preacher of God's holy Word. And his beliefs grew out of that great Biblical foundation of thought that has its base in the Bible.  Of course, with today's rise of the gay rights movement, some think that gay marriage is an extension of the things taught by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. Jr. The think that King's ideas about "justice" require that marriage rights be extended to gays and lesbians (and bisexual, and transgender, etc., etc.) And, since King advocated so passionately for equality, one might initially be inclined to think th

A new major study on IQ and religious belief has been released that has already caught the buzz in atheist circles. It's got a sophisticated and scientific approach to statistical methods, although that doesn't mean it is free of biases. The study, done by Miron Zuckerman and Jordon Silberman of the University of Rochester NY and Judith A. Hall, Northeaster University, Boston, is major since it combined a statistical meta-analysis of a larger number of studies ever done before. It's findings are overwhelmingly in favor of atheism. They used 63 studies showing a significant negative association between intelligence and religiosity." [1] (the study has been removed from the scribd source linked to) The study for all its statistical sophistication, is beset by some basic flaws that are more or less part of the package of buying into the atheist dogma about intelligence. Before really getting into I want to point out what atheists will do with this on

Dave's Challenge is a multi-part long-ruining theme on my blog:   Remember Dave wanted me to describe Chrsitain message without using any conventional language because he consider all the Christian terminology to be worn out, to have become so often used we don't think about it anymore. I thought I did pretty well but Dave didn't think so. I'm working on the premise that granting the problem Dave finds, worn out language, the other approach we can do, besides Dave's approach (which is chucking traditional terms and re-describing) is to re-define the old terms. I said: "I've already demonstrated how one might expand upon God talk without referring to God per se." Dave answers: You've touched on the edges of how one might do so, but still firmly rooted in a heavily theological framework and philosophical perspective. There's still the issue of Christianity.  No offense to my friend Dave, who is a professional academic an