Saying that a couple of your statics don't add up to 100% I think you need to work on this... Sorry pal =/
God said he'd rid the earth of evil, there is still evil Odin said he'd rid the earth of frost giants. I don't see any frost giants around. HAIL ODIN.
Ok my thoughts, (which no one cares about) science is trying to figure things out that doesn't have anything to do with religion because most people don't care/like religion so they are forced to search for other ways to explain things but here's what I say say Christianity is correct people would go to hell or heaven with regular science you live and die so might as well convert to Christianity just in case they are right.
@Jester: Still here, my friend. No lock and delete yet. =) @schizo: It seems there is a healthy minority of scientists who disagree with you. I don't feel so loanly over here in my corner. =) @Imitation-Chees: The source I give doesn't seem to distinguish between advanced and not so advanced fields of physics. It's an evaluation of academia. If your rebuttle to me is that more advanced fields of physics is demonstrably more atheist, then it is your place to support your claim. Additionally, all the above fields of science do utilize the scientific method. @Top-Pawn: You obviously did not read the entire thread. The issue you raise is addressed. If you are interested enough to respond then please be interested enough to read the entire thread.
You said "if your rebuttal to me is..." Not "If you are rebutting." That's why I was confused because you said "your rebuttal," which shows you believed I was rebutting, when I wasn't.
Okay, very well. However, your claim is a counter to the consensus I have found and I have no need to validate it. If you feel the counter claim suggested in your response to me is more accurate, I encourage you to support it.
Hey, buddy. Calm down. I'm not looking for an argument LOL. I don't intend to make any factual claim, as I'm completely ignorant of this particular subject. I'm just sharing a bit of my own speculation about the topic.
Not upset my friend. I was only responding to your post. One way or the other, there was a claim in it... if you prefer, a suggestion. That's all.
Citation to what, fluffles. If you mean my statistics, look at the original post. I left a link to my source.