Made of Stars wrote:

Paul G wrote:Hopefully they'll soon realise they can't just spit out babies constantly, there's only so much of this planet to go round.

Not likely. The world's going to end tomorrow, remember?

HERETIC. It's ending on December 21st, 2012, at 20:12. Or 21:12. Or 21:20. Or 12:21. Something like that. Anyway, you won't be here on the 22nd.

I think it already ended, but we missed the bus.

Funny, I don't feel doomed.

Doesn't Ed West hate us Atheists or what? He isn't afraid to show it in his bullshit articles anyway. I guess this shows that maybe Atheists and other types of non-religious people (and some religious people of all religions) actually have brains since they know if they have loads of children the planet will get even more overpopulated which will bring in loads of problems and knows that all animals defy nature since it's in our nature to defy it.

The mention of the Amish for having such a high retention rate, probably due to the whole 'shunning' thing, you either are a good amish, or you are out of the family, out of the community, shunned, no communication at all.

I predict by 2100 half the planets population will have the surname Duggar

Millefleur wrote:I predict by 2100 half the planets population will have the surname Duggar

Only half?

Valden wrote:

It would be very funny if all the "Liberal" Christians were the only ones raptured, leaving behind the Fundies. They'd be both shocked and confused!

Actually i think it would be even more hilarious if the Jews were the ones raptured, they are the original God's Chosen no?

When that happens, Christianity and Islam suddenly would realize that this God they spend all their lives worshipping and killing for actually never gave a shit about them and they were just engaging in wishful thinking when they hijacked the original belief from the Jews.

I find the idea of 2 billion + people having their belief system rendered meaningless an extremely amusing thought.

Millefleur wrote:I predict by 2100 half the planets population will have the surname Duggar

I reckon half of them would either have Chinese surnames or Indian ones.

Lucy Wiggin wrote:

Weaver wrote:The simple fact that percentages of atheists has been increasing over time refutes his argument.

Increasing, sure. But are they increasing fast enough? An average Ultra-Orthodox family in Israel has 8 children. If 2 become Atheists, you still have the other 6 to deal with.

That's just the thing- the percentage of atheists is increasing, that is, the number of atheists is growing at a higher rate than the number of theists.

Weaver wrote:As someone above pointed out, atheists don't only come from atheist parents (informal sampling here indicates somewhat under 50%). Percentages of orthodox religious within the overall population has been decreasing over time, in spite of higher birth rates, while percentage of atheist/agnostic/no-religion has been increasing. So, in the end, the higher birth rates of orthodox religious types isn't leading to them "taking over".

Indeed. My parents are Mormon, but only managed to indoctrinate 2 of their 7 children.

Doubtdispelled wrote:

Millefleur wrote:I predict by 2100 half the planets population will have the surname Duggar

Only half?

The female half have to marry somebody, and even the Duggars must realize that somebody should preferably not be too closely related.

Prince of Gonzo wrote:

Weaver wrote:As someone above pointed out, atheists don't only come from atheist parents (informal sampling here indicates somewhat under 50%). Percentages of orthodox religious within the overall population has been decreasing over time, in spite of higher birth rates, while percentage of atheist/agnostic/no-religion has been increasing. So, in the end, the higher birth rates of orthodox religious types isn't leading to them "taking over".

Indeed. My parents are Mormon, but only managed to indoctrinate 2 of their 7 children.

Exactly this. Surely atheism is spreading fastest as a result of people denouncing their parents', and by extension all religion, due to general progress in the collected knowledge of the human race. If we had to literally outbreed mormons, catholics, hindus and muslims in the developing world etc - well, we'd never get any work done for starters.

juːtoʊpiə wrote:

Lucy Wiggin wrote:

Weaver wrote:The simple fact that percentages of atheists has been increasing over time refutes his argument.

Increasing, sure. But are they increasing fast enough? An average Ultra-Orthodox family in Israel has 8 children. If 2 become Atheists, you still have the other 6 to deal with.

That's just the thing- the percentage of atheists is increasing, that is, the number of atheists is growing at a higher rate than the number of theists.

New humanist, in the last issue, has lengthy interview with the author of the book. The argument he is making is that number of secular/atheist people is increasing, but they come mostly from the moderates, not from the fanatics, which are on the rise.

He also examines groups that have political agenda and plan that looks 200 years into the future. These people exist (to my surprise) and they actually intend to gain stronger political foothold by out-breeding every other religious/secular group.

To have full understanding of his arguments i guess i'll have to read the book, but New Humanist did not draw conclusions in the same way the telegraph's blogger did. At least not to that extent and definitively not using the same language

Am I the only one or is the moral of the story here that Atheists should breed more?
Any takers

I think my wife might get upset ...

Not to mention the miniscule chances of successful conception.

Prince of Gonzo wrote:

Weaver wrote:As someone above pointed out, atheists don't only come from atheist parents (informal sampling here indicates somewhat under 50%). Percentages of orthodox religious within the overall population has been decreasing over time, in spite of higher birth rates, while percentage of atheist/agnostic/no-religion has been increasing. So, in the end, the higher birth rates of orthodox religious types isn't leading to them "taking over".

Indeed. My parents are Mormon, but only managed to indoctrinate 2 of their 7 children.

Yeh, Mormon parents - but how many mothers did you have? The Mormons: loads of mothers...

Weaver wrote:I think my wife might get upset ...

Not to mention the miniscule chances of successful conception.

Hey, my partner and I will have second child in July, and we are older than you! It only took two tries... (OK, then there was the risk of spontaneous abortion, faulty chromosones, etc, but we cleared those obstacles).

Instead of counting on an increase of religious people through breeding and indoctrination, someone should calculate the drop-out frequency. Also, there are untold numbers of apatheists who don't bother with neither church nor identifying themselves as open atheists.

Weaver wrote:I think my wife might get upset ...

Not to mention the miniscule chances of successful conception.

Minisucule chances x large itterations = eventual out comes

Times a'wasten people!
I, for one, wouldn't mind the opportunity to mate with a wholesome atheist lady *Swoon*

P.s I should also mention I'm at work...and bored.




[edited because Im an idiot and didn't read what I wrote before pushing the button. Please dont let this reflect on me as a mate choice ]