The arrogantly anti-theist bent of recent posts to this thread are
quite unfortunate. I particularly take issue with the following:
external,
independently unverified polls, with unknown
demographic factors and unknown questions, have
expressed an overruling of both science consensus and
WP-local consensus.
Why is WP consensus not US general consensus? As
people become more educated and involved in NPOV-based
projects, the move toward rationality. NPOV requires
at least a rational basis for article craftsmanship,
which implies rationality in other areas.
IIRC, the typical MBTI for WPdians is quite different
from the average majority. WP by default is
represented by bookish, eristic types. PR crusades by
any particular irrational POV, regardless of its
representaion, is bound to fail, simply because
belief=irrationality, hence not NPOV.
That is exactly the sort of fact-dismissing POV pushing I have always
combatted by use of books of reference, and basic logic. There is a
reason why state-education fosters atheism, and it has nothing to do
with facts or logic. In the US, according to a survey published in
Nature in 1997, four out of 10 scientists believe in God. Just over
45% said they did not believe, and 14.5% described themselves as
doubters or agnostics. This ratio of believers to non-believers had
not changed in 80 years. The majority of academics however... I
shudder to think.
Jack (Sam Spade)