Heaven is 'a fairy story,' scientist Stephen Hawking says..

[moshquerade]

Well, he's right...

You two are basically screaming "INTOLERANCE!" at each other, and so far he's presented a pretty darn good argument...

Not at all Eli. Surprised you can't see that. I have not called him stupid for his beliefs. I really don't care what his beliefs are. I'm not here to criticize them. I am not showing any intolerance. He is the one calling out Christians.

 

[JackBurton]

Not at all Eli. Surprised you can't see that. I have not called him stupid for his beliefs. I really don't care what his beliefs are. I'm not here to criticize them. I am not showing any intolerance. He is the one calling out Christians.

It's VERY difficult to criticize logic and facts, but you are more than welcome to try. Now this is the complete OPPOSITE of Christian beliefs. And as soon as you come up with some facts to back your beliefs, I'll start to take you seriously. Until then, anyone who pretends to drink their God's blood every Sunday will be referred to as a "retard" in my book. I might even upgrade that to "crazy retard" if you want me to be more specific.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It's VERY difficult to criticize logic and facts, but you are more than welcome to try. Now this is the complete OPPOSITE of Christian beliefs. And as soon as you come up with some facts to back your beliefs, I'll start to take you seriously. Until then, anyone who pretends to drink their God's blood every Sunday will be referred to as a "retard" in my book. I might even upgrade that to "crazy retard" if you want me to be more specific.

I give this rant 7/10.

 

[JackBurton]

I give this rant 7/10.

Ah, I'm going to have to work on my rant skills.

 

[Lifted]

Not at all Eli. Surprised you can't see that. I have not called him stupid for his beliefs. I really don't care what his beliefs are. I'm not here to criticize them. I am not showing any intolerance. He is the one calling out Christians.

You feeling the need to play Christian Knight in a post about Hawking on a tech forum at 11:30PM doesn't help things. It appears you feel that Christianity can't survive a simple instance of having it's followers called stupid.

As much as I may agree with the man, I think Christianity will survive, so sleep well fair Knight.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Ah, I'm going to have to work on my rant skills.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion on things like an afterlife. The problem is that it isn't something which lends itself to examination. Personally I allow for the possibility, however I can't have much of an opinion on the subject, and nothing at all to say from a definitive viewpoint. How could it be otherwise? That's why I find it somewhat irksome when celebrity scientists are quoted regarding what is a philosophical conundrum. This is something that resolves itself one way our another upon death, but dead men tell no takes.

 

[SirStev0]

thumbs up.

 

[JackBurton]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion on things like an afterlife. The problem is that it isn't something which lends itself to examination. Personally I allow for the possibility, however I can't have much of an opinion on the subject, and nothing at all to say from a definitive viewpoint. How could it be otherwise? That's why I find it somewhat irksome when celebrity scientists are quoted regarding what is a philosophical conundrum. This is something that resolves itself one way our another upon death, but dead men tell no takes.

So let me ask you this, what kind of God possibility are you open to? Is it just a generic God? Are there any rules associated with this God? Do you get a prize at the end for believing in this generic God?

What I'm getting at is, what do you get out of leaving this possibility open? I pretty much leave all possibilities open, as long as they are realistic possibilities. Hawking cannot disprove God, just like he cannot disprove magic fairies. All he can conclude is that based on his findings, there is NO evidence of a God. Which I agree with.

 

[PowerEngineer]

We need a palm-to-forehead icon!

My understanding of what Hawking means is that he believes he understands enough about cosmology to explain how the universe came to be as it is without needing a supernatural "start". He sees no indication that a "god" has to exist, and therefore chooses to believe that "god" does not exist.

This is quite a long way from being able to state with certainty that "god" does not exist.

No one can be completely certain about the existance of "god", so chill out. Agnosticism seems like the only really reasonable position to take.

 

[TechAZ]

So let me ask you this, what kind of God possibility are you open to? Is it just a generic God? Are there any rules associated with this God? Do you get a prize at the end for believing in this generic God?

What I'm getting at is, what do you get out of leaving this possibility open? I pretty much leave all possibilities open, as long as they are realistic possibilities. Hawking cannot disprove God, just like he cannot disprove magic fairies. All he can conclude is that based on his findings, there is NO evidence of a God. Which I agree with.

I want to preface what I am about to say by stating that I am not religious in the least bit....

Mr. Hawking, along with every other theoretical physicist, can not even determine how many universes there are. If you want to berate the bible, go for it. I do think it would be stupid to berate anyone who believes in a God though. That would be retarded, considering the smartest men and women on the planet cannot even figure out how many dimensions there are.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Mr. Hawking, along with every other theoretical physicist, can not even determine how many universes there are. If you want to berate the bible, go for it. I do think it would be stupid to berate anyone who believes in a God though. That would be retarded, considering the smartest men and women on the planet cannot even figure out how many dimensions there are.

Gosh. Can anyone say 'argument from ignorance'?

 

[Malak]

someones bitter

I don't get why every time Hawking says something it gets in the news. I didn't think he was even that well respected in the scientific community. He's certainly no Einstein.

For the same reason every time the pope says something he is in the news. He isn't relevant but journalists are stupid and think he is. To journalists, all Christians are catholic and respect the pope just like all scientists are followers of Hawking.

 

[Locut0s]

For the same reason every time the pope says something he is in the news. He isn't relevant but journalists are stupid and think he is. To journalists, all Christians are catholic and respect the pope just like all scientists are followers of Hawking.

Scientists don't "follow" Hawking. They may hate him for personal, political, or other reasons but that's different. Any paper that he has written that has been peer reviewed and accepted by the general physics community is taken as fact until someone can come up with a better explanation or counter example, it doesn't require a fellowship.

 

[Malak]

Scientists don't "follow" Hawking. They may hate him for personal, political, or other reasons but that's different. Any paper that he has written that has been peer reviewed and accepted by the general physics community is taken as fact until someone can come up with a better explanation or counter example, it doesn't require a fellowship.

I think you might have missed the point to my post, but I'll assume it is because it is late.

 

[So]

We need a palm-to-forehead icon!

My understanding of what Hawking means is that he believes he understands enough about cosmology to explain how the universe came to be as it is without needing a supernatural "start". He sees no indication that a "god" has to exist, and therefore chooses to believe that "god" does not exist.

This is quite a long way from being able to state with certainty that "god" does not exist.

No one can be completely certain about the existance of "god", so chill out. Agnosticism* seems like the only really reasonable position to take.

*Agnostic Atheism (since we've looked a LOT and there's nary a sign of a god, especially one resembling the bearded god so popular in western europe and it's offshoots).

 

[WaTaGuMp]

actually, it isn't.

Here in California its more like brown.

 

[davmat787]

Hawking has a radiation named after him, so don't mess with the Hawk.

 

[Kadarin]

Despite the fact that Christianity has been around for about two thousand years now, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that either God or heaven exist, so I'm inclined to think Hawking is probably right. I am, however, open to changing my mind if such evidence is discovered.

"Evidence" does not mean personal anecdotes or people trying to shout me down about how great Jesus is; I'm saying evidence in the scientific sense where God or heaven can be manifested under conditions that can be both observed and repeated.

 

[MustangSVT]

proof that god exists!!

 

[DougoMan]

proof that god exists!!

lol

 

[DirkGently1]

The only surprise here is that there are still idiots who believe in these fairy tales. The dark ages were supposed to have been over centuries ago.

 

[Red Dawn]

 

[rudeguy]

Despite the fact that Christianity has been around for about two thousand years now, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that either God or heaven exist, so I'm inclined to think Hawking is probably right. I am, however, open to changing my mind if such evidence is discovered.

"Evidence" does not mean personal anecdotes or people trying to shout me down about how great Jesus is; I'm saying evidence in the scientific sense where God or heaven can be manifested under conditions that can be both observed and repeated.

its impossible for science to prove God or heaven's existence. The scientific theory excludes them, so how could it possibly prove them?

It would be like relying on a color blind person to tell you what color your shirt is.

 

[Jeff7]

It's VERY difficult to criticize logic and facts, but you are more than welcome to try. Now this is the complete OPPOSITE of Christian beliefs. And as soon as you come up with some facts to back your beliefs, I'll start to take you seriously. Until then, anyone who pretends to drink their God's blood every Sunday will be referred to as a "retard" in my book. I might even upgrade that to "crazy retard" if you want me to be more specific.

Awwww, but ritual cannibalism is fuuuun!!!!....:'(

 

[Malak]

despite the fact that christianity has been around for about two thousand years now, there is no evidence whatsoever that either god or heaven exist, so i'm inclined to think hawking is probably right. I am, however, open to changing my mind if such evidence is discovered.

"evidence" does not mean personal anecdotes or people trying to shout me down about how great jesus is; i'm saying evidence in the scientific sense where god or heaven can be manifested under conditions that can be both observed and repeated.

jesus is great you stfu