Stephen Hawking on Religion: "Science Will Win"



fiannafailure

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
2,066
Hawking may indeed be proved correct over the long term, but you do not have to look very far to find that humans find it easier to believe in things rather than work out logical conclusions.

And many of the worlds most despotic leaders came to power using that simple truth.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
10,212
many people are afraid of death and miss their dead loved ones. A story which "fixes" these two issues along with other uncertainties about their destiny will be believed.

Emotions in humanity don't change and a lot of people will continue to be superstitious.
 

fiannafailure

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
2,066
many people are afraid of death and miss their dead loved ones. A story which "fixes" these two issues along with other uncertainties about their destiny will be believed.

Emotions in humanity don't change and a lot of people will continue to be superstitious.
Everything in the universe, including you and I, is fundamentally composed of energy and energy can be neither created or destroyed, simply changed into another form of energy.

It is therefore possible to propose an afterlife of sorts, serious scientists postulate that conciousness is composed of entangled energy fields and massless particles such as tachyons, which in theory travel faster than light, can explain such phenomena as precognition and the ability of twins to know what the other is thinking even whilst seperated by distance.

Maybe they are also the medium of prayer
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
10,212
, , can explain such phenomena as precognition and the ability of twins to know what the other is thinking even whilst seperated by distance.

Maybe they are also the medium of prayer
twins do NOT know this. Really, you think if you separate 2 twins and show 1 a number that the otther will know what the number is?

Magic isn't real.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
33,520
It is therefore possible to propose an afterlife of sorts, serious scientists postulate that conciousness is composed of entangled energy fields and massless particles such as tachyons, which in theory travel faster than light, can explain such phenomena as precognition and the ability of twins to know what the other is thinking even whilst seperated by distance.

Maybe they are also the medium of prayer
I lost interest in physics when the lecturer started talking about particles whose only function seemed to be to fit gaps in the quantum theory which he was explaining. It also helped that I didn't have the brainpower to be really good at the subject. Unlike those who write Wikipedia articles, I know I'm not Einstein.
What amazes me about Hawking is that someone who has based his whole life on creating a theory for which there is no proof, can be so certain that there cannot be a creator.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
10,212
I lost interest in physics when the lecturer started talking about particles whose only function seemed to be to fit gaps in the quantum theory which he was explaining. It also helped that I didn't have the brainpower to be really good at the subject. Unlike those who write Wikipedia articles, I know I'm not Einstein.
What amazes me about Hawking is that someone who has based his whole life on creating a theory for which there is no proof, can be so certain that there cannot be a creator.
nobody can be certain that there is no creator. but I cannot be certain that there are not invisible leprechauns that play in my kitchen when I am asleep either. Isn't the burden of proof on those that believe there is something?
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
33,520
nobody can be certain that there is no creator. but I cannot be certain that there are not invisible leprechauns that play in my kitchen when I am asleep either. Isn't the burden of proof on those that believe there is something?
I guess you're not Einstein either:lol:
 

fiannafailure

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
2,066
I lost interest in physics when the lecturer started talking about particles whose only function seemed to be to fit gaps in the quantum theory which he was explaining. It also helped that I didn't have the brainpower to be really good at the subject. Unlike those who write Wikipedia articles, I know I'm not Einstein.
What amazes me about Hawking is that someone who has based his whole life on creating a theory for which there is no proof, can be so certain that there cannot be a creator.
Substitute the word brainpower with the word imagination and preface imagination with the word constructive and get back to reading a Brief History of Time. ;)

There is a construction in a neuron which just happens to be the correct theoretical shape to act as an antenna for a tachyon, if indeed such a particle exists.

The various high energy collidors around the world are proving these particles slowly but surely.

Believe ;)
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
10,212
Sign in Einstein's office

Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
So you think that it is logical to believe in something of which there is no evidence because Einstein had a sign? what if a smarter scientist had a sign saying the opposite?
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
10,212
none of these soundbites make a case of believing in something of which there is no evidence.

I believe the Loch Ness monster rules everything that happens - you cannot prove me wrong and anything I don't understand I can attribute to nessie.
 

Fr. Hank Tree

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
5,845
It would be sad to see another great scientist get sucked into this fad that is quite fashionable at the moment. Especially as it is a fad that serves a deeper malignant agenda.
 

jdaly

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
2,904
so where were you and I a thousand years ago?
You were a will-o-the-wisp flitting around a Longford bog and I was a big blue bubble living with a big green bubble on an unknown star somewhere beyond yonder.
 

yellowfish

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
3,755
It would be sad to see another great scientist get sucked into this fad that is quite fashionable at the moment. Especially as it is a fad that serves a deeper malignant agenda.
I don't think that's very fair, if the fad your referring to is for the debunking or at least challenging of religion. It has been made clear that the scientific community has felt called out to the fight, called out by the more fundamentalist wings of religion, who are insisting for instances that things like intelligent design or even full whack creationism (at least its honest) Be taught alongside evolution as equal "theories", Not to mention the assault on logic that is most religious belief.
It is hardly a fad to get sick of fighting brush wars with gods spokespeople and decide to go for the old fake himself.
I fear you are being a little disingenuous.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top