Stephen Hawking:'There is NO heaven; it's a fairy story'- HAHHA

[Parker]

THIS IS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Computer wore Tennis Shoes?

[Dr.Ill]

That's funny, most books I've read make it a point to avoid the word 'explosion' and instead say inflation. There's a good reason for this.

Explosion means a very rapid expansion of particles through some sort of medium whether it be air, liquid or whatever you can think of. The main point is that those particles can never travel faster than the speed of light.

The universe expanded in a pace that was many, many, many times the speed of light because the space itself in between the particles inflated and it allowed the universe to expand the way it did. No explosion, inflation.

How many times have you seen energy converted to any living animated matter?  Your saying physics supports the Big Bang theory but never in physics has energy been converted in this manner....so I ask these believers to prove this phenomenon?

[loco]

When the scientist and Roman Catholic priest Georges Lemaître first proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory, Einstein initially dismissed the theory without thought or consideration, in part because it came from a priest and because it implied "Creation" and a "Creator."  

Einstein was quick to endorse both Lemaître and his theory only after Hubble confirmed the theory.


Georges Lemaître

[Tito24]

When the scientist and Roman Catholic  lee priest first proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory, Einstein initially dismissed the theory without thought or consideration, in part because it came from a priest and because it implied "Creation" and a "Creator."  

Einstein was quick to endorse both Lemaître and his theory only after Hubble confirmed the theory.


Georges Lemaître

 

[loco]

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet two atheists who have donated more money to charity than all churches combined.  Hope this helps.

False.  In the past 2,000 or so years, Christians have donated more money and time to charity than many Bill Gates and many Warren Buffets combined.

Christians do this because they want to follow Jesus' example and teachings.  But I see from your statement, and similar statements made by Richard Dawkins, that atheists donate to charity because they believe it is a pissing contest.  

Either way, I am glad that atheists donate to charity too, no matter their motivation.  This is good for the needy recipients of these donations.

[loco]

When the scientist and Roman Catholic priest Georges Lemaître first proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory, Einstein initially dismissed the theory without thought or consideration, in part because it came from a priest and because it implied "Creation" and a "Creator." 

Einstein was quick to endorse both Lemaître and his theory only after Hubble confirmed the theory.


Georges Lemaître

 

Indeed!  Thank you!   

[dogbowl]

Quantum physics is weird, therefore Jesus is your Lord and Savior.

A religious person once had a valid scientific idea, therefore all his non-scientific ideas were also valid.

[dogbowl]

lol dumbass  natural selection is not a force its a term describing an observed happening. there is no "natural selection" force, its just soemthing that happens.  yes, evolution is completely random in the scientific sense.  there is no cause and there is no purpouse, the mutations are widely varied and not pre selected, the surviving organisms are not pre determined and are completely determined bythe variables it encounters in its experience, all of which are randomly determined. 

the mutations are random, but the survival of the organisms is not random.

natural selection is a very cruel process.  if there is a god, he is a real sadist to do this to his creations

[Dr.Ill]

Quantum physics is weird, therefore Jesus is your Lord and Savior.

A religious person once had a valid scientific idea, therefore all his non-scientific ideas were also valid.

What makes his theories valid?  Where is the proof, no one person here is vaidating these scientist theory.....has anyone converted energy to an animate object and it became alive?

[YngiweRhoads]

What makes his theories valid?  Where is the proof, no one person here is vaidating these scientist theory.....has anyone converted energy to an animate object and it became alive?

We don't know the answer 'yet' to certain questions, so let's fabricate an answer instead of attempting to discover why things are the way they are.

[Shockwave]

We don't know the answer 'yet' to certain questions, so let's fabricate an answer instead of attempting to discover why things are the way they are.

The thing is, If you take a step back and really look, Science is just another belief structure that man has created, except it is based on observations that we use as evidence. (Thing is, the evidence we used is based on our ability to comprehend things. Sometimes there isnt a rational scientific explanation for everything. Some things are simply beyond human comprehension.)  
There is an equal amount of faith in believe that the universe "inflated" as opposed to believing that their was a creator.
Really take a step back and think about it.
There is EXACTLY the same leap of faith in both theories.

To go a step further, whos to say that "dot" that inflated, wasnt inflated by the creator?
I believe that is what someone else in this thread was getting at.

Both theories, same leap of faith.
However, those who hide behind science, will denounce the other as "rediculous", even though their theory (sounds) equally rediculous when you look at it without bias.

To me, the fact that science and scientists believe that we as humans will be able to comprehend everything and explain everything, is tremendously arrogant in the face of how small and insignificant we are in the grand scheme of things. IMO some things are just beyond us, and while I do believe that we can and should try and explain and move science forward, often I find those who point to science as the-be-all-end-all as highly narcissistic, arrogant, pretentious, and most of all hypocritical people. Not always, but often, especially in the case of someone like Hawking.

My .02

[Dr.Ill]

The thing is, If you take a step back and really look, Science is just another belief structure that man has created, except it is based on observations that we use as evidence. (Thing is, the evidence we used is based on our ability to comprehend things. Sometimes there isnt a rational scientific explanation for everything. Some things are simply beyond human comprehension.)  
There is an equal amount of faith in believe that the universe "inflated" as opposed to believing that their was a creator.
Really take a step back and think about it.
There is EXACTLY the same leap of faith in both theories.

To go a step further, whos to say that "dot" that inflated, wasnt inflated by the creator?
I believe that is what someone else in this thread was getting at.

Both theories, same leap of faith.
However, those who hide behind science, will denounce the other as "rediculous", even though their theory (sounds) equally rediculous when you look at it without bias.

To me, the fact that science and scientists believe that we as humans will be able to comprehend everything and explain everything, is tremendously arrogant in the face of how small and insignificant we are in the grand scheme of things. IMO some things are just beyond us, and while I do believe that we can and should try and explain and move science forward, often I those who put to science as the be all end all as highly narcissistic, arrogant, pretentious, and most of all hypocritical people. Not always, but often, especially in the case of someone like Hawking.

My .02

Bingo!  

[OTHstrong]

Bingo! 

x2

[#1 Klaus fan]

Science is all about believing things with little or no evidence. Now let us all wackos have a group hug. Fucking idiots. 

[Shockwave]

Science is all about believing things with little or no evidence. Now let us all wackos have a group hug. Fucking idiots.  

Way to prove my point. 

[tbombz]

the mutations are random, but the survival of the organisms is not random.

natural selection is a very cruel process.  if there is a god, he is a real sadist to do this to his creations

the survival of the organisms is random as well. what determines survival? random mutation interacting with the random environmental attributes. what causes the environmental conditions which determine which mutations survive? nothing, its all completely random.

what is cruel? is life cruel? would it be beter to experience life or to have never existed? no thing that has ever existed has any reason to complain, for their situation could have been worse and even more importantly they could have never even existed at all.

We don't know the answer 'yet' to certain questions, so let's fabricate an answer instead of attempting to discover why things are the way they are.

its not that we dont know the answer yet, its that there is no possible satisfactory answer except for God.

get that through your brain dummy

[#1 Klaus fan]

Way to prove my point. 

You had no fucking point.

[tendonitis]

x2

x3

[Shockwave]

You had no fucking point.

My point is that even though the Big Bang theory requires the same leap of faith that believing in a creator does, people like YOU will instantly refer to them as a fucking idiot for having that same leap of faith in something different than what you do.

AND that people who denounce anything other than science many times are pretentious, arrogant, hypocritical, self righteous cock suckers.
Thanks for proving my point so eloquently.

[#1 Klaus fan]

I love you too, Shockwave.

By the way, I created the universe. You just have to have the same leap of faith as with anything else.

[Rami]

The one question I would like someone to answer is, why is there anything at all?

When according to natural science energy/matter can not be destroyed, only transformed.

Therefore it was around before big bang. And energy in one form or another have always existed according to the physical laws in natural science.
 

So how can there be anything if it was never created?


natural science is limited

[tbombz]

The one question I would like someone to answer is, why is there anything at all?

When according to natural science energy/matter can not be destroyed, only transformed.

Therefore it was around before big bang. And energy in one form or another have always existed according to the physical laws in natural science.
 

So how can there be anything if it was never created?


natural science is limited

its "hip" these days to be an athiest. they think they sound intelligent.

[Rami]

its "hip" these days to be an athiest. they think they sound intelligent.

yes I come to this understanding as well. not all, but many atheists falls into that thinking. To pretend to really know everything is just immature.

[The Abdominal Snoman]

Bill Gates money is going toward sterilization and depopulation of the globe. That might sound necessary to some but deeper down the Gates rabbit hole you go, the easier its see that Gates is in fact a psychopath who is responsible for extermination of bloodlines.

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

[Rami]

Bill Gates money is going toward sterilization and depopulation of the globe. That might sound necessary to some but deeper down the Gates rabbit hole you go, the easier its see that Gates is in fact a psychopath who is responsible for extermination of bloodlines.

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

yes many of his donations or programs are questionable.

Granting money to research forced vaccinations through virus in mosquitoes etc.

The excuse is that this is a valuable experiment in the quest for ways to use mosquitoes to deliver vaccines to the masses at low cost.


to these people we are just subjects.