There is no need for God..

[ChrisKH]

[QUOTE 1173612"]


It's crazy to think that Hawking is doing this for money. Crazy.


It's a counter-argument of the basest sort. Devoid of any thought, is just mud-slinging and plainly defamatory.

If you disagree with Hawking then engage with his arguments.
[/quote]


Well that's just it, none of us mere mortals can measure up to that intellect.

All we can be certain of, and this includes Hawking, is we have insufficient data with which to make an informed decision. Or you can choose not to engage at all, which is still a valid choice, however it may offend your sensibilities.

 

[adscrim]

there is no need for a God to "light the blue touch paper".

Surely he only included the statement because he's fed up of being used as a plus point by the religious when arguing about science and religion. The line about the 'knowing the mind of God' always gets trotted out without any thought of what Hawking meant when he wrote it.

 

[marinyork]

Well that's just it, none of us mere mortals can measure up to that intellect.

All we can be certain of, and this includes Hawking, is we have insufficient data with which to make an informed decision. Or you can choose not to engage at all, which is still a valid choice, however it may offend your sensibilities.

Not really to an extent, the books are out there if you want to read them. If you don't want to read them, well that's what this new publication is for. As for insufficient data I'm not quite sure what you're getting at there rather than a trivial point.

 

[ChrisKH]

Not really to an extent, the books are out there if you want to read them. If you don't want to read them, well that's what this new publication is for. As for insufficient data I'm not quite sure what you're getting at there rather than a trivial point.

Surely that's your downfall. The expectation is there, in you, that everything you need to know about everything can be found in a book. Which it can't. The only thing about which we can be certain of is our relative ignorance. Hawking is just slightly less ignorant than the rest of us.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

Hawking is just slightly less ignorant than the rest of us.

There, I always knew he wasn't more intelligent, just less ignorant. Chortle!

 

[Flying_Monkey]

I am not sure this is exciting any controversy at all. It's quite obvious there is 'no need for God' in any explanation of the origins of the universe. That's a perfectly rational, sceintific view, consistent with the evidence, and at the same time still does not rule out the existence of a god or gods. Next...

 

[marinyork]

Surely that's your downfall. The expectation is there, in you, that everything you need to know about everything can be found in a book. Which it can't. The only thing about which we can be certain of is our relative ignorance. Hawking is just slightly less ignorant than the rest of us.

Right, another christian spin thread, charming.

The books really are there to read and study and when I say things like books I'm including heps and things like that. Someone doesn't want to? That's fine. Someone wants to read the popular science books, again that's fine. Someone starts shouting at the side lines complaining when they haven't read either I think is unreasonable.

And thank for you for the lecture but what popular science books are there for like in this specific case is for people that cannot/do not want to read/study cosmology + GR + QM + EM + QFT + analytical mechanics/CoV/whatever + numerous maths topics to get a reasonable idea from a very fine mind. That said Penrose and Hawking I would say have a very sharp insight into seeing things through more study and you can pick up new and insightful things from these works even having studied bits of things (never enough).

 

[numbnuts]

[QUOTE 1173612"]

It's crazy to think that Hawking is doing this for money. Crazy.

It's a counter-argument of the basest sort. Devoid of any thought, is just mud-slinging and plainly defamatory.
If you disagree with Hawking then engage with his arguments.
[/quote]

That’s the trouble I’m a nobody that believes in God were Hawking is a man of knowledge and people will follow his teaching as he knows more then them, were I just read the Bible and believe in something I can’t prove, but my faith tell me that there was a Creator i.e a God that started it all off.

 

[BenScoobert]

That’s the trouble I’m a nobody that believes in God were Hawking is a man of knowledge and people will follow his teaching as he knows more then them, were I just read the Bible and believe in something I can’t prove, but my faith tell me that there was a Creator i.e a God that started it all off.

Do you believe what the bible says? Or just a hunch/feeling that there is a Creator?

 

[ChrisKH]

Right, another christian spin thread, charming.

Actually marinyork you couldn't be further from the truth. There is no religious drive or connection to my post. Well, not a conscious one anyway.

 

[marinyork]

I scarcely managed "A Brief History..". What chance do I have of understanding "The Grand Design", and will it have a profound affect on my beliefs (or lack of them)?

You won't have that many problems reading this. It's a very easy book to understand.

 

[XmisterIS]

I the same vein as Hawkin's suggestion that there is no need for God ... well, there is no need for XmrsIS to have a curvy arse, but hot damn, I like it!

 

[2Loose]

I the same vein as Hawkin's suggestion that there is no need for God ... well, there is no need for XmrsIS to have a curvy arse, but hot damn, I like it!

Well put.

He isn't saying that it wasn't, he was only saying that it didn't have to be, whereas before now, no reason could be thought up as a viable alternative.

 

[User482]

I almost understood The Brief History of Time, but got a bit lost towards the end. I seem to remember him discussing the weak and strong anthropogenic effect. Why is the universe so engineered that life is possible within it? Because if it wasn't, we wouldn't be around to wonder about it. But how probable is it that a universe would come into being with laws which allow life to evolve? If it's probable than God doesn't need to exist; otherwise He might.

On the other hand, we don't know how many universes have existed before this one. It's possible that the chances of the universe having the right conditions for life became a statistical certainty.

 

[GentleBenn]

On the other hand, we don't know how many universes have existed before this one. It's possible that the chances of the universe having the right conditions for life became a statistical certainty.

That's a good theory , I was watching a documentary the other day where scientists were discussing the likelyhood of all life on earth being wiped out ,an extinction event just like the Dinosaurs by a comet/meteor, butapparently it's not 'if' it will, its a case of when. But life on earth started again ! What if the Big Bang was when the Universe before this one ended ? Apparently the Universe is expanding ,but there will come a time when it will stop and start shrinking !