Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God

[matt4pack]

There is no god. The concept of deities was what humans came up with to explain the unexplainable. That's all there is to it.

It's time to drop a concept which dates back to the stone age and move on.

Well then what is your explanation of existence since you seem to know so much? Science can't answer that question which is why religion will continue to exist. Answer that question and religion will go away as you wish. As I said earlier even science has to shrug it's shoulders when when it reaches a certain point.

Just saying God didn't create the big bang doesn't really answer anything that we didn't already know and isn't going to make religion go away unless you can explain everything before the big bang as well which is probably impossible for the human mind.

[Malisk]

So what created physics and then what created whatever created physics? You get to a point where you just have to shrug your shoulders no matter what you believe in.

That question ("what created physics? why was physics created? how? when?") is precisely what, among others, M-theory that is mentioned by Hawking attempts to explain. (M theory is among the more popular and established ones)

This is why Hawking is impressed in the above article. That we have come so far as to build theories on this topic.

Note: Also, as one should always keep in mind in these discussions; don't confuse scientific theories with the common word "theory". There's an important difference.

Edit: Also, since quantum physics seem to be based heavily on randomness, as seen by experiments, and also since it was a dominant force "in the beginning", I personally wouldn't be surprised if the big bang was created by chance due to random quantum fluctuations.

[vincent]

Well then what is your explanation of existence since you seem to know so much? Science can't answer that question which is why religion will continue to exist. Answer that question and religion will go away as you wish. As I said earlier even science has to shrug it's shoulders when when it reaches a certain point.

Science shrugs it's shoulder all the time, it doesn't perform dishonest tactics by moving the goal posts and say god(s) is/are responsible

[grimman]

Well then what is your explanation of existence since you seem to know so much? Science can't answer that question which is why religion will continue to exist. Answer that question and religion will go away as you wish. As I said earlier even science has to shrug it's shoulders when when it reaches a certain point.

There is a documented correlation between lower IQ and being religious.

Since IQ is rising, it would be fair to assume we are going to shrug off such superstitious beliefs, not, as you claim, cling on to them like frightened children.

[Crompee]

That's the kind of attitude that promotes extremism when you think about it. I could tell you that being an atheist is barbaric, see what I did there?

over debating only hurts it never helps, so why not be tolerant and respectful of what others believe in.

but its the logical conclusion with the evidence we have at the moment, there is absolutly no proof for God.. Therefore God does not exist. It may turn out he/she/it does exist in some form but at the moment out knowledge suggests there is no God.

At the moment, there are no aliens. It does not mean that it isnt possible aliens exist or are out there, It just means our current knowledge of the universe says there are no other aliens. We can say there may be aliens out there or its likely there are aliens out there (although, we dont know how likely as we cant really put a digit on how likely life is to form, even if all the conditions for life to form are present.. It could turn out to be 50% chance for life to form if the conditions are right, or it could be 0.00...1%). That does not mean that 'there are no aliens' is wrong or barbaric, its just that our knowledge says there arnt any aliens that we know off.

We can however prove that certain Gods are not real, when statements about them effecting our life are made. We can prove weither that statement is correct is incorrect, like when someone says "God caused the earthquake cuz they're evil".. We can look into it and find that actually that earthquake was an inevitability and was just the laws of physics at work. There is currently no evidence for any religious god. A

God which created the Big Bang and setup the laws so that it has unfolded the way it has cannot be unproved but then again its pretty pointless, as it means he hasnt interacted with this universe since that moment and he only set the wheels in motion and then let everything happen without interference. It would actually show that the human race is just a spec of dirt to this 'god' and no more special than anything else, we've been around for a few million years; in the grand scale of the universe were nothing. If we was special and 'god' created this universe for us, why didnt he just created the perfect universe for us? without disease(which kills at random), genetic mutations which kill babies/children(again, at pretty much random), and other things like natural disasters? This universe is not a garden of eden for humans, Its more close to hell where we're constantly fighting the devil to stay alive.

Infact, it would be just as plausable to say the Devil created the universe to stop humans going to heaven. Any human which is born, should of gone to heaven to have eternal life but instead the devil stole there soul and sent them to this universe as a game for his pleasure.

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

And you know this... how exactly?

Logical thinking.

And science explains everything now?

Not everything. Yet. But sooner or later science will find explanations for everything.

By this reasoning, any concepts dating back to the stone age should be dropped?

Dropping the concept of deities would be enough.

[Malisk]

What created God?

This is indeed an even harder question to answer than "what created the universe and its physics", in my opinion.

I think creating a God to explain things is only making less sense, not more.

[Crompee]

The Same Hawkins moron that claims the Earth will be destroyed by aliens?????

He lost whatever credibility he might have had with retarded comments like that

You lost any credibility you might of had when you made that retarded comment.

Hawkins said we should avoid contact with aliens as it made have devistating consequences for Earth, as they not have the same morals as us or may regard humans as animals (much like we do to any other life form at the moment). He simply said that seeking to make contact with other intelligence life is very risky and may not end in a happy ever after story.

He never said that the Earth 'will' be destroyed by aliens, he simply said that if aliens exist and we make contact with them, they may want to pillage Earth for its resources (if the Earths resources are rare/valuable) and as such, it is risky seeking to contact aliens.

[matt4pack]

That question ("what created physics? why was physics created? how? when?") is precisely what, among others, M-theory that is mentioned by Hawking attempts to explain. (M theory is among the more popular and established ones)

This is why Hawking is impressed in the above article. That we have come so far as to build theories on this topic.

Note: Also, as one should always keep in mind in these discussions; don't confuse scientific theories with the common word "theory". There's an important difference.

I'm aware of M-Theory and fascinated by it. I just get frustrated by people who act like they've just solved the mysteries of the existence when really they haven't explained much at all. They would just rather bash a certain group of people.

I'm atheist but it's not a religion to me like it seems to be for so many who call themselves atheist.

[sudo]

Logical thinking.

The formation of conclusions from incomplete evidence is hardly "logical thinking".

Not everything. Yet. But sooner or later science will find explanations for everything.

Until it does, your conclusions (which are based on the hope -see the irony- that science will -at some point- explain everything) are false.

Dropping the concept of deities would be enough.

Since science can't rebut it with hard evidence, why drop this concept? Your reasoning implies dropping anything science can't prove, and that's a lot of things we depend on to survive as human beings.

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

putting replies inside the quote box is annoying.

Anyway...

Since science can't rebut it with hard evidence, why drop this concept? Your reasoning implies dropping anything science can't prove, and that's a lot of things we depend on to survive as human beings.

There's nothing to rebut. There is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of a deity, let alone any that could potentially be falsified by the scientific method.

That's why it should be dropped - it's nothing more that hearsay and wishful thinking.

[Kirkburn]

Sudo, Mephistopheles - stop replying within quotes, it's annoying if you want to respond to them :) Edit: heh @ M2Ys4U

sudo, so why invoke a god in the first place? Physics has a good track record of answering questions, whereas as religion ... well ... doesn't. I do agree that to put all ones eggs in the "science will know everything!" basket is verging on a faith/belief system itself, but it does at least have a track record to fall back upon.

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

@sudo:

Why should the burden of proof lie with the atheists? Why don't you or any other theist show evidence of the existence, or even the necessity of a deity?

[bogas04]

Whenever i had this discussion with my dad (yeah!) , i used to say ,

there is no God , its just some laws which came from nowhere , everything just depends on these laws , which are either discovered , or are yet to be. If , God was there , won't He/She , break these laws as and when He/She had to? Plus , i used to say , even if God is there , why would He/She kill innocent ppl in Tsunamis and other calamities ?

Whatever , no one can justify all this :p

[BajiRav]

Wasn't it obvious that God did not create universe? I mean why would he create such nasty things as gay people and abortions! Universe is ungodly, proved.

[Ently]

For some strange reason after reading that article i got the taste of fresh fruit salad in my mouth... anyone else get that?

[Shaun N.]

@sudo:

Why should the burden of proof lie with the atheists? Why don't you or any other theist show evidence of the existence, or even the necessity of a deity?

This. Why should we/atheists constantly be told to prove any of the Gods exist? because they are told they must blindly believe and not question if they exist. Which to me is even more of a reason not to believe.

[bjoswald]

I'd take his word over The Word.

There's no way I'm going to believe there's an invisible man, sitting in a cloud kingdom, watching over everything and creating all life by simply snapping his fingers. It's nothing but superstitious nonsense to sing our kids to sleep.

[sudo]

There's nothing to rebut. There is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of a deity, let alone any that could potentially be falsified by the scientific method.

That's why it should be dropped - it's nothing more that hearsay and wishful thinking.

Asking for evidence to back up a faith... that's ridiculous. Believing in a deity is a faith, it doesn't need solid scientific proof to exist. Denying a lot of human beings their faith (of the existence of a deity) based on nothing is stupid. Much like people believing in love, if they sought evidence of that, they would pretty much stop loving and believing they're loved.

My point is: Human beings who believe in the existence of a deity are as right (or wrong, depending on where you come from) as the human being who claim there is no deity.

Sudo, Mephistopheles - stop replying within quotes, it's annoying if you want to respond to them :) Edit: heh @ M2Ys4U

sudo, so why invoke a god in the first place? Physics has a good track record of answering questions, whereas as religion ... well ... doesn't. I do agree that to put all ones eggs in the "science will know everything!" basket is verging on a faith/belief system itself, but it does at least have a track record to fall back upon.

I did not mention "religion".

@sudo:

Why should the burden of proof lie with the atheists? Why don't you or any other theist show evidence of the existence, or even the necessity of a deity?

As a theist myself, I don't need evidence, I just believe and I will continue to believe until there's proof I was wrong. People like yourself who only believe in science, and rebut the existence of a deity NEED to provide evidence, because that is what science is about, hard evidence.

[x-scratch]

really we have a god ???? i would like to meet him then & tell him hes fake just like santa clause , tooth fairy & the easter bunny if you believe that then i got several acres of swamp land for sale in arizona

and if you have a problem with what i said stay off the net then

[brentaal]

As a theist myself, I don't need evidence, I just believe and I will continue to believe until there's proof I was wrong. People like yourself who only believe in science, and rebut the existence of a deity NEED to provide evidence, because that is what science is about, hard evidence.

Falsifiability is required for something to be scientifically disproved. God as an abstract vaguely defined entity cannot be disproved as it is not falsifiable. To make it falsifiable, one would need to provide a detailed definition of what that entity is and specific examples on how to observe it (wherein such observation would also provide enough data for to make conclusions).

Until then, requiring evidence for the non-existence of such an entity can be considered a joke at best. The side that wants to prove the existence of such entity has it easier as they can themselves define what God is, but they refuse to.

[Quattrone]

really we have a god ???? i would like to meet him then & tell him hes fake just like santa clause , tooth fairy & the easter bunny if you believe that then i got several acres of swamp land for sale in arizona

and if you have a problem with what i said stay off the net then

:laugh: I think humans needs a supreme power that they believe is powerful and bring happiness to their lives. I truly believe in what you said.

[Hell-In-A-Handbasket]

Personally I think this

(carved idol) or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; thou shalt not bow down to them or serve them; for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, punishing the iniquities of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those that hate me; but showing mercy to thousands of generations of those that love me, and keep my commandments.

Proves a problem, as with all the different religions, and those that don't believe, a vast portion of the world would be dead already, but their not

Unless each religions God is having a Holy Royal Rumble up there and the victor kills everybody else

[+devHead Subscriber²]

Wow, how can a law exist without a lawmaker? He talks about the law of gravity, as though it's a given that it just has to exist. But gravity is so misunderstood, everything we have to explain it is still theories. But it came about without intelligent intervention whatsoever? I'm sorry, but laws containing explicit and intricate information always imply intelligence. Show me some information somewhere that didn't result from intelligence of one kind or another. It just doesn't make sense.

It's a shame that so-called Fundamental Creationists put their spin on the Genesis account and try to say the universe is only several thousand years old. Genesis does not say anywhere that the 'days' spoken of in Chapter 1 were literal 24-hour days. And Genesis 1:1 is completely outside the beginning of the first day anyhow! Cosmology has proven that the universe is likely between 12-14 billion years old, and the Bible doesn't contradict that anywhere with its statement "In the beginning..."

Well that's the end of my rant. I'm pretty disappointed in Hawking. He has no real evidence that the universe was not a product of intelligent design.

[zeta_immersion]

Lex Luthor, a lvl.5 intelect ... he is like a night elf or some other cracy thing in WOW

this in interesting ... M-theory .. have never hared of it but does anyone know the gist of it?