Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God


Recommended Posts

an automobile can't evolve from a box of scraps, unlike living creatures. Your argument is invalid.

I was attempting to equate the obvious intelligent design behind an automobile to things that exist in the universe, like how stars work or pehaps more related, the human body. Yes, I know that living cells can mutate and change function unlike a non-living mechanical device but its my personal belief that humans came about from some form of deliberate direction (like a car). Obviously, my take on this is unpopular so I'll just shut up about it.

My apologies to wellofsouls for the personal attack. Was having a bad day....

Obviously, my take on this is unpopular so I'll just shut up about it.

Meh, it's not that unpopular. I think the majority of Americans fail to believe in evolution, and it's an interesting topic for debate whichever side your opinion may lay :)

I think half of the reason evolution is so unpopular in America however, is that it's rarely understood. I'm not sure how well it's taught in American schools, but from what I've seen it cannot be in much depth.

I know that living cells can mutate and change function

This, for example, is to my knowledge wrong.

Mutations mainly arise in offspring when compared to the parent/parents, because DNA is replicated incorrectly, not in living cells. This is also the only time it would have any real effect on survival value/evolution in the long term, as mutation of the cells in a living organism would not be passed on to offspring.

Wow, I was under the impression that this was just another new article that anyone was free to read and discuss. My deepest apologies for overstepping my bounds :whistle: Who exactly bestowed upon you the authority to tell others here where they have business being? If this was supposed to be a hardcore discussion on physics, I would've stayed out. You misunderstood some of what I was trying to convey which I normally would've been happy to elaborate, but since you've taken the opportunity to come off insulting with your smartass-like responses, I see little reason to indulge you further. Since you're so fond of the word "ignorant", I would like to comment on how "ignorant" your parents were for not considering the benefits of birth control prior to your conception.

well, I'm not saying you are not free to comment here, I'm just suggesting that when discussing things related to maths and physics, like the chance of spontaneously formed cars and spontaneously formed lifeforms, I think we should not just say "based on common sense", since it's a known fact that common sense matters little in maths and physics researching into the origin of life and the universe. Maybe I have worded it badly in my own rather casual comments. And I didn't mean to insult you for saying "ignorant on the age of the unverse", I myself is ignorant on many things too, I can't understand many maths and physics papers myself :p And I'd like to listen to what you are trying to convey and elaborate on ;)

Hey sorry, but his responses come off "holier than thou" which is a bit irritating. Like I said, I was under the impression that this was a simple read/comment kinda story, nothing more. And at no point did I ever make an attempt to guess the age of the universe! :angry:

like I said, I was commenting on the "Your're basically saying that everything we've invented over the course of our existence would've been made anyway due to the forces of the universe." part, which I may be reading into it too literally, that comes like a statement of what can happen with the age of our universe to me. My first language is not Engllish, so sorry if I interpreted it too literally. And I never meant to sound "holier than thou", I just reiterate some things I read from those "science popularization" books, like I said, I'm grateful to those scientists who explain things that I normally wouldn't be able to understand ;) And at times certain things from your posts like "No way a car is going to form radomly no matter how many gazillion years and particles you have in the mix" sounds a bit "holier than thou" to me too, but then I guess it's just easy to misinterpret the intention of others posts in an online forum :p

My apologies to wellofsouls for the personal attack. Was having a bad day....

no hard feelings, we both worded things badly at times, and I guess it happens a lot in online forums ;)

I was attempting to equate the obvious intelligent design behind an automobile to things that exist in the universe, like how stars work or pehaps more related, the human body. Yes, I know that living cells can mutate and change function unlike a non-living mechanical device but its my personal belief that humans came about from some form of deliberate direction (like a car). Obviously, my take on this is unpopular so I'll just shut up about it.

My apologies to wellofsouls for the personal attack. Was having a bad day....

The car analogy is a huge failure, because for one you can go to an automobile plant and actually see the cars being built, so your evidence on whom created said car is right there in front of you, no one has yet been able to provide evidence that the universe's creation was God's work.

Allah (GOD) is creator of this universe. This verse simply explain. So just reflect.

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding

Also This

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, and the ships which sail through the sea with that which is of use to mankind, and the water (rain) which Allaah sends down from the sky and makes the earth alive therewith after its death, and the moving (living) creatures of all kinds that He has scattered therein, and in the veering of winds and clouds which are held between the sky and the earth, are indeed Ayaat (proofs, evidences, signs, etc.) for people of understanding.

Allah (GOD) is creator of this universe. This verse simply explain. So just reflect.

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding

Also This

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, and the ships which sail through the sea with that which is of use to mankind, and the water (rain) which Allaah sends down from the sky and makes the earth alive therewith after its death, and the moving (living) creatures of all kinds that He has scattered therein, and in the veering of winds and clouds which are held between the sky and the earth, are indeed Ayaat (proofs, evidences, signs, etc.) for people of understanding.

Those are just words, they don't suffice as credible evidence. Again, show me a photo of god and/or him in the act of creating said universe and i'll convert...

The car analogy is a huge failure, because for one you can go to an automobile plant and actually see the cars being built, so your evidence on whom created said car is right there in front of you, no one has yet been able to provide evidence that the universe's creation was God's work.

So who has given them material to build car. Actually you just take a point. Just reach threshold of any thing and you will reach GOD. My teacher once said a thing which is created by some one does not know its creator. Do computers know their creators. (We are our fake creators but infact there creator is also GOD.)

Those are just words, they don't suffice as credible evidence. Again, show me a photo of god and/or him in the act of creating said universe and i'll convert...

Assume we are creator of computer, so computer really ever know their "Creator" . Plus if GOD is someone which can be seen directly than that is simply contradiction of nature. :shifty:

So who has given them material to build car. Actually you just take a point. Just reach threshold of any thing and you will reach GOD. My teacher once said a thing which is created by some one does not know its creator. Do computers know their creators. (We are our fake creators but infact there creator is also GOD.)

You never attended school did you?

Assume we are creator of computer, so computer really ever know their "Creator" . Plus if GOD is someone which can be seen directly than that is simply contradiction of nature. :shifty:

Uh... yea, sure pal

What do you mean by "You ever attented school?'

He never said "ever" The words he used: "You never attended school did you?"

It's what you call a rhetorical question! A form of sarcasm!

So who has given them material to build car. Actually you just take a point. Just reach threshold of any thing and you will reach GOD. My teacher once said a thing which is created by some one does not know its creator. Do computers know their creators. (We are our fake creators but infact there creator is also GOD.)

Assume we are creator of computer, so computer really ever know their "Creator" . Plus if GOD is someone which can be seen directly than that is simply contradiction of nature. :shifty:

But there is evidence that computers were created by man, as you would expect. There is, however, no evidence we were created by a god, as you would also expect to see in nature if it were true.

A universe created by an omnipotent being should be quite different to one in which things arose through the inevitable application of natural laws. For example, it shouldn't be as wasteful. There is a vast amount of space in the universe which has gone unused, and we occupy only the smallest fraction of it. Not very efficient if it was made for us.

We, as a species, should also lack vestigial organs if we had merely been created. Instead we seem to have quite a few, and our bodies are also shockingly inefficient for something designed by an omniscient/omnipotent creator. Quite simply, we look like we were created via the process of evolution, and since transitional fossils support this, it renders your hypothesis of a creator really quite unnecessary.

And that's all before we even get onto the complexity of a proposed god, and start applying Occam's razor to show it as a far less favourable concept.

Why he would ever want to do that. I hate sarcasm. :blush:

Probably because you assumed we would take the words of a holy book "on faith". ;) Atheists tend to be ill equipped to follow circular logic so easily.

Atlast you have to believe that there is no GOD but Allah. If you really want to know than just PM me.

Sorry but that completely skipped my points.

All the flaws for the hypothesis of a creator apply to Allah as well as any other. He is just as unlikely to exist, based on all available evidence, as Thor, Zeus or any other deity.

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, and the ships which sail through the sea with that which is of use to mankind, and the water (rain) which Paulz0r sends down from the sky and makes the earth alive therewith after its death, and the moving (living) creatures of all kinds that He has scattered therein, and in the veering of winds and clouds which are held between the sky and the earth, are indeed Ayaat (proofs, evidences, signs, etc.) for people of understanding.

^^

I have paraphrased the above and replaced 'Allah' with 'Paulz0r'. That verse simply explains everything.

I created the universe, bitches.

Allah (GOD) is creator of this universe. This verse simply explain. So just reflect.

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding

Also This

Verily! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day, and the ships which sail through the sea with that which is of use to mankind, and the water (rain) which Allaah sends down from the sky and makes the earth alive therewith after its death, and the moving (living) creatures of all kinds that He has scattered therein, and in the veering of winds and clouds which are held between the sky and the earth, are indeed Ayaat (proofs, evidences, signs, etc.) for people of understanding.

The funny thing is christianity and islam are based on pagan religions. Specifically, Horus and Isis. So much for originality lol.

No one created physics, it is just a term we use.

Um, no. The "Big Bang" is what created physics as we know it. According to scientists anyway. I don't believe in any of these theories. I think it's asinine to believe that any one theory (or any of them for that matter) can be an accepted rule. They are all guesses. Period. Anyway, if there was a big bang, according to them, it is what made the universe's rules work as they do.

Assume we are creator of computer, so computer really ever know their "Creator" . Plus if GOD is someone which can be seen directly than that is simply contradiction of nature. :shifty:

Computers are not sentient beings, so no computers wouldnt know us at their creator. Also show me the rule book that says "seeing god directly would be a contradiction of nature". There is nothing to even suggest that god (if real) cant be seen.

  • 4 weeks later...

Um, no. The "Big Bang" is what created physics as we know it. According to scientists anyway. I don't believe in any of these theories. I think it's asinine to believe that any one theory (or any of them for that matter) can be an accepted rule. They are all guesses. Period. Anyway, if there was a big bang, according to them, it is what made the universe's rules work as they do.

A theory is not a guess. It is supported by evidence and observation.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Read this in Humor Simpson 's voice, "Out of my way Moe".
    • You still can, its just under the Transform flyout for WordArt now
    • Likely nothing will be done in corporate America, there have been countless Tesla self-driving incidents. Then again, there have also been countless human operated incidents. It's literally daily news here in Canada, to the extent that it's now odd if we get a day where a collision doesn't get announced on the radio throughout the day...
    • SKG Hand Massager with Heat OS500 hands on by Steven Parker I was offered the chance to test out the SKG Hand Massager with Heat OS500, and full disclosure, they let me keep it regardless of my findings. Anyway, I jumped at the chance due to my long hours sitting at my desk, mousing around. Apologies for the knife cut across the top of the box; that was my doing, being a bit too heavy-handed with opening up the outer packaging. First up, what's in the box: SKG Hand Massager with Heat OS500 1x Type-C charging cable User Manual 1-Year Warranty (card) In short, everything you need to get started. According to the official Amazon listing, here are the key features: Full-Hand Air Compression: OS500 wraps your fingers, palm, and wrist with multi-chamber air compression for a complete hand relaxation experience. The extended massage chamber helps cover more of the hand and wrist area than standard palm-only hand massagers Palm Kneading with 6 Modes & 6 Intensities: Built-in palm kneading rollers add a hands-on massage feel, while 6 preset modes and 6 pressure levels let you choose the comfort level that fits your day—from gentle relaxation to a firmer full-hand massage 3 Heat Levels with Cooling Fan: Choose from 104°F, 113°F or 122°F warmth to suit different seasons and comfort preferences. The built-in cooling fan helps reduce stuffiness during heated sessions, keeping your hand feeling fresh and comfortable Easy Visual Display & Smart Timer: The digital image display clearly shows massage area, mode, intensity, heat level, and remaining time at a glance. Select 10, 15, or 20-minute sessions for quick office breaks, evening relaxation, or everyday hand care Rechargeable, Cordless & Comfortable: A 3000mAh battery supports over 90 minutes of full-function use on a full charge, with convenient USB-C charging. The soft inner lining, smooth ABS/PU finish, and premium black-gold design make OS500 ideal for home, office, or gifting With all that out of the way, here are my own findings. I gave it a try on both left and right hands, and as you can maybe see from the above YouTube Short, (sorry for the shaky video), my whole hand fits in, but my wrist barely enters the Hand Massager. I was able to push through a bit more with my fingertips extending out the other end to get a bit of massaging on the start of my wrist. Usage For some reason, there is a strap that is very difficult to fasten to my wrist with one hand. I am not sure what function it has, and it isn't mentioned in the user manual. The only thing I could find was in the product images that claimed "wrist precision". Unlike the Bob and Brad Hand Massager, this device does not massage the wrist anyway, even though a "wrist mode" is mentioned, which must be for smaller hands than I have, as it is mainly intended for the hand and fingers. In addition, for its steeper price, there are no disposable gloves provided in the box, which is a bit of an issue considering the internal cover (which appears to be elasticated nylon) cannot be removed for washing; so you are left with only one choice: always thoroughly wash your hands before using it. I can imagine this thing getting a bit grimy after a period of use, and that is a bit of a shame. With that said, the buttons on the device, from left to right, do the following: Heat button: 3-level heat control at 104°F, 113°F, or 122°F Mode button: Auto mode Circular mode Soothing mode Relax mode Palm and fingers mode Palm and wrist mode Intensity button: from (First-time users) 15Ka, 25Ka, 35Ka, 45Ka, 55Ka, 60Ka (Intensive relief) Knead button: on or off (6 pressure levels) Power button: Long-press to turn on or off Cooling button: turn on or off the cooling fan Also, in the product imagery, it states there are 36 "custom modes," but nowhere is it listed what these modes are. I can only imagine that they mean a combination of all of the above settings in different intensity levels. The device itself seems to rely on a single "kneading" mechanism located at the palm area of the hand, which spins when in use, and the other massage features are mainly utilized through the air sacs, increasing and decreasing at various levels on the hand and fingers. I am not sure it offered too much relief for someone who is typing and operating a mouse for hours at a time; further testing may be required. It does feel nice, though. Finally, you may be wondering how this fits into the scope of a tech website? Well, let me tell you something: sometimes I sit for up to 15 hours working on Neowin, and although I take breaks in between, it takes a toll on my body. I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief, a good massager like this Hand Massager can shed the strains of the day in just a couple of 15-minute bursts. On the official website, this has an MSRP of $99.99, but luckily for our readers, it is selling at $10 off for just $89.99 right now on Amazon. SKG Hand Massager with Heat OS500 for $89.99 (with $10 off coupon), $99.99 MSRP For me, this gets a thumbs hands(?) down. However, it could be improved by making it so that the protective covering could be removed and thrown into the washing machine, or get yourself some disposable gloves to use with it. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Thanks for the info, but I'm still not sure if I need this....
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      505
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      184
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      86
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!