Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God


Recommended Posts

Growled

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

Got any proof of that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
brentaal

Got any proof of that?

You mean other than the fact that it doesn't meet the basic prerequisite for evolution?

Link to post
Share on other sites
JustGeorge

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....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nihilus

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wellofsouls

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 ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
vincent

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Del-Funky Smelly Be.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
vincent

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...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Del-Funky Smelly Be.

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:

Link to post
Share on other sites
vincent

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Del-Funky Smelly Be.

You never attended school did you?

Uh... yea, sure pal

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Farstrider

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Del-Funky Smelly Be.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nihilus

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Del-Funky Smelly Be.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nihilus

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul Paliath

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LoveThePenguin

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
chrismgtis

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mekun

Maybe hawkings is just bitter at god because hes in a wheelchair and has a robot voice. Just saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
qdave

Maybe hawkings is just bitter at god because hes in a wheelchair and has a robot voice. Just saying.

not funny.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alladaskill17

Maybe hawkings is just bitter at god because hes in a wheelchair and has a robot voice. Just saying.

fail, ignorant and bitter about hawkings intelligence. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Skin

fail, ignorant and bitter about hawkings intelligence. ;)

You cannot call someone who gave their opinion a fail, ignorant, and bitter. Well you can, but that would make you a fail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
remix17

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.