User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:26:59 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. I believe it's called "whistling past the graveyard" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:27:09 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:28:53 AM EDT
[#3]
Every time I have blown something up, and it made a Big Bang, it typically left small pieces of the original object. Not once have I blown up, let's say a mound of scrap metal, and out popped a brand new chevy 1500.
Science always seems to prove the magnificent of our creator. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:29:05 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? Matter is created, and God is the creator. You assume that God is matter and therefore "needs to be created." One other thing. I find it amusing that these scientists likes to delve deep into black holes, quarks, anti-matter etc. I think they should learn to walk before they run and answer more mundane questions such as: how does gravity work? How is it generated? I'd like them to be able to shoot 100 yards before they starts going for the 1000 yard target. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:29:53 AM EDT
[#5]
Actually, the problem is that you'll never be able to prove, or disprove, the existence of God in a scientifically acceptable manner.
Belief in God is about just that, belief...faith. If it could be proven one way or the other, faith would not be required. So the faithful criticize the non-believers for their lack of faith and the non-believers excoriate the faithful for their stupidity in believing. So it goes...Carry on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:30:16 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They see others receiving great peace and comfort from their faith, while they themselves, are left out, so they want to prevent others from having what they do not themselves have. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. They see others receiving great peace and comfort from their faith, while they themselves, are left out, so they want to prevent others from having what they do not themselves have. Maybe some feel this way, but there are strange people with strange behavior everywhere, regardless of what you believe. Myself, I have seen first hand how strong faith can help a person through trying times, and I felt glad that they found that comfort. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:30:20 AM EDT
[#7]
Oh Jesus Christ........the string theory again!!??
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:30:27 AM EDT
[#8]
To not believe in something they sure do spend a lot of time talking about it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:30:36 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why does a drunk our a junkie only hang with drunk junkies? They don't want to be judged by straight folk and viewed as , LOSSERS. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. Why does a drunk our a junkie only hang with drunk junkies? They don't want to be judged by straight folk and viewed as , LOSSERS. could someone translate this to English...please. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:32:40 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just as the human mind cannot truly grasp a universe that never ends, so we are unable to grasp the concept that a higher being (God) is, and always was. Matter is created, and God is the creator. You assume that God is matter and therefore "needs to be created." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? Matter is created, and God is the creator. You assume that God is matter and therefore "needs to be created." So basically you use the concept of an invisible deity to answer questions you are too lazy to try and understand, and at the exclusion of all other possibilities? Way to go there 
And you call Stephen Hawking "exceptionally stupid". Talk about pot and kettle.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:32:58 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apparently banned for my non-Christian views in the end. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
OP aren't you the mod in the religion subforum? 
Feels like you're trolling. I've never been a Mod. And I don't post over there anymore! 
You? Interesting. Why don't you post there anymore? Apparently banned for my non-Christian views in the end. hmm...ok...I must have you confused with someone else then..my apologies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:33:01 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just as the human mind cannot truly grasp a universe that never ends, so we are unable to grasp the concept that a higher being (God) is, and always was. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? Matter is created, and God is the creator. You assume that God is matter and therefore "needs to be created." |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:33:22 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint This. I dont subscribe to any one faith but the possibility exists. Part of me wants to believe it exists but not enough to buy into any one faith along with accepting the possibility that Hawking is correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:33:40 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So who made God then? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. So who made God then? The same dude who made the space/time void, socks in the dryer go into. DUH!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:34:29 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint Fire insurance huh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:35:09 AM EDT
[#16]
Is this the same guy who has been wrong about allot of other shit?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:35:10 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They see others receiving great peace and comfort from their faith, while they themselves, are left out, so they want to prevent others from having what they do not themselves have. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. They see others receiving great peace and comfort from their faith, while they themselves, are left out, so they want to prevent others from having what they do not themselves have. Actually, that isn't it at all. Atheists, like everyone, still search for answers for why, how, when, etc. And if one searches for those answers through science, and you come to certain conclusions or prove/disprove certain things, why is there and expectation that you keep that newfound knowledge to yourself...just to prop up religion even though your new evidence or understanding may contradict it? The problem is, theists view every single one of these things like it is an attack on religion, and a deliberate one at that. Often it is not. But if an atheist comes to a conclusion through philosophy or science and shares it, there is this expectation here that they keep their mouths shut or they must just be mean and hate religious people because they are mean meanies. Meanwhile, for everyone else, spread the word of god to your hearts content, your opinion is more valid, and you should share it. TL/DR: Most atheists don't hate you or your religion, but when it comes up, we will discuss it. We might even bring it up if a new vein of thought comes available. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:38:09 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So basically you use the concept of an invisible deity to answer questions you are too lazy to try and understand, and at the exclusion of all other possibilities? Way to go there And you call Stephen Hawking "exceptionally stupid". Talk about pot and kettle. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? Matter is created, and God is the creator. You assume that God is matter and therefore "needs to be created." So basically you use the concept of an invisible deity to answer questions you are too lazy to try and understand, and at the exclusion of all other possibilities? Way to go there And you call Stephen Hawking "exceptionally stupid". Talk about pot and kettle. That is a big difference and one you need to grasp. He does this for a living. I do not.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:39:38 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The same dude who made the space/time void, socks in the dryer go into. DUH!!! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. So who made God then? The same dude who made the space/time void, socks in the dryer go into. DUH!!! I knew it. Fucking Zanussi. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:40:17 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Evangelical atheists and theocratic atheists are just two modern permutations of secular anti-intellectualism... I understand what each of those words means individually. But when they're in this order, I'm at a loss. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:42:14 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is this the same guy who has been wrong about allot of other shit? Yeah, he clung to a theory (that he created) for 30 years, was proven wrong, and then came out on the other side of the argument. This is the same guy that has mathematically "shown" that the Big Bang occurred. BTW, his Big Bang theory (according to him) is sort of like a "black hole in reverse..." so if his black hole theories were incorrect (and they appear to be), what does this say about his example of the Big Bang?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:43:08 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We can create matter just fine in a collider. No reason not to think the universe was created in a similar way by a higher being. But then who created him and his collider? Ah, the tough question that science cannot answer. The big bang is an elegant theory about the beginning but it fails to answer what was before the beginning... and it never will. Technically we are not creating matter in a collider, we are converting energy into matter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:45:08 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Technically we are not creating matter in a collider, we are converting energy into matter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We can create matter just fine in a collider. No reason not to think the universe was created in a similar way by a higher being. But then who created him and his collider? Ah, the tough question that science cannot answer. The big bang is an elegant theory about the beginning but it fails to answer what was before the beginning... and it never will. Technically we are not creating matter in a collider, we are converting energy into matter. yes....but it proves on link in the chain. it proves that energy can be converted into matter. The other question is to determine where all the energy came from, yes? If we can solve that one, we could really get onto something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:47:02 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: yes....but it proves on link in the chain. it proves that energy can be converted into matter. The other question is to determine where all the energy came from, yes? If we can solve that one, we could really get onto something. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: We can create matter just fine in a collider. No reason not to think the universe was created in a similar way by a higher being. But then who created him and his collider? Ah, the tough question that science cannot answer. The big bang is an elegant theory about the beginning but it fails to answer what was before the beginning... and it never will. Technically we are not creating matter in a collider, we are converting energy into matter. yes....but it proves on link in the chain. it proves that energy can be converted into matter. The other question is to determine where all the energy came from, yes? If we can solve that one, we could really get onto something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:47:34 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As has been said many times, atheists don't, anti-theists seem to want to though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. As has been said many times, atheists don't, anti-theists seem to want to though. Fair enough, I should have specified. The small "a" atheists can be good conversation. Big "a" Atheists are the outspoken evangelists that even small-"a" atheists call d-bags. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:49:13 AM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:50:01 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really? I can say confidently that EVERY scientific study ever conducted in the history of mankind has failed to provide evidence for the existence of God. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't this at least a few years old? Do you have something along these lines of scientific study which are much more recent? Jim Really? I can say confidently that EVERY scientific study ever conducted in the history of mankind has failed to provide evidence for the existence of God. i guess it would also fail to provide evidence that there is not one.... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:50:26 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Well, yall are welcome to explain to God why you don't need him when you stand before Him... I for one ain't taking the chance! - Clint Right with you brother. I don't know why atheists need to stamp out religion. I don't believe in the Easter bunny but I don't make a point to be an asshole about it to those that do. The athiests you hear from all the time are just unhappy souless beings wanting you to be the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:52:51 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i guess it would also fail to provide evidence that there is not one....
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Isn't this at least a few years old? Do you have something along these lines of scientific study which are much more recent? Jim Really? I can say confidently that EVERY scientific study ever conducted in the history of mankind has failed to provide evidence for the existence of God. i guess it would also fail to provide evidence that there is not one....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:53:06 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Last time I checked I wasn't a renowned scientist. Unless a scientist can prove, beyond any doubt, that something (such as God) doesn't exist, they shouldn't make these statements. In fact, it is anathema to the scientific credo (if you will). The fact that Hawking does this, in his position as a scientist, is exactly what proves him to be an idiot. That is a big difference and one you need to grasp. He does this for a living. I do not. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. If the matter for the big bang had to be created by "someone", than who created that someone? If you believe, that the "someone" always existed, why can't the matter also have always existed? Matter is created, and God is the creator. You assume that God is matter and therefore "needs to be created." So basically you use the concept of an invisible deity to answer questions you are too lazy to try and understand, and at the exclusion of all other possibilities? Way to go there
And you call Stephen Hawking "exceptionally stupid". Talk about pot and kettle. That is a big difference and one you need to grasp. He does this for a living. I do not. that's not how science works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:55:03 AM EDT
[#31]
Unfortunately a lot of Leftist atheists want to substitute Big Gubmint as their "God" and use tools such as Politicial Correctness, legislating from the bench, etc. to squash anyone who doesn't share their vision. This vision includes stripping people of the right to bear arms, since the only "threat" they see to their Gubmint God is an armed population being able to say "no more" or "no" to their machinations. Not all atheists do this (as evidenced by those here on AR15), but the Leftist ones sure do.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:55:07 AM EDT
[#32]
[youtube] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo [/youtube]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:55:13 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Every time I have blown something up, and it made a Big Bang, it typically left small pieces of the original object. Not once have I blown up, let's say a mound of scrap metal, and out popped a brand new chevy 1500. Science always seems to prove the magnificent of our creator. Yes, because that's what science says the Big Bang was. An explosion, and immediately from it an organized universe. Thanks for enlightening us all on Big Bang theory.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:56:18 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly correct. The problem, IMO, is when people conclude "no one knows, therefore God." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
All these universe books ever really say is in a whole bunch of words is "no one knows". Exactly correct. The problem, IMO, is when people conclude "no one knows, therefore God." I guess I'm failing to see why this would be considered a "problem". Doesn't really seem any more far out than the other possibilities. For the record I don't think there is an old dude with a white beard out there but I do believe in some type of intelligent design. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:56:27 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One other thing. I find it amusing that these scientists likes to delve deep into black holes, quarks, anti-matter etc. I think they should learn to walk before they run and answer more mundane questions such as: how does gravity work? How is it generated? I'd like them to be able to shoot 100 yards before they starts going for the 1000 yard target. We answer questions about gravity by studying black holes and such. If anything, studying black holes tells us more about gravity than it does anything else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:57:37 AM EDT
[#36]
By the OT standard, as seen in the Baalite vs Isreali standoff, Yahweh is a false god. Back then people didn't come prepared to debates with excuses about not testing the divine, because they had no subconscious fears, or acceptance, of the lack thereof. They expected visible results, and were confident enough to ritually accept the burden of proof, and confident enough to stake their lives on the results.
Until recently I didn't understand why atheists liked to mock Christians. Yes, humor can deflate superstition, and Christianity has a long and solemn history in western culture, and some people are plain evangelical, no matter the ideology. But I was indifferent to failed hypotheses - after all, there are so many of them. Then I read some popular accelerationist literature, by way of Georges Bataille, and realized that it was because Yahweh is just fucking hilarious, for reals. If you too enjoy unnecessarily erudite penis analogies, check out The Thirst for Annihilation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:57:45 AM EDT
[#37]
"that's not how science works."
JFrankParnell, You've proven my point, thank you. So please explain why the "scientist", Stephen Hawking would then make such a definitive declaration about something when he does not have absolute proof? Being closed-minded and making absolute declarative statements is not how science "works" especially in regards to something that the scientists can not explain. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:57:59 AM EDT
[#38]
Fuck that crumpled up bastard. I have no idea why he gets all of this attention. WTF.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:58:29 AM EDT
[#39]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:58:58 AM EDT
[#40]
Honest question... Why does science have to replace religion for so many? It doesn't have to be either/or, not in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:59:38 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We answer questions about gravity by studying black holes and such. If anything, studying black holes tells us more about gravity than it does anything else. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: One other thing. I find it amusing that these scientists likes to delve deep into black holes, quarks, anti-matter etc. I think they should learn to walk before they run and answer more mundane questions such as: how does gravity work? How is it generated? I'd like them to be able to shoot 100 yards before they starts going for the 1000 yard target. We answer questions about gravity by studying black holes and such. If anything, studying black holes tells us more about gravity than it does anything else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 11:59:49 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is this the same guy who has been wrong about allot of other shit? All scientists are wrong about a lot of things over their career. That is the fundamental nature of science. Develop theory, test theory, theory wrong, move on to develop better theory. It is religion that goes in with a general "this is what is, and anything to the contrary is blashphemy." Most religion is dogmatic, and does not respond well to testing. Good science is about proving bad theories wrong through testing than it is proving good theories right. Weed out of wrong, the right stands tall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:00:35 PM EDT
[#43]
Hawkins is the Chancey Gardiner of our time! Bless his heart
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:00:38 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
... Unless a scientist can prove, beyond any doubt, that something (such as God) doesn't exist, they shouldn't make these statements. In fact, it is anathema to the scientific credo (if you will). The fact that Hawking does this, in his position as a scientist, is exactly what proves him to be an idiot.. This is the entertainment value of Arfcom: members who can call the most brilliant physicist since Einstein an "idiot" without a trace of irony. Scientific "proof" is a misunderstood concept. Science never proves anything. Proofs are for mathematics. Science simply accumulates more and more evidence and creates more and more reliable and comprehensive theories. "Theories" are another misunderstood concept. In the scientific sense, theories are testable ideas that are always potentially refutable by evidence. The best theories, such as that of evolution, have withstood more than a century of challenges. Nevertheless, they always remain malleable. Anyway, Hawking's position is simply that an explanation of the universe does not require mysticism. Science deals in evidence-based reason, and if evidence of a god or gods is produced, science will embrace the concept. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:01:37 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The book Universe From Nothing explains is as nothing existed so it was the right recipe for something. Which makes sense except when you put time against it. No one can really say what was before. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He says that science and the "Big Bang" can explain the creation of the universe. And who exactly made the matter for the Big Bang? For someone so "smart" he is exceptionally stupid. So who made God then? The book Universe From Nothing explains is as nothing existed so it was the right recipe for something. Which makes sense except when you put time against it. No one can really say what was before. Time is a feature of our universe. "Before" becomes a very interesting concept when time doesn't exist yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:01:50 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Last time I checked I wasn't a renowned scientist. Unless a scientist can prove, beyond any doubt, that something (such as God) doesn't exist, they shouldn't make these statements. In fact, it is anathema to the scientific credo (if you will). The fact that Hawking does this, in his position as a scientist, is exactly what proves him to be an idiot. That is a big difference and one you need to grasp. He does this for a living. I do not. Well, singling out scientists as not being able to share their opinion on religion is pretty silly just because of their job. Are there any other professions you like to mandate never share their opinion on a particular subject because it isn't formally a part of their job? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:01:53 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, the problem is that you'll never be able to prove, or disprove, the existence of God in a scientifically acceptable manner. Belief in God is about just that, belief...faith. If it could be proven one way or the other, faith would not be required. So the faithful criticize the non-believers for their lack of faith and the non-believers excoriate the faithful for their stupidity in believing. So it goes...Carry on. Science relies on documentation. Nuff said |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:02:45 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All scientists are wrong about a lot of things over their career. That is the fundamental nature of science. Develop theory, test theory, theory wrong, move on to develop better theory. It is religion that goes in with a general "this is what is, and anything to the contrary is blashphemy." Most religion is dogmatic, and does not respond well to testing. Good science is about proving bad theories wrong through testing than it is proving good theories right. Weed out of wrong, the right stands tall. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Is this the same guy who has been wrong about allot of other shit? All scientists are wrong about a lot of things over their career. That is the fundamental nature of science. Develop theory, test theory, theory wrong, move on to develop better theory. It is religion that goes in with a general "this is what is, and anything to the contrary is blashphemy." Most religion is dogmatic, and does not respond well to testing. Good science is about proving bad theories wrong through testing than it is proving good theories right. Weed out of wrong, the right stands tall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:05:57 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"that's not how science works." JFrankParnell, You've proven my point, thank you. So please explain why the "scientist", Stephen Hawking would then make such a definitive declaration about something when he does not have absolute proof? Being closed-minded and making absolute declarative statements is not how science "works" especially in regards to something that the scientists can not explain. except he never said "god does not exist." he said god was not necessary for the creation of the universe. there's a difference. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2015 12:07:33 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the entertainment value of Arfcom: members who can call the most brilliant physicist since Einstein an "idiot" without a trace of irony. Scientific "proof" is a misunderstood concept. Science never proves anything. Proofs are for mathematics. Science simply accumulates more and more evidence and creates more and more reliable and comprehensive theories. "Theories" are another misunderstood concept. In the scientific sense, theories are testable ideas that are always potentially refutable by evidence. The best theories, such as that of evolution, have withstood more than a century of challenges. Nevertheless, they always remain malleable. Anyway, Hawking's position is simply that an explanation of the universe does not require mysticism. Science deals in evidence-based reason, and if evidence of a god or gods is produced, science will embrace the concept. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: ... Unless a scientist can prove, beyond any doubt, that something (such as God) doesn't exist, they shouldn't make these statements. In fact, it is anathema to the scientific credo (if you will). The fact that Hawking does this, in his position as a scientist, is exactly what proves him to be an idiot.. This is the entertainment value of Arfcom: members who can call the most brilliant physicist since Einstein an "idiot" without a trace of irony. Scientific "proof" is a misunderstood concept. Science never proves anything. Proofs are for mathematics. Science simply accumulates more and more evidence and creates more and more reliable and comprehensive theories. "Theories" are another misunderstood concept. In the scientific sense, theories are testable ideas that are always potentially refutable by evidence. The best theories, such as that of evolution, have withstood more than a century of challenges. Nevertheless, they always remain malleable. Anyway, Hawking's position is simply that an explanation of the universe does not require mysticism. Science deals in evidence-based reason, and if evidence of a god or gods is produced, science will embrace the concept. If a scientist (such as Hawking) is going to make DEFINITIVE DECLARATIONS regarding subjects that are UNABLE TO BE DEFINITELY PROVEN OR DISPROVEN, then yes, he's an idiot. As a scientist, he's the ONE guy that shouldn't be doing this. It discredits him and his work. Hawking the most "brilliant scientist" since Einstein? LOL. Methinks you regurgitate popular narratives rather then educating yourself...no offense intended.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
