In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
WORLD'S LEADING PHYSICIST ADMITS GOD
babybear
Member Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭✭✭
Stephen Hawking, one of the world's foremost physicists says in effect the ultimate knowledge is to know the mind of God..... www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1153853,00.html.
Comments
How you doin'!
I was reading an account of a conversation that Tennyson had with Darwin. Tennyson asked him point black if he believed in the existence of a higher power. Darwin answered, "Certainlly I admit it; I am compelled to do so, because evolution has always gone onward and upward, from lower to higher forms of life. That could not be chance; it is unscientific to postulate such an hypothesis, because chance never moves in one direction."
"Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
-Jimmy the cheese man
I have no idea where some folks got the idea that God and science were mutually exclusive.
Evolution, for example. Why some folks rabidly adhere to one or the other to the exclusion of all else is baffling. One, evolution, is scientific theory. The other, Genesis, is a matter of faith. One has been proven, the other does not need to be. Doesn't make one better than the other.
As you pointed out, Hawkings has proven himself one of those open minds. There is room for both science and faith. Without science, we would all be burning witches at the stake and living in mud huts.
And I shudder to think where we would be without faith.
Just my 2 cents.
"Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet."
That is a 19th century concept based on the notion that evolution was a progression of change from the simplest forms to the ultimate: man. It is simply not correct. Protozoa are a product of an evolutionary history of identical length to that of man. The concept is way out of date.
There is no reason to suppose that evolution, a proven fact, is not the means by which God effected the creation.
1950's sci-fi movies not with standing, DE-volution simply does not exist.
He Dog
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Don't let Slippers see this! He will be dismissed as a non-scientist!
quote:Originally posted by 4GodandCountry
dheffley, I didn't know slippers was a scientist.
First, so there is no confusion: Slippers is a she not a "he." (I'm sure of that!)[;)]
Second, she is in bed nursing a severe head cold. (I know that she is in really in bad shape when she doesn't even want to play on the computer!)
Third, I'll just respond that if "the proof of God" relies upon "celebrity" endorsement, the believers have no real proof at all!
First, so there is no confusion: Slippers is a she not a "he." (I'm sure of that!)[;)]
The He is in reference to Hawkins. She would dismiss Him as a non-scientist. And, It was all said in jest (joke). I dig at Slippers about her non-belief, and she digs at me about my blind faith. It's all in fun because I doubt either of us will ever change our views.[:D]
quote:Originally posted by competentone
Third, I'll just respond that if "the proof of God" relies upon "celebrity" endorsement, the believers have no real proof at all!
The foundation of our belief is based on faith not physical proof. That's what those of you who do not believe do not understand about those of us who do.[;)]
How you doin'!
Ironic. Every religion in the world claims to already have this knowledge.
"Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
-Jimmy the cheese man
Competentone..Examples of genious...Einstein, Edison, Hawking...
No, these were/are "celebrity" scientists (although Edison was more of just a "celebrity businessman").
The media has told you these are "the great men of science" and you believe it--without understanding some of the monstrous errors in logic the men you name have made when expressing their views about the world.
You will not find me calling them "genius."
Additionally, even if I do call someone a genius, it does not mean that I blindly accept as true everything that they say. Nobody--scientist or otherwise--has any monopoly on knowledge. Facts/knowledge do not rely upon any person's endorsement. Knowledge stands on its own and is accessible to all who are willing to exercise their logic-capable minds to understand it.
(But so few are willing to use their brains to understand things and find it easier to "just believe" what they are told without seeking proof of its veracity.)
quote:A theory of everything would be the ultimate in scientific determinism....
So powerful would the equation be, that to know it would be to know the mind of God, Professor Hawking famously remarked.
His decision to abandon the hunt for a theory of everything is outlined in a paper posted online.
I don't mean to pop a balloon here, but let's be accurate. Hawking is giving up altogether on explaining everything and this is his way of saying so. I agree with DWS that religions, on the other hand, tend to have a ready "explanation" for everything -- which Hawking would not subscribe to since he is abandoning the search for any such understanding as "unknowable." Of course we can say that the mind of God is unknowable, but that kinda puts those who think it's all laid out in the book in an awkward spot. [;)]
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
The He is in reference to Hawkins. She would dismiss Him as a non-scientist. And, It was all said in jest (joke).
Yes, I got it, but was just adding to the "misinterpretation" that 4GodandCountry was joking about.
Babybear don't be fatuous. If you refer to the bible, that is clearly the work of men. If you assert that is devinely inspired, that is a matter of faith, since it is not provable, and I certainly do not have to accept it as so.
Misquoting scientists as "proof of god is somewhat like talking about "Scientific creationism," When you have to coopt what you preceive to be the opposition to bolster your case, you have lost the debate.
In point of fact, there is no competent scientist anywhere that will argue science proves there is no god, nor will one say there is proof there is a god. Science and evolution can only demonstrate that Genesis cannot be taken literally, but is an ancient creation myth finally written down. It is eloquent, but by its very nature mythical. That does not mean that god is. God is a matter purely of faith, unknowable and unprovable (also of course un-disprovable). Either ya got faith or ya don't whether you are a scientist or not.
He Dog
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Leave it at that.
That said, how do you know of God except through His revealed Word?
Lemme guess the only place where you think His revealed Word will be found. But to reveal God's word, one must know God's mind, which is precisely what Dr. Hawking claims is beyond him. Therefore, you are claiming to know more than Dr. Hawking.
It is truly an honor and a privilege to have you posting here today.
Do you believe it? Accept it as a matter of faith? Or demand proof?
How much proof is enough proof? Can you ever know the mind of the person who said that?
It boils down to BELIEF.
SIG pistol armorer/FFL Dealer/Full time Peace Officer, Moderator of General Discussion Board on Gunbroker. Visit www.gunbroker.com the best gun auction site on the Net! Email davidnunn@texoma.net