Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Stephen Hawking has to give the non God answer to physics.
Thats his job.
Religion is the job of a different community of which they do not
spout things of physics.
There was an in between character Velikovsky.
Perhaps relating the works of creation for a planetary system.
Thats all we know from the past.
Now its telescopes and Hawking telling us things.
I believe he is honestly stating his opinion on the matter though. The reason I say this is because he's been pretty bold as of late when it comes to
making public statements like this. It seems more like he's thought about all this stuff for a while and is just now speaking his mind when before he
was too afraid to.
Even Stephen Hawking knows that nobody can ever argue one way or another and have a solid ground to stand on from a scientific standpoint. But you
have to agree that it's plausible God had nothing to do with the birth of our universe.
Like I said earlier, even if we definitively understood the birth of our universe it would not necessarily tell us anything about God. That is
completely a man-made assumption and nothing more.
The anthropic principle states that our universe and everything within it was created so perfectly and so orderly for us to be here on planet earth
having this very discussion about it that our beginnings must have involved some kind of divine influence. But it can also be argued that this is an
assumption and that our existence on planet earth is a huge cosmic accident.
In fact, if you were of the opinion that God didn't have anything to do with our being here, you would basically be backed up by science since we've
seen no definitive fingerprint of the creator. We don't witness god spinning galaxies. We don't witness god creating stars and planetary systems.
What we can say is that we do see the lack of any direct divine influence. I think this is basically Hawking's argument. Everything in our universe
has an explanation even if we have a hard time understanding it all. Even if we somehow understood every process in the universe, there's nothing
telling us we would be any closer to understanding God as the divine creator.
Regardless of what anyone believes philosophically, spiritually and/or religiously, it is always going to be more difficult to prove a creator exists
than to prove it wasn't there to begin with.
Even if we had all the answers and we had definitive proof that God created the universe and Stephen Hawking was completely wrong.. It would only act
to piss people off. IMO, spiritual beliefs seem to only act to cause disagreement, social disparity and armed conflict. No answer we could ever
scientifically come to involving God will ever be good enough for everyone. Such a groundbreaking scientific discovery would cause more harm than
We all have the individual right to believe whatever we want about God but science will always clash with spiritual and faith-based ideaologies.
Science could never prove one way or another which religion(s) are correct and which aren't. And even if we somehow we stumbled across something to
prove who was right and who was wrong, it wouldn't matter.
If you are someone who is devout in your spiritual beliefs, you have every right to. But it also means that you can cherry-pick your facts. If
scientific discoveries support your pre-existing beliefs, so be it. If a scientific discovery conflicts or otherwise proves your beliefs false, you
can ignore it and chalk it up to atheist scientists who only exist to spread fear and hate. I've always wondered why a God argument even exists in
science though, just like Stephen Hawking probably has. No scientific conclusion is ever going to be good enough for everyone, despite what exists to
edit on 14-9-2010 by BlasteR because: (no reason given)